Is Discourse Theory a Theory of Populism?

Abstract

This article departs from Slavoj Žižek’s critique of Ernesto Laclau’s theory of populism, according to which On Populist Reason (2005) would constitute merely a self-referential extension of the discourse theory previously developed by the author. Contrary to this interpretation, the article argues that the relationship between discourse and populism in Laclau’s work must be understood in inverse terms: it is the theory of populism that grounds and makes possible the formulation of his theory of discourse, rather than the other way around. To substantiate this claim, we examine two texts written before Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (1985), namely Towards a Theory of Populism (1978) and Populist Rupture and Discourse (1980), identifying in them categories and conceptual formulations that anticipate both the discursive perspective consolidated in Hegemony and Socialist Strategy and the central elements of On Populist Reason. The article concludes by arguing that, for Laclau, populism has, since his earliest writings, been structured as discourse.