Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred [Hardcover]

John Lukacs (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: March 8, 2005

This intensely interesting—and troubling—book is the product of a lifetime of reflection and study of democracy. In it, John Lukacs addresses the questions of how our democracy has changed and why we have become vulnerable to the shallowest possible demagoguery.
Lukacs contrasts the political systems, movements, and ideologies that have bedeviled the twentieth century: democracy, Liberalism, nationalism, fascism, Bolshevism, National Socialism, populism. Reflecting on American democracy, Lukacs describes its evolution from the eighteenth century to its current form—a dangerous and possibly irreversible populism. This involves, among other things, the predominance of popular sentiment over what used to be public opinion. This devolution has happened through the gigantic machinery of publicity, substituting propaganda—and entertainment—for knowledge, and ideology for a sense of history. It is a kind of populism that relies on nationalism and militarism to hold society together.
Lukacs’s observations are original, biting, timely, sure to inspire lively debate about the precarious state of American democracy today.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

A prolific historian and theorist of international relations, Lukacs (The Hitler of History) offers a compact view of political change in Europe and the United States from the Napoleonic Wars to the present, with a particular focus on his area of expertise, WWII and the decades just before and after. For him, Western democracy as we have known it may have already begun to follow a course similar to that of Nazi Germany, where demagogic populists seized power, took control of the media and brainwashed their way through subsequent "elections." Lukacs derides familiar models of modern politics that pit liberals against conservatives; true conservatives, who stress aristocracy and traditional authority, have (he argues) been in decline since at least 1870. Instead, modern history shows a steady increase in popular sovereignty, in the power of public opinion and in the appeal of aggressive nationalism, which tends to control that opinion given a chance—with the aid of mass media. Lukacs decries the "devolution of liberal democracy into populism" and "popular nationalism," especially but not only under George W. Bush. He also decries gay marriage, television, contemporary feminism, "permissiveness" and American "decadence." His hauteur, fast pace and frequently cantankerous asides may impede what is otherwise a thoughtful warning from a very knowledgeable source. (Mar.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From Booklist

*Starred Review* Lukacs has written imaginatively (A Thread of Years, 1998) and persuasively (At the End of an Age, 2002) about the present as the conclusion of an era. That he also descries the rough beast shuffling on the immediate horizon this concentrated discussion of political modes and motivations attests. Aristocracy and monarchy died in the modern era, and democracy prevails as the regnant form of governance. Moreover, such styles of democracy as socialism and liberalism have failed, overpowered by nationalism and populism; for instance, Russia turned from an international to a national socialism under Stalin and never reverted, while the prevalence of politics by poll and publicity in the West has marginalized political parties, encouraged charismatic candidates, and led politicians to be concerned with what "the people" want. The temptations of crude majoritarianism and of strongmen embodying national destinies are rampant. Lukacs believes deeply in the power of ideas and insists upon defining terms precisely, based on their actual usage and effects; this accounts for some of the most striking passages, such as his discrimination of fascism from national socialism, in a book so dense and cogent that many will want to read it repeatedly and refer to it often. Ray Olson
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 256 pages
• Publisher: Yale University Press; First Printing edition (March 8, 2005)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0300107730
• ISBN-13: 978-0300107739
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.8 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12.8 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 2.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,056,894 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

51 of 65 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars The Degeneration of Democracy into Populist Nationalism, May 6, 2005

By 

J. Grattan "Ideas can move the world" (Lawrenceville, GA USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred (Hardcover)

Those expecting a thorough, organized treatment of democracy and populism will be somewhat disappointed by this book. Lukacs, an eminent conservative historian, wanders disjointedly over the political landscape of the last two hundred years making any number of observations, assertions, and rather blunt criticisms of other chroniclers of the era, including historian Richard Hoftstadter and Hannah Arendt, the author of "The Origins of Totalitarianism," described as a "muddled and dishonest writer." A burden is placed on the reader to sift through the fragmented commentary to separate substance from overstatement and inconsistencies and to locate, if not construct, main themes.

