BİR SENDROM OLARAK POPÜLİZM: POPÜLİST ANTAGONİZMANIN SİYASET PSİKOLOJİSİ

Öz

Bu makalede, küresel düzeyde hızla yükselişe geçen popülizmin halk ile seçkinler arasında meydana gelen antagonistik niteliğinin siyaset psikolojisi eksenli değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda, özne ile yapı arasındaki ilişkinin diyalektik bir biçimde gerçekleştiği argümanı ekseninde bireylerin neden popülist politikalar benimseyen siyasetçileri desteklediği ve popülizmin hangi psikolojik etkenler sebebiyle yükselişe geçtiği sorgulanmıştır. Bu yaklaşım doğrultusunda popülizmin ayırt edici nitelikleri olarak halk merkezcilik, seçkin karşıtlığı ve genel irade kapsamında beliren otoriter lider unsurları üzerinde özenle durulmuştur. Söz konusu nitelikler, siyaset psikolojisi eksenli bir yaklaşım dahilinde özellikle toplumsal kimlik, grup aidiyetliği, narsisizm, bilişsel ve duygusal unsurlar temelinde değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmada, popülizmin temsili demokrasinin gölgesinde beliren bir sendrom olduğu argümanı benimsenmiştir. Bu bakımdan popülizmin, mevcut demokrasi bunalımlarını farklı biçimlerde ve çoğunlukla anti demokratik şekilde gündeme getirdiği ileri sürülmüştür. Nihayetinde, mevcut eşitsizlik ve adaletsizlikler karşısında pejoratif duygulara sahip bireylere seslenerek kurgusal bir “kurtuluş” vaadinde bulunan popülizmin 21. yüzyıl itibarıyla yükselişe geçmesinin alternatif grup ve toplumsal kimlik aidiyetliğine bağlı olarak beliren kolektif narsisizm ile ilişkili olduğu vurgulanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Popülizm
• Siyaset Psikolojisi
• Demokrasi
• Otoriterlik
• Kolektif Narsisizm

POPULISM AS A SYNDROME: THE POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY OF POPULIST ANTAGONISM

Öz

In this article, it is aimed to evaluate the antagonistic nature of populism, which is on the rise at the global level, between the public and the elite, based on political psychology. In this context, based on the argument that the relationship between the agent and the structure occurs dialectically, why individuals support politicians who implement populist policies and the psychological factors of the rise of populism have been problematized. From this perspective, the distinctive features of populism, such as people-centrism, opposition to elites, and authoritarian leader elements embodied within the scope of general will have been specifically focused on. These qualities have been considered on the basis of especially social identity and group belonging and narcissism, within an approach based on political psychology. In the study, it has been argued that populism is a syndrome that emerges in the shadow of representative democracy. In this respect, it has been argued that populism has brought the current democracy crises to the agenda in different ways and mostly in an anti-democratic manner. As a result, it has been emphasized that populism promises a speculative "liberation" by appealing to individuals with pejorative emotions in the face of current inequalities and injustices, and that the rise of populism as of the 21st century is related to collective narcissism that emerges depending on alternative group and social identity belonging.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Populism
• Political Psychology
• Democracy
• Authoritarianism
• Collective Narcissism

Kaynakça

1. Akkerman, Tjitske (2003). “Populism and Democracy: Challenge or Pathology?”, Acta Politica, 38: 147-159.
2. Albertazzi, Daniele ve Duncan McDonnell (2008). “Introduction: The Sceptre and the Spectre”, Albertazzi, Daniele ve Duncan McDonnell (Der.). Twenty-First Century Populism: The Spectre of Western European Democracy (New York: Palgrave Macmillan): 1-11.
3. Arditi, Benjamin (2010). Liberalizmin Kıyılarında Siyaset: Farklılık, Popülizm, Devrim, Ajitasyon (İstanbul: Metis Yayıncılık) (Çev. Emine Ayhan).
4. Brown, Wendy (2018). Halkın Çözülüşü: Neoliberalizmin Sinsi Devrimi (İstanbul: Metis Yayıncılık) (Çev. Barış Engin Aksoy).
5. Canovan, Margaret (1999). “Trust the People! Populism and Two Faces of Democracy”, Political Studies, 47(1): 2-16.
6. Collier, Ruth Berins ve David Collier (2002). Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press).
7. Conway, John F. (1978). “Populism in the United States, Russia, and Canada: Explaining the Roots of Canada’s Third Parties”, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 11 (1): 99-124.
8. Cotoi, Calin (2018). “Populist Dilemmas: Fin-De-Siecle Russian Narodnicism and Nation-Building Romania”, Chini, Chiara ve Sheyla Moroni (Der.). Populism: A Historiographic Category? (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing): 35-47.

