Dichotomous simplification and imprecision are the very condition of political action

Evidence

Populism, it is argued, ‘simplifies’ the political space, replacing a complex set of differences and determinations by a stark dichotomy whose two poles are necessarily imprecise. In 1945, for instance, General Perón took a nationalistic stand and asserted that the Argentinian option was to choose between Braden (the American ambassador) and Perón. And, as is well known, this personalized alternative features in other discourses through dichotomies such as the people versus the oligarchy, toiling masses versus exploiters, and so on. As we can see, there is in these dichotomies, as in those which constitute any politico-ideological frontier, a simplification of the political space (all social singularities tend to group themselves around one or the other of the poles of the dichotomy), and the terms designating both poles have necessarily to be imprecise (otherwise they could not cover all the particularities that they are supposed to regroup). If things are so, however, is not this logic of simplification, and of making some terms imprecise, the very condition of political action? — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 62

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Populism’s analytical elusiveness stems from theory’s own limited tools — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 9; Rhetorical devices become instruments of social rationality, not mere decoration — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 42; Populism is a permanent possibility of political structuration, not a deviance — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 46 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Contingency of historical conjunctures is a precondition for political possibility #corroborates (0.72)
• Typologies reduce analytic effort and predictive uncertainty about political actors. #exemplifies (0.72)