The subtitle, "Fear and Hatred," gives some indication of the direction that the author is headed. It is thought processes and psychology that are important in a mass democracy: "our concern must be with how people think, how they choose to think, including how they are influenced or impressed to think and speak." Fear and hatred are central concerns. He rejects the Freudian notion that they operate subconsciously, rather than being purposely chosen.

The author tags 1870 as a time of fundamental rearrangement of political forces. The rise and attraction of socialism and nationalism basically shoved aside the older liberal, conservative debate, though that debate lingers today. Interestingly, and probably correctly, he points out that none of the political parties in the 19th century US were truly conservative. The rise of socialism, or the Welfare state, merely reflected the new Darwinian perspective of constant social "progress." The author's assertion that the entire globe is now socialist is not much of an overreach.

But the emergence of populist nationalism is more relevant to understanding the 20th century. Nationalism is not synonymous with patriotism; it is a mutation of patriotism. It is "aggressive" and based on a vague "myth of the people" that takes on feverish religious overtones. Nationalists are anti liberal. They take offense at liberal open-mindedness and tolerance, especially for foreigners. For the author, 1914 represents the time when the weakness of socialism relative to nationalism finally became clear. "... class consciousness melted away in the heat of nationalist emotions and beliefs."

Populism, at least as it has evolved in the last century, is a mutant form of democracy. Tocqueville already saw mass conformity to public opinion as a problem for democracy. But Lukacs is more concerned with the manipulation of public opinion. The media of 1914 pandered to nationalistic sentiments. In addition, the US government got into the propaganda act by creating departments to promote the War. Ultimately, "nationalist hatred [trumped] class hatred."

Hitler clearly demonstrates where populist nationalism can wind up. He fanned hatreds for the "enemies of German nationalism both within and without." The author explains that the old "Right," at one time, feared popular sovereignty. But that has been reversed in this century as the Right has assumed the populist nationalism mantle, appealing to and creating a fierce nationalism within populations. And that is the basis of the Right's advantage over the Left - a main point of the book. The Left and Democrats have never been sufficiently nationalistic.

It is a conceit within the Right that they support a higher morality. The author, a true conservative, is having none of that. Clearly, the cultural products of the US have smashed social and moral standards worldwide. The author decries the "stunning transformations of personal and sexual and civilizational behavior" within American culture. So-called conservatives have been prime promoters of technology and "progress," and more importantly economic policies of neoliberalism, which give global corporations a free hand in upsetting the social order by such actions as offshoring jobs without the hindrance of environmental or labor regulations. The impacts on families, whom conservatives claim to value much, and communities have been profound, not to mention on the environment.

Surprisingly, the author has a blind eye about other aspects of capitalism. For example, his claim that 20th century nationalists shared with socialists a dislike, even hatred, for international financiers and capitalists. Or his contention that corporate executives do not form a new aristocracy. What is a plutocracy (which surely exists in the US) other than a moneyed aristocracy? There is little evidence that the populist Republican Party favors restrictions on international capital. At one time the Pat Buchanan wing of the Republicans showed some interest in those areas. On the other hand, the minimal social disapproval of white collar crime is noted - surely, a conservative contradiction.

The author is concerned that parliamentary democracy is at risk in the US due to a large deficit in the free flow of useful information. The press no longer performs a role of assimilating and reflecting the political views of the public. As with other media, its focus is on entertainment. He is especially concerned about the potential for the public being manipulated by television, which now dominates news and entertainment, through the subtle distortion of words and speech. There are only limited avenues for unaltered oppositional voices.

As the author suggests, there has been a degeneration of democracy into nationalist populism in the US. There is one slight reference to the original populists in the US, the farmer revolt in the South in the late 19th century, who correctly identified oppression by business and government and attempted to ameliorate their situation through economic and political means - a true democratic effort. The measures taken to suppress that movement were extreme, and not discussed by the author.