9. Cottam, Martha L., Elena Mastors, Thomas Preston ve Beth Dietz (2017). Siyaset Psikolojisine Giriş (Ankara: BB101 Yayınları) (Çev. Mesut Şenol).
10. Çarkoğlu, Ali, Ezgi Elçi, Fatih Erol ve Cansu Paksoy (2022). “Popülizm Teorileri Işığında Türkiye’de Popülizmin Tarihsel Gelişimi: Siyasi Partiler Üzerine Bir İnceleme”, Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22 (1): 323-348.
11. Çınar, Menderes (2015). “Demokrasi”, Taşkın, Yüksel (Der.), Siyaset: Kavramlar, Kurumlar, Süreçler (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları): 203-249.
12. Çin, Gökhan (2019). “Amerikan Emperyalizminin Latin Amerika’daki Son Örneği: Bolivarcı Venezuela Cumhuriyeti’nde Yaşanan Kriz”, Üsküdar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8: 1-38.
13. Enyedi, Zsolt (2018). “Democratic Backsliding and Academic Freedom in Hungary”, Perspectives on Politics, 16 (4): 1067–1074.
14. Finchelstein, Federico (2017). From Fascism to Populism in History (Oakland, CA: University of California Press).
15. Gallie, Walter Bryce (1956). “Essentially Contested Concepts”, Proceeding of the Aristotelian Society, 56: 167–98.
16. Germani, Gino (1978). Authoritarianism, Fascism and National Populism (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books).
17. Golec de Zavala, Agnieszka Golec, Aleksandra Eidelson, Eidelson Roy ve Nuwan Jayawickreme (2009). “Collective Narcissism and Its Social Consequences”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (6): 1074–1096.
18. Golec de Zavala, Agnieszka Golec, Karolina Dyduch-Hazar, Dorottya Lantos (2019). “Collective Narcissism: Political Consequences of Investing Self-Worth in the Ingroup’s Image”, Political Psychology, 40: 37-74.
19. Hennessy, Alistair (1969). “Latin America”, Ionescu, Ghita ve Ernest Gellner (Der.), Populism: Its Meaming and National Characteristics (London: The Macmillan Company): 28-61.
20. Hermet, Guy (2012). “Permanences et Mutations du Populisme”, Critique, 776-777: 62-74.
21. Hermet, Guy (2013). “Foundational Populism”, Gherghina, Sergiu, Sergiu Mișcoiu ve Sorina Soare (Der.), Contemporary Populism: A Controversial Concept and Its Diverse Forms (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing): 84-113.
22. Heywood, Andrew (2012). Political Ideologies: An Introduction (London: Palgrave Macmillan).
23. Hirigoyen, Marie-France (2021). Narsisistler İktidarda (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları) (Çev. Ayşen Gür).
24. Hogg, Michael A. (2004). “Social Categorization and Group Behavior”, Brewer, Marilynn B. ve Miles Hewstone (Der.), Self and Social Identity (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing): 203-301.
25. Houwen, Tim (2013). Reclaiming Power for the People: Populism in Democracy (Nijmegen: Radboud University).
26. Huddy, Leonie, David O. Sears ve Jack S. Levy (2013). “Introduction: Theoretical Foundations of Political Psychology”, Huddy, Leonie, David O. Sears ve Jack S. Levy (Der.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (New York: Oxford University Press): 23- 58.
27. Kaltwasser, Cristobal Rovira, Paul Taggart, Paulina Ochoa Espejo ve Pierre Ostiguy (2017). “Populism: An Overview of the Concept and the State of the Art”, Kaltwasser, Cristobal Rovira, Paul Taggart, Paulina Ochoa Espejo ve Pierre Ostiguy (Der.), The Oxford Handbook of Populism (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 1-24.
28. Kazin, Michael (2016). “How Can Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders Both Be ‘Populist’?”, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/27/magazine/how-can-donald-trump-and-bernie-sanders-both-be-populist.html (30.05.2022).
29. Krastev, Ivan (2015). “The Age of Populism: Reflections on The Self-Enmity of Democracy”, European View, 10: 11-16.
30. Laclau, Ernesto (1977). Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory (London: New Left Books).
31. Laclau, Ernesto (2007). Popülist Akıl Üzerine (Ankara: Epos Yayınları) (Çev. Nur Betül Çelik).
32. Lantos, Dorottya ve Joseph P. Forgas (2020). “The role of Collective Narcissism in Populist Attitudes and the Collapse of Democracy in Hungary”, Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 5 (2): 65-78.
33. Lasch, Christopher (1991). The True and Only Heaven: Progress and Its Critics (New York: W. W. Norton).
34. Lenin, Vladimir Ilyich (1963). The Economic Content of Narodism and the Critique of it in Mr. Struve's Book. Collected Works, Volume 1 (London: Lawrence & Wishart).
35. Lepore, Jill (2010). The Whites of Their Eyes: The Tea Party’s Revolution and the Battle Over American History (Priceton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
