A radical community development response to right-wing populism

2020 ◽  
pp. 55-70
Author(s):  
Peter Westoby
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Community Development ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Associational Life ◽  
Right Wing Populism

This chapter evaluates what community development's response might be to right-wing populism. It begins by looking at the literature's analysis of right-wing populism. The chapter then considers a theory of social change that might help in charting a way forward for community development praxis. Community development practitioners need to engage locally and globally, bringing their particular skills in creating spaces, places, and platforms for associational life, filled with dialogical and agonistic conflict. It is their job to create the places where people can put aside their rage, and learn the disciplines of conversation and deliberation, heard, while not affirmed as necessarily right. In a nutshell, the work of reconnecting. These are the basic qualities of liberal democracy also infused with a radical egalitarian spirit, and a cohesive society.

Right-wing populism and community development: beyond modernity and liberal democracy

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-54
Author(s):  
Jim Ife
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Community Development ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Indigenous Land Rights ◽  
Development Workers ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Indigenous Land

This chapter examines the relationship between right-wing populism and community development. Community development has identified itself as working with the most marginalised in society, as a result of its 'welfare' orientation and mandate to address social problems, and has also identified itself with more politically progressive movements for social change, such as anti-racism, feminism, Indigenous land rights, pro-LGBTIQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer) rights, refugee rights, environmentalism, and so on. It positions itself as supporting the 'parasites' so mistrusted by right-wing populism. Such a positioning of community development suggests that community development is as much an anathema to right-wing populists as right-wing populism is to community development workers, and that the two are fundamentally opposed. The chapter then considers the relationship between them first in relation to the crisis in modernity, and then more specifically in relation to one aspect of that crisis, namely the erosion of the legitimacy and the institutions of liberal democracy. This will lead to some suggestions of how community development might move to address some of these issues and retain both its relevance and its integrity in a world where right-wing populism will be a continuing presence.

Democracy as Punishment: Brexit and Austerity Politics

2018 ◽  
pp. 188-215
Author(s):  
Insa Lee Koch
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Housing Estate ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
State Control ◽  
Negative Experiences ◽  
Daily Experiences ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Eu Referendum ◽  
Point Of Departure

Chapter 7 asks what the implications of classed state control are for liberal democracy at large. It takes as a point of departure the referendum on leaving the European Union in June 2016 and the rise of what has been labelled ‘popular authoritarianism’. Residents on the housing estate experience government as something that is ‘not for them’: negative experiences with the authorities, including since 2010 the shift towards ‘austerity’ politics, translate into a deep-seated sense that politicians and politics are the antithesis of ordinary personhood and sociality. This justifies widespread withdrawal from electoral processes. However, unlike an ordinary election, some residents perceived the EU referendum as an opportunity to say ‘no’ to a government tout court. The chapter argues that an ethnographic understanding of ‘Brexit’ in terms of residents’ daily experiences of government uncovers the liberal state’s disavowal of its moral and political responsibilities towards its most disenfranchised populations. It also underlines the risk of right-wing populism at a time when alternative mechanisms for capturing working-class people’s voices are either weak or absent.

scholarly journals Populism as a Factor of Destabilisation in Consolidated Democracies

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-108
Author(s):  
Artur Roland Kozłowski
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
Democratic System ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Consolidated Democracy ◽  
Law And Justice ◽  
The Stability

AbstractThis study offers a discussion of the dangers to the stability of political systems in consolidated democracies posed by contemporary populism, with a particular focus on the dynamic development of extreme right-wing populism. The author considers the consequences of efficient populist campaigns, such as Brexit in Great Britain, lowered trust towards the United States under Trump’s administration and practices followed by the Law and Justice party (PiS) under the leadership of Jarosław Kaczyński in Poland, which seem especially destructive for liberal democracy. Further examples are those of Hungary and Turkey, where the political systems have eroded into semi-consolidated democracy in the case of the former and an authoritarian system in the latter case. A comparative analysis of freedom indices indicates some dangers related to de-consolidation of the democratic system in Poland. Furthermore, the study points out dangers arising from the transformation of soft populism, understood as communication rhetoric oriented towards the concentration of power in the hands of populist leaders, which clearly paves the way for the dismantling of consolidated democracy in favour of an authoritarian system. The conclusions of the study outlines a variety of actions which can be undertaken to protect the achievements of liberal democracy.