The author misses the opportunity to reflect on the difficulties that truly ground-up democratic action faces. It seems that pseudo-democracy, or the kind of populism that the author discusses, is really all that can be "successful." But that is a result of manipulation by elites. It is not deliberative, and is usually fanatical. He does recognize that spectacular sporting events encourage "accumulations of hatred," which can be exercised politically.

Unsurprisingly, the author can only hope for some sort of revival of true conservatism. The chances of the Left successfully combating the forces of the Right are virtually nil.

15 of 27 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A Good Study for the Future of The World As We Know It., June 28, 2005

By 

Betty Burks "Betty Burks" (Knoxville, TN) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred (Hardcover)

This critical analysis of U. S. politics and "democracy" is written by an eminent historian who devoted many years to writng a six-volume history about Churchill and his importance to the outcome of World War II. He wrote FIVE DAYS IN LONDON (in May 1940) pivotal to the success of WWII in favor of the Allies, and THE DUEL between Churchill and Hitler.

He is a man who lives and breathes history. He feels that the current form of American democracy which had its roots in the 18th Century have changed drastically to a dangerous form of populism. History today is written for entertainment or propaganda and depends more on public opinion than on actual facts.

The machinery of publicity (the media) has caused the United States president to rely on nationalism and militarism to hold our society together. The decline of privacy (Big Brother cameras everywhere, even out on the Interstates which traverse this country) and the rise of criminality make for a dark future, full of fear and hatred.

The division between the two major political parties, Democrats and Republicans, make for a bad choice of bedfellows. The very material order (or disorder) of the world is not at all the dundament but the consequence of what many people think. Mayors, public officials, government workers, Governors, Presidents -- all are in power because of their popularity and not their ability. In America, you get where you are by who you are or who you know. It's sad what this world has become since 1945 when our future seemed secure. Nothing is secure today and 9/11 proved it. Those terrorists died in the plane crashes, but there are double that amount in U. S. A. today waiting for their turn to be suicide bombers, whether in planes, trains, or public transit.

5 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Disappointing mumblings from an old man, December 23, 2010

By 

Jorge Kersman "Jorge Kersman" (Buenos Aires, Argentina) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred (Hardcover)

(I am not of english speaking origin so please excuse errors and poor gramatics)
After having read the "Big" books of Mr. Lukacs with enormous pleasure, this is a big disappointment.
No clear thinking, that traduces in quite confusing writing. Plain vanity at a very high level. The author not only disavows reputed writers and historians, with just a couple of phrases: he also denies common wisdom with a "not so" and no more explanations. It seems like his purpose is "èpater le bourgeois" once and then again.
He "opens" themes that never come to fruition, meanders in a way impossible to follow, confuses the reader without evidently having made the effort to stream his lines of thought.
All this may be attributed to decay, old age of the author, lack of something new to say or just laziness.
But there is too a more malign component, if that is the word. The author simply cannot ignore he is lying when he asserts:
1) That Hitler and the Nazi Party evolved from a mere 2% of the vote, arriving to "more than 43 in March 1933". Everibody who knows anything about the Third Reich, knows that those last elections were rigged and fiercely manipulated. (See Richard Evans "The Third Reich in Power" for a detailed explanation). But in this precise point of the authors discourse (page 97) it is convenient for Mr. Lukacs to show that the Nazis had a substantial percentage of the vote. He, of all authors can not ignore the above.
2) Why on earth to lie again on this aspect of Hitler's personality: (Page 209): "He (Hitler) was no sadist, he took no particular pleasure in watching, or even being informed about the sufferings of his declared enemies".
Again, Mr. Lukacs cannot ignore the infamous films that Hitler had made of the slow dying of the conspirators of July 44. Hanged slowly with piano strings to a dreadful dead. Is quite well known that the dictator spent time looking those gruesome details.
I have a theory: again, he always tries to show he knows best than all other authors, and of course than the common knowledge.
In sum, a very poor performance and a waste of time.
Note: I include the pages of those two mistakes without giving details of the edition, because I am absolutely certain that this is going to be the only one.
Jorge Kersman