36. Lipset, Seymour Martin (1960). Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics (Garden City, NY: Doubleday and Company, Inc). Marchlewska, Marta, Aleksandra Cichocka, Orestis Panayiotou, Kevin Castellanos ve Jude Batayneh (2017). “Populism as Identity Politics: Perceived In-Group Disadvantage, Collective Narcissism, and Support for Populism”, Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9 (2): 151-162.
37. Moffitt, Benjamin (2016). The Global Rise of Populism: Performance, Political Style, and Representation (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
38. Mouffe, Chantal (2018). For a Left Populism (London: Verso).
39. Mudde, Cas ve Cristobal Rovira Kaltwasser (2013). “Populism”, Freeden, Michael, Lyman Tower Sargent ve Marc Stears (Der.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 493-512.
40. Mudde, Cas (2017). “Populism: An Ideational Approach”, Kaltwasser, Cristobal Rovira, Paul Taggart, Paulina Ochoa Espejo ve Pierre Ostiguy (Der.), The Oxford Handbook of Populism (Oxford: Oxford University Press): 27-47.
41. Müller, Jan-Werner (2018). Popülizm Nedir?: Bir Deneme (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları) (Çev. Onur Yıldız).
42. Nesbitt-Larking, Paul, Catarina Kinnvall, Tereza Capelos ve Henk Dekker (2014). “Introduction: Origins, Developments and Current Trends”, Nesbitt-Larking, Paul, Catarina Kinnvall, Tereza Capelos ve Henk Dekker (Der.), The Palgrave Handbook of Global Political Psychology (New York: Palgrave Macmillan): 3-16.
43. Oakeshott, Michael (1991). Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund).
44. Oakeshott, Michael (1996). The Politics of Faith and the Politics of Scepticism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press).
45. Rosch, Eleanor (1978). “Principles of Categorization”, Rosch, Eleanor ve Barbara B. Lloyd (Der.), Cognition and Categorization (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates): 27-48.
46. Rosenblum, Nancy L. (2008). On the Side of the Angels: An Appreciation of Parties and Partisanship (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
47. Rousseau, Jean Jacques (2020). Toplum Sözleşmesi (İstanbul: Koridor Yayıncılık) (Çev. Işık Ergüden).
48. Rucht, Dieter (2019). “Right-Wing Populism in Context: A Historical and Systematic Perspective”, Fitzi, Gregor, Jürgen Mackert ve Bryan S. Turner (Der.), Populism and the Crisis of Democracy: Volume 2: Politics, Social Movements and Extremism (Oxon: Routledge): 67-84.
49. Schmitt Carl (1996). The Concept of the Political (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
50. Sherif, Muzafer ve Carolyn W. Sherif (1969). An Outline of Social Psychologly (New York: Harper & Row).
51. Silva, Bruno Castanho Silva, Federico Vegetti ve Levente Littvay (2017). “The Elite Is Up to Something: Exploring the Relation Between Populism and Belief in Conspiracy Theories”, Swiss Political Science Review, 23 (4): 423-443.
52. Skenderovic, Damir (2021). “Populism: A History of the Concept”, Heinisch, Reinhard, Christina Holtz-Bacha ve Oscar Mazzoleni (Der.), Political Populism: Handbook of Concepts, Questions and Strategies of Research (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft): 47-64.
53. Stanley, Ben (2008) “The Thin Ideology of Populism”, Journal of Political Ideologies, 13 (1): 95-110.
54. Taguieff, Pierre-Andre (2007). L’ Illusion Populiste: De l’ Archaque au Mediatique (Paris: Flammarion).
55. Tajfel, Henri (1978). “Social Categorization, Social Identity, and Social Comparison”, Tajfel, Henri (Der.), Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (New York: Academic Press): 61-76.
56. Tajfel, Henri ve John C. Turner (2005). “The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior”, Jost, John T. ve Jim Sidanius (Der.), Political Psychology: Key Readings in Social Psychology (New York: Psychology Press): 367-390.
57. Turner, John C. ve Rupert J. Brown (1978). “Social Status, Cognitive Alternatives and Intergroup Relations”, Tajfel, Henri (Der.), Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (New York: Academic Press): 201-234.
58. Wardetzki, Barbel (2021). Siyasette ve Toplumda Narsisizm, Ayartma ve İktidar (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları) (Çev. Deniz Cankoçak).
59. Wodak, Ruth (2019). “The Micro-Politics of Right-Wing Populism”, Fitzi, Gregor, Jürgen Mackert ve Bryan S. Turner (Der.), Populism and the Crisis of Democracy: Volume 2: Politics, Social Movements and Extremism (Oxon: Routledge