ABSTRACT

Populism is a relatively popular discourse that poses a challenge to established political parties. However, most populist scholarship focuses on populist actors at the expense of the elites whom they oppose and the context within which populism becomes popular. This article explores the concept of anti-populism, which is to say the discourse used by the establishment to explicitly counter populism. It does so through a qualitative case study of the 2016 EU referendum that resulted in Brexit. Specifically, this article presents a discourse analysis of the argument against Brexit, as voiced by the Britain Stronger In Europe (Remain) campaign organization. Remain appropriated and reversed the three central populist categories of the people, the elite and ongoing crisis, arguing instead that Brexit would inaugurate the real crisis, the elite were the champions and protectors of the people, and the people themselves could not afford to vote against the will of the elite. These findings deepen our understanding of the EU referendum, demonstrate the utility of anti-populism as a concept, and suggest that anti-populism is a generalizable phenomenon that might be deployed by the elite wherever the establishment is undergoing a crisis.

摘要

民粹主义是一种相对流行的话语，它对已建立的政党提出了挑战。然而，大多数民粹主义学术都关注民粹主义演员，而忽视了他们反对的精英以及民粹主义流行的背景。本文探讨了反民粹主义的概念，也就是当权派用来明确反对民粹主义的话语。它通过对导致英国退欧的 2016 年欧盟公投的定性案例研究来做到这一点。具体而言，本文对反对英国退欧的论点进行了话语分析，正如英国在欧洲更强大（留欧）运动组织所表达的那样。继续挪用和扭转人民的三个核心民粹主义类别，精英和持续的危机，相反，他们认为英国退欧将引发真正的危机，精英是人民的拥护者和保护者，人民自己不能投票反对精英的意志。这些发现加深了我们对欧盟公投的理解，证明了反民粹主义作为一个概念的效用，