Questioning Consensuses: Right-Wing Populism, Anti-Populism, and the Threat of ‘Gender Ideology’

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 528-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eszter Kováts
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Movements ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Gender Ideology ◽  
The Other ◽  
Perceived Threat ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Demand Side ◽  
Systemic Crisis ◽  
Right Wing Populism

Since 2012, several European countries (among others Austria, Croatia, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia or Slovakia) have seen the rise of conservative and, in part, fundamentalist social movements against the perceived threat of what they call (depending on the context) ‘gender ideology’, ‘gender theory’, or ‘genderism’. The movements mobilizing against ‘gender ideology’ are frequently understood as a conservative backlash against achieved levels of equality between women and men and/or LGBTQ rights. This perspective of ‘the patriarchy/heteronormativity fighting back’ seems as tempting as it is simplifying. I discuss the transnational movements against ‘gender ideology’ in the context of the rise of right-wing populism and on the basis of considerations seeking to explain their demand side. On one hand, I argue that the study of this phenomenon provides important clues for understanding the reasons behind the rise of populist forces in Europe and beyond. On the other hand, I propose that ‘gender’ is not the final target for these movements and that they should not be understood primarily as mobilizations against equality. Rather, I see the emergence of these movements as a symptom of a larger systemic crisis. ‘Gender ideology’ in this sense embodies numerous deficits of the so-called progressive actors, and the movements or parties that mobilize against the perceived threat of ‘gender ideology’ react to these deficits by re-politicizing certain issues in a polarized language. Based on Chantal Mouffe’s critique of the established hegemonic idea of consensus in liberal democracy, I discuss two consensuses that are characteristic of the so-called progressive actors (including the feminist and LGBTQ actors), namely, the neoliberal consensus and the human rights consensus, and their contribution to the rise of the movements against ‘gender ideology’.

scholarly journals Radicalising citizenship education

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 17-34
Author(s):  
Stuart Moir ◽  
Jim Crowther
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Citizenship Education ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Personal Responsibility ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Democratic Life ◽  
The Uk

Democracy faces two key threats today. The first is evident in the growth of authoritarian, right-wing, populism which is evident in a number of European countries and beyond. The second has been the un- dermining of democratic life by neoliberalism. Liberal democracy has aided the latter by the separation of economics from politics and the focus on the individual at the expense of the public sector and the common good. At the same time, some of the virtues of liberal democracy – the separation of powers, for example – are threatened by authoritarianism. We argue the importance of a critical engagement with current versions of democracy by drawing on a more participatory and active democratic tradition. This has significant implications for how we view citizenship and citizenship education. The dominant ver- sion of citizenship education in Scotland and the UK (possibly in Europe too) embodies a ‘minimalist’ model of citizenship through a curriculum for taking personal responsibility. This is inadequate for the challenge democracy faces. We argue the need to ground citizenship education in more radical soil, to nurture a critically engaged and active citizenry capable of challenging the democratic threats of right- wing populism and neoliberal subjectivity.

Introductory overview

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Sue Kenny ◽  
Jim Ife ◽  
Peter Westoby
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Community Development ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Rational Basis ◽  
Global State ◽  
Introductory Overview ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Critical Perspectives

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the issues that the book discusses, as well as the challenges in editing it. The book offers diverse critical perspectives, both international and cross-disciplinary, on the challenge of how to make sense of contemporary forms of populism and also how community development responds to these. It particularly focuses on right-wing populism. How can those committed to community development endeavours respond to populism? When thinking about any community development response to populism, it is important to understand that feelings of alienation and resentment, and concerns about uncertainty and material insecurity, have a rational basis. From this perspective, populism should be viewed as a symptom of underlying factors that have characterised much of the global state of affairs since the last decades of the twentieth century. Taking the viewpoint that populism is a symptom, any response to populism must be cognisant of the underlying conditions in which populism has arisen. The chapter then considers the view that populism is a symptom of the deterioration of the project of democracy.

Populism and community organising in Hong Kong

2020 ◽  
pp. 207-226
Author(s):  
Fung Kwok-kin ◽  
Hung Suet-lin ◽  
Lau Siu-mei ◽  
Wong King-lai ◽  
Chan Yu-cheung
Keyword(s):  
Hong Kong ◽  
Young People ◽  
Community Development ◽  
Welfare Regime ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Frequent Users ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Present Context ◽  
Right Wing Populism ◽  
Development Practice

This chapter explores the potential responses of community development practice to the proliferation of populist practices in Hong Kong. Populism is an under-researched area in the community development field in Hong Kong, despite the increasing prominence of populism globally and the rising popularity of populist practice in Hong Kong since its return to China in 1997. Studies of populism, particularly right-wing populism, have developed the 'globalisation loser' hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, disadvantaged groups, which in the present context include young people, who are frequent users of community development programmes, support right-wing populism. Currently, community workers in Hong Kong are unprepared to respond to this phenomenon. This study is the first stage of a research project examining the implications of populism for community development practice in Hong Kong. To contextualise the study, the chapter outlines the productivist welfare regime of Hong Kong and the resultant characteristics of community development services in Hong Kong.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document