Parties function as institutional guarantors of political pluralism against populism

Evidence

Without political parties, democracy takes a radically populist form. The one, homogeneous, “true” people stand behind their leader without the party as an intermediary institution. Populism is, as we have argued, antipluralist. And, for their part, parties are the institutional expression and guarantors of political pluralism. They connect the natural pluralism of a free society—churches, clubs, interest groups, civic associations—with the formal institutions of government. They connect candidates and programs to the loyalties and interests of citizens. The relation is reciprocal: parties bring the doings of the national government within the sightlines of citizens. — Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum, A Lot of People Are Saying, 192

Categorization

• XREF: Builds on earlier populism/antipluralism material in this same book; echoes Murray’s pluralism arguments. — connects to: Populism is a permanent possibility of political structuration, not a deviance — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 46; Populism can be mobilized either against or in service of the power bloc; Populist-left parties replaced mass-party structures with leader-centric media-driven quick mobilization — Arthur Borriello and Anton Jäger, The Populist Moment: The Left After the…, 97 (+2 more)

Broader Connections

• Populism is a permanent possibility of political structuration, not a deviance #qualifies (0.78) — Ernesto Laclau, On Populist Reason, 46
• Populist-left parties replaced mass-party structures with leader-centric media-driven quick mobilization #qualifies (0.75) — Arthur Borriello and Anton Jäger, The Populist Moment, 97
• Populism can be mobilized either against or in service of the power bloc #qualifies (0.72)