Conference Presentations by Riccarda Schmid
Conference Programme & Abstract, 2020
"Populism" is a dazzling term that has recently gained prominence in political and media discours... more "Populism" is a dazzling term that has recently gained prominence in political and media discourse. "Populist" is the term used above all to describe parties and tendencies on the periphery of the political spectrum in order to criticize the aims and means of their politics and to question their legitimacy. At the same time, however, such groups have avowed their populism quite openly and tried to legitimize their radical objectives by invoking the "will of the people".
Populism is based on the demand that all political power should lie with the "people". It is based on the assumption of a fundamental antagonism between "the people" on the one hand and "the elite" on the other: The people, who in the original sense of the word should rule democracy, are supposed to be dominated, oppressed and exploited by an elite lacking any kind of legitimacy. This elite, to which only the opponents are reckoned to belong, ought to be eliminated, even destroyed, and the power to be transferred (again) as directly as possible to the people according to the populist demands. People and elite are presented as unified entities, which first of all are characterized only by their juxtaposition. On the basis of this opposition, tendencies can develop on both the right and left sides of the political spectrum that aim at a fundamental transformation of the current political order, which is believed to have made it possible to disregard the will of the people. "We are the people" is an assertion that can be made by all those who believe that "people's rule", democracy, has been replaced by elite rule.
Populism, especially in the social sciences, which in recent years have been intensively researching it, is usually seen as a phenomenon of modern democracies that have emerged since the American and French revolutions. However, democracy as a political system is much older and its roots lie in Greek antiquity. It emerged as a political system of the Greek polis, and its history is closely linked to the rise of Athens as the leading city state in the 5th century, where democracy was practiced in a form perceived as "radical". The Attic democracy with its tumultuous history has inspired philosophers, thinkers and poets of antiquity to often critical reflections, and it remains an important point of reference to this day. However, democracy is not only an Athenian phenomenon. In the Greek world of the Hellenistic period, democracy became the basic model of the political order of the polis in many forms, even where the city states lost their external independence to empires.
It seems reasonable to ask what role the phenomenon of populism played in the Greek polis under the specific conditions of ancient democracy. In contrast to most modern political systems, Greek democracy was a direct popular rule, in which roughly all important decisions were taken by the polis citizens in the People's Assembly. But even in the "radical" democracy of Athens, elites emerged whose members set the tone as demagogues, as "leaders of the people". In Hellenistic times, the role of the citizen elite, distinguished by education, origin and, above all, material wealth, seemed even more important, so that in research it was often questioned whether one could actually still talk of a people's rule.
The conference organized by the ZAZH - Zentrum Altertumswissenschaften Zürich, UZH and scheduled for February 12-14, 2020, aims to examine the phenomenon of populism under the specific conditions of democracy in the Greek world of antiquity outlined above with a view also to modern parallels: Were there already in the Greek polis political tendencies that could be qualified as populist? Did the direct democracy of antiquity leave room for populist politics at all – or rather was politics on the whole basically populist? Did the strengthening of the elites in the Hellenistic poleis lead to populist counter-movements? What role did authoritarian leaders play, who – paradoxically – are almost a feature of modern populist movements? The conference will discuss these and other questions from a broad perspective of classical studies. It is by no means intended to deal only with historical questions in the narrower sense: Also of interest are the reflections that populism has found in ancient political philosophy, literature or rhetoric.
A central concern of the conference is to lead the discussion about populism in antiquity in dialogue with the present. Current political science research will be actively included in the conference. We are convinced that modern research on democracy offers many connecting points and allows deeper insights into ancient phenomena. At the same time, we hope that the examination of populism in the Greek world will also contribute to a better understanding of populist movements in the present. The populism of the present is a challenge that we also want to meet by illuminating it as a historical phenomenon.
Papers by Riccarda Schmid
Uploads
Conference Presentations by Riccarda Schmid
Populism is based on the demand that all political power should lie with the "people". It is based on the assumption of a fundamental antagonism between "the people" on the one hand and "the elite" on the other: The people, who in the original sense of the word should rule democracy, are supposed to be dominated, oppressed and exploited by an elite lacking any kind of legitimacy. This elite, to which only the opponents are reckoned to belong, ought to be eliminated, even destroyed, and the power to be transferred (again) as directly as possible to the people according to the populist demands. People and elite are presented as unified entities, which first of all are characterized only by their juxtaposition. On the basis of this opposition, tendencies can develop on both the right and left sides of the political spectrum that aim at a fundamental transformation of the current political order, which is believed to have made it possible to disregard the will of the people. "We are the people" is an assertion that can be made by all those who believe that "people's rule", democracy, has been replaced by elite rule.
Populism, especially in the social sciences, which in recent years have been intensively researching it, is usually seen as a phenomenon of modern democracies that have emerged since the American and French revolutions. However, democracy as a political system is much older and its roots lie in Greek antiquity. It emerged as a political system of the Greek polis, and its history is closely linked to the rise of Athens as the leading city state in the 5th century, where democracy was practiced in a form perceived as "radical". The Attic democracy with its tumultuous history has inspired philosophers, thinkers and poets of antiquity to often critical reflections, and it remains an important point of reference to this day. However, democracy is not only an Athenian phenomenon. In the Greek world of the Hellenistic period, democracy became the basic model of the political order of the polis in many forms, even where the city states lost their external independence to empires.
