Populism and the European Culture Wars: The Conflict of Values between Hungary and the EU

by Frank Furedi

Concern and hostility towards populism has become a distinctive feature of contemporary political culture. In Europe such concerns are frequently directed at Eurosceptics, whose opposition to the European Union is often portrayed as a cultural crime. Ancient anti-democratic claims about the gullibility, ignorance and irrationality of the masses are frequently recycled through the anti-populist condemnation of people who vote the wrong way.

This book argues that the current outburst of anti-populist anxiety is symptomatic of a loss of faith in democracy and in the ability of the demos to assume the role of responsible citizens. Distrust of the people and of parliamentary sovereignty is reinforced by the concern that, on its own, liberal democracy lacks the normative foundation to inspire the loyalty and affection of ordinary citizens. Through focusing on the conflict between the European Union’s Commission and the Government of Hungary, this book explores contrasting attitudes towards national sovereignty, popular sovereignty and the question of tradition and the past as the main drivers of the culture war in Europe.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction

152 pages, Kindle Edition

Published August 10, 2017

About the author

Frank Furedi is a professor of sociology at the University of Kent, UK.

Reviews

[Ben · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent!

A fantastic and well reasoned critique of contemporary European politics and the elites that are seen as responsible for a decline in both traditional values and classical liberal democracy. Good insights regardless of personal political views. Recommended.

[Ietrio · Rating 1 out of 5]

Democracy is served only when the clique favored by Furedi wins. Otherwise it is populism and some army should invade and change the leaders.

I also liked the cover showing the Magyar in their favorite cosplay according to the smarts of Furedi.

[Илья Дескулин · Rating 3 out of 5]

Furedi is good at pointing out dishonesties and double standards of the liberal establishment, but when it comes to defending their populist opponents he (maybe intentionally) becomes politically naive and apologetic.