American Populism

Populism is enjoying a revival in the process of global social transformation and stillremains a bone of contention in the academic circle. Since the1950s, scholars in the westhave tried to study this political phenomenon by adopting various analytical modes andtheories. However, no unanimous agreement has been achieved in terms of its definitionand characteristics. As generally accepted, populism is divided into two modes, theRussian Narodnichestvo and American populism based on the People’s Party movement inthe last decade of the19thcentury. Most of Chinese scholarship on populism has been builtupon the Russian mode. Western scholarship in this field, American scholarship inparticular, while impressive in the number of publications, has been basically confined tothe study of the People’s Party itself to weigh its contributions and weakness. Why can’tpopulism achieve its ultimate goal in America after several attempts to change Americanpolitical life? This question has been addressed, to be sure, but, in the view of the author,either not comprehensively or satisfactorily. This thesis tries to answer this question bymaking a case study of Huey Long’s case in the context of American liberal tradition.Based on the discussion and analysis above, the thesis concludes that populist movements,no matter how fervent they may be, can hardly shake the predominant position ofAmerican liberalism. However, the tenacity and recurrence of populism have time andagain exposed flaws and defects in American democracy, which have not only expandedthe scope of citizen participation in public affairs, but also pushed policy makers to movein the more democratic direction.This thesis mainly consists of three chapters, plus Introduction and Conclusion. Thefirst chapter intends to identify the mode of American Populism so as to put the discussionof this subject in a meaningful context. Through the examination of the recurrence ofpopulism in American history, the thesis tries to find out the reasons for its repeateddownfall, even though its claim to democratic ideal seems to fit in well with basicAmerican creeds. The second chapter takes Huey Long-led populist movement as a casestudy, examining its background, development, evolution, driving force, setbacks as wellas its significance and impact on American welfare programs. The third chapter providesconcrete explanations for the question previously raised and analyzes the radical nature of the movement itself, arguing that Huey’s personality frailty and the unrealistic vision of hispopulist program were the direct causes of his defeat, but more importantly Americanliberal tradition, while championing democracy and reform, rejects any radical orfundamental change to its political system, only allowing populist ideas to be incorporatedinto rather than alter the existing system. In other words, populism, however democratic itmay be, can, at best, tinker with rather than change American democratic system.