Desire members participate in fourth helsinki conference on emotions, populism and polarised poltics, media, and culture
DESIRE panel with Savvas Voutyras, Jana Goyvaerts, Omran Shroufi, and Benjamin De Cleen
University of Helsinki
11.12.23 - 13.12.23
University of Helsinki
11.12.23 - 13.12.23
The Fourth Helsinki Conference on Emotions, Populism, and Polarised Politics (HEPP4) parrallels efforts of the Horizon2020 project focussing on deradicaliziation in Europe and beyond. For this reason, the conference's scope includes a clear emphasis on research surrounding ethno-nationalism. DESIRE members presented their works in the form of a panel as well as individual presentations.
Benjamin De Cleen - Populism of the privileged? People, elite, privilege and the study of populism
The aim of this paper is to flesh out the character and pervasiveness of cultural stereotypes about populism and – in particular – supporters of populism. This is done by focusing on the case of Brexit, and analysing visual (memes, images, etc.) as well as discursive material (text-based posts and discussion comments under relevant posts) on online ‘Remain’ communities, to identify and critically assess patterns in the aesthetics and semantics of the representation of Brexit supporters. Beyond the criticism of UK governments’ attempts to materialise Brexit, an important part of the activity of these communities is focused on Brexit supporters, who are often depicted in pejorative ways. This case study will allow us to capture, in vivid detail, a manifestation of the cultural ‘high vs low’ conflict that is in operation in today’s populist and anti-populist discourses. While the politics of Brexit is very commonly described as ‘populist’, the emphasis on strategic or ideological-ideational dimensions of populism has left its socio-cultural aspects and their implications, underexamined. Contrasted to ‘official’ discourse against Brexit (e.g. that of politicians, institutions or most media sources), that would avoid such pejorative depictions, the ‘unofficial’ discourse of an online community of likeminded individuals is more likely to allow the expression of powerful, but otherwise lurking, sentiments that are linked to culture, identity, and belonging. Such a case study thus makes possible their examination, something that would not be as possible in the analysis of official discourse.
The aim of this paper is to flesh out the character and pervasiveness of cultural stereotypes about populism and – in particular – supporters of populism. This is done by focusing on the case of Brexit, and analysing visual (memes, images, etc.) as well as discursive material (text-based posts and discussion comments under relevant posts) on online ‘Remain’ communities, to identify and critically assess patterns in the aesthetics and semantics of the representation of Brexit supporters. Beyond the criticism of UK governments’ attempts to materialise Brexit, an important part of the activity of these communities is focused on Brexit supporters, who are often depicted in pejorative ways. This case study will allow us to capture, in vivid detail, a manifestation of the cultural ‘high vs low’ conflict that is in operation in today’s populist and anti-populist discourses. While the politics of Brexit is very commonly described as ‘populist’, the emphasis on strategic or ideological-ideational dimensions of populism has left its socio-cultural aspects and their implications, underexamined. Contrasted to ‘official’ discourse against Brexit (e.g. that of politicians, institutions or most media sources), that would avoid such pejorative depictions, the ‘unofficial’ discourse of an online community of likeminded individuals is more likely to allow the expression of powerful, but otherwise lurking, sentiments that are linked to culture, identity, and belonging. Such a case study thus makes possible their examination, something that would not be as possible in the analysis of official discourse.
Jana Goyvaerts - Anti-populism: Normativity and beyond Conceptualizing the Public Debate and Discourses about Populism
Within the growing field of populism research, there is a heightened interest in discourses about populism Mainly critical scholars criticize the predominant anti-populist position in public discourse. However, a look at the conceptual history of populism shows that this anti-populist attitude is not new, nor a new line of academic interest. Moreover, there are important non-normative aspects to antipopulism as well. Based on my PhD dissertation, I contextualize current anti-populist discourses with a historical perspective, and look at structural dynamics of the debate to include non-ideological characteristics of anti-populist discourse. To develop this premise, I conducted a discourse-theoretical analysis of Belgian newspaper articles about ‘populism’ to examine how the term is articulated. Based on this analysis and an overview of the literature, I propose to look at anti-populism as a political logic that needs to be studied in its context to fully grasp its nuances and consequences.
Within the growing field of populism research, there is a heightened interest in discourses about populism Mainly critical scholars criticize the predominant anti-populist position in public discourse. However, a look at the conceptual history of populism shows that this anti-populist attitude is not new, nor a new line of academic interest. Moreover, there are important non-normative aspects to antipopulism as well. Based on my PhD dissertation, I contextualize current anti-populist discourses with a historical perspective, and look at structural dynamics of the debate to include non-ideological characteristics of anti-populist discourse. To develop this premise, I conducted a discourse-theoretical analysis of Belgian newspaper articles about ‘populism’ to examine how the term is articulated. Based on this analysis and an overview of the literature, I propose to look at anti-populism as a political logic that needs to be studied in its context to fully grasp its nuances and consequences.
Omran Shroufi - Is There a Far Right Ideology?
While the study of the far right has flourished in recent years, critical reflections on the trajectory of the field remain rare. One striking weakness is the rather tautological and narrow understanding of far right ideology that takes proposed far right policies as evidence of the parties’ ideology, despite thefact that different ideological worldviews can empirically manifest themselves in similar ways. Indeed, it remains unclear whether a unique ‘far right ideology’ actually exists, or whether the key logics and ideas underpinning far right politics can more accurately be understood as manifestations of ‘preexisting’ ideologies, be it racism, nationalism or conservatism? As such, my paper asks whether efforts to continually re-define far right ideology on account of changing policy positions distracts us from meaningfully coming to terms with the political ontology and logics that underpin far right politics today.