It seems reasonable to ask what role the phenomenon of populism played in the Greek polis under the specific conditions of ancient democracy. In contrast to most modern political systems, Greek democracy was a direct popular rule, in which roughly all important decisions were taken by the polis citizens in the People's Assembly. But even in the "radical" democracy of Athens, elites emerged whose members set the tone as demagogues, as "leaders of the people". In Hellenistic times, the role of the citizen elite, distinguished by education, origin and, above all, material wealth, seemed even more important, so that in research it was often questioned whether one could actually still talk of a people's rule.
The conference organized by the ZAZH - Zentrum Altertumswissenschaften Zürich, UZH and scheduled for February 12-14, 2020, aims to examine the phenomenon of populism under the specific conditions of democracy in the Greek world of antiquity outlined above with a view also to modern parallels: Were there already in the Greek polis political tendencies that could be qualified as populist? Did the direct democracy of antiquity leave room for populist politics at all – or rather was politics on the whole basically populist? Did the strengthening of the elites in the Hellenistic poleis lead to populist counter-movements? What role did authoritarian leaders play, who – paradoxically – are almost a feature of modern populist movements? The conference will discuss these and other questions from a broad perspective of classical studies. It is by no means intended to deal only with historical questions in the narrower sense: Also of interest are the reflections that populism has found in ancient political philosophy, literature or rhetoric.
A central concern of the conference is to lead the discussion about populism in antiquity in dialogue with the present. Current political science research will be actively included in the conference. We are convinced that modern research on democracy offers many connecting points and allows deeper insights into ancient phenomena. At the same time, we hope that the examination of populism in the Greek world will also contribute to a better understanding of populist movements in the present. The populism of the present is a challenge that we also want to meet by illuminating it as a historical phenomenon.
Papers by Riccarda Schmid
Populism is based on the demand that all political power should lie with the "people". It is based on the assumption of a fundamental antagonism between "the people" on the one hand and "the elite" on the other: The people, who in the original sense of the word should rule democracy, are supposed to be dominated, oppressed and exploited by an elite lacking any kind of legitimacy. This elite, to which only the opponents are reckoned to belong, ought to be eliminated, even destroyed, and the power to be transferred (again) as directly as possible to the people according to the populist demands. People and elite are presented as unified entities, which first of all are characterized only by their juxtaposition. On the basis of this opposition, tendencies can develop on both the right and left sides of the political spectrum that aim at a fundamental transformation of the current political order, which is believed to have made it possible to disregard the will of the people. "We are the people" is an assertion that can be made by all those who believe that "people's rule", democracy, has been replaced by elite rule.
Populism, especially in the social sciences, which in recent years have been intensively researching it, is usually seen as a phenomenon of modern democracies that have emerged since the American and French revolutions. However, democracy as a political system is much older and its roots lie in Greek antiquity. It emerged as a political system of the Greek polis, and its history is closely linked to the rise of Athens as the leading city state in the 5th century, where democracy was practiced in a form perceived as "radical". The Attic democracy with its tumultuous history has inspired philosophers, thinkers and poets of antiquity to often critical reflections, and it remains an important point of reference to this day. However, democracy is not only an Athenian phenomenon. In the Greek world of the Hellenistic period, democracy became the basic model of the political order of the polis in many forms, even where the city states lost their external independence to empires.
It seems reasonable to ask what role the phenomenon of populism played in the Greek polis under the specific conditions of ancient democracy. In contrast to most modern political systems, Greek democracy was a direct popular rule, in which roughly all important decisions were taken by the polis citizens in the People's Assembly. But even in the "radical" democracy of Athens, elites emerged whose members set the tone as demagogues, as "leaders of the people". In Hellenistic times, the role of the citizen elite, distinguished by education, origin and, above all, material wealth, seemed even more important, so that in research it was often questioned whether one could actually still talk of a people's rule.
The conference organized by the ZAZH - Zentrum Altertumswissenschaften Zürich, UZH and scheduled for February 12-14, 2020, aims to examine the phenomenon of populism under the specific conditions of democracy in the Greek world of antiquity outlined above with a view also to modern parallels: Were there already in the Greek polis political tendencies that could be qualified as populist? Did the direct democracy of antiquity leave room for populist politics at all – or rather was politics on the whole basically populist? Did the strengthening of the elites in the Hellenistic poleis lead to populist counter-movements? What role did authoritarian leaders play, who – paradoxically – are almost a feature of modern populist movements? The conference will discuss these and other questions from a broad perspective of classical studies. It is by no means intended to deal only with historical questions in the narrower sense: Also of interest are the reflections that populism has found in ancient political philosophy, literature or rhetoric.
A central concern of the conference is to lead the discussion about populism in antiquity in dialogue with the present. Current political science research will be actively included in the conference. We are convinced that modern research on democracy offers many connecting points and allows deeper insights into ancient phenomena. At the same time, we hope that the examination of populism in the Greek world will also contribute to a better understanding of populist movements in the present. The populism of the present is a challenge that we also want to meet by illuminating it as a historical phenomenon.