While the study of the far right has flourished in recent years, critical reflections on the trajectory of the field remain rare. One striking weakness is the rather tautological and narrow understanding of far right ideology that takes proposed far right policies as evidence of the parties’ ideology, despite thefact that different ideological worldviews can empirically manifest themselves in similar ways. Indeed, it remains unclear whether a unique ‘far right ideology’ actually exists, or whether the key logics and ideas underpinning far right politics can more accurately be understood as manifestations of ‘preexisting’ ideologies, be it racism, nationalism or conservatism? As such, my paper asks whether efforts to continually re-define far right ideology on account of changing policy positions distracts us from meaningfully coming to terms with the political ontology and logics that underpin far right politics today.
Savvas Voutyras - Socio-cultural Aspects of Anti-populism: Depictions of Brexiters in online Remain communities
The aim of this paper is to flesh out the character and pervasiveness of cultural stereotypes about populism and – in particular – supporters of populism. This is done by focusing on the case of Brexit, and analysing visual (memes, images, etc.) as well as discursive material (text-based posts and discussion comments under relevant posts) on online ‘Remain’ communities, to identify and critically assess patterns in the aesthetics and semantics of the representation of Brexit supporters. Beyond the criticism of UK governments’ attempts to materialise Brexit, an important part of the activity of these communities is focused on Brexit supporters, who are often depicted in pejorative ways. This case study will allow us to capture, in vivid detail, a manifestation of the cultural ‘high vs low’ conflict that is in operation in today’s populist and anti-populist discourses. While the politics of Brexit is very commonly described as ‘populist’, the emphasis on strategic or ideological-ideational dimensions of populism has left its socio-cultural aspects and their implications, underexamined. Contrasted to ‘official’ discourse against Brexit (e.g. that of politicians, institutions or most media sources), that would avoid such pejorative depictions, the ‘unofficial’ discourse of an online community of likeminded individuals is more likely to allow the expression of powerful, but otherwise lurking, sentiments that are linked to culture, identity, and belonging. Such a case study thus makes possible their examination, something that would not be as possible in the analysis of official discourse.
The aim of this paper is to flesh out the character and pervasiveness of cultural stereotypes about populism and – in particular – supporters of populism. This is done by focusing on the case of Brexit, and analysing visual (memes, images, etc.) as well as discursive material (text-based posts and discussion comments under relevant posts) on online ‘Remain’ communities, to identify and critically assess patterns in the aesthetics and semantics of the representation of Brexit supporters. Beyond the criticism of UK governments’ attempts to materialise Brexit, an important part of the activity of these communities is focused on Brexit supporters, who are often depicted in pejorative ways. This case study will allow us to capture, in vivid detail, a manifestation of the cultural ‘high vs low’ conflict that is in operation in today’s populist and anti-populist discourses. While the politics of Brexit is very commonly described as ‘populist’, the emphasis on strategic or ideological-ideational dimensions of populism has left its socio-cultural aspects and their implications, underexamined. Contrasted to ‘official’ discourse against Brexit (e.g. that of politicians, institutions or most media sources), that would avoid such pejorative depictions, the ‘unofficial’ discourse of an online community of likeminded individuals is more likely to allow the expression of powerful, but otherwise lurking, sentiments that are linked to culture, identity, and belonging. Such a case study thus makes possible their examination, something that would not be as possible in the analysis of official discourse.
Archibald Gustin - From Illiberal to Liberal Sexism: Femonationalism in Vlaams Belang's Discourse
Sarah Farris’s concept of femonationalism (Farris 2017) has been largely discussed in the literature on far right gender politics (Blee 2020; Norocel et al. 2020). However, it has also been highly criticized for drawing exaggerated equivalences between feminist and far right politics (Möser 2022). This paper aims at offering a new perspective on Farris’s work. While Farris regards femonationalism as a “convergence between the anti-Islam positions of feminists and nationalists with neoliberalism” (Farris 2017: 8), this paper, based on a discursive-theoretical perspective, argues that femonationalism can be better seen as the articulation of feminist and nativist (Newth 2021) discourses. More precisely, relying on Aurelien Mondon and Aaron Winter’s distinction between illiberal and liberal racism (Mondon and Winter 2020), this article shows how Vlaams Belang’s femonationalism fuels the distinction between post-sexist liberal societies and an illiberal sexist Muslim Other.
Sarah Farris’s concept of femonationalism (Farris 2017) has been largely discussed in the literature on far right gender politics (Blee 2020; Norocel et al. 2020). However, it has also been highly criticized for drawing exaggerated equivalences between feminist and far right politics (Möser 2022). This paper aims at offering a new perspective on Farris’s work. While Farris regards femonationalism as a “convergence between the anti-Islam positions of feminists and nationalists with neoliberalism” (Farris 2017: 8), this paper, based on a discursive-theoretical perspective, argues that femonationalism can be better seen as the articulation of feminist and nativist (Newth 2021) discourses. More precisely, relying on Aurelien Mondon and Aaron Winter’s distinction between illiberal and liberal racism (Mondon and Winter 2020), this article shows how Vlaams Belang’s femonationalism fuels the distinction between post-sexist liberal societies and an illiberal sexist Muslim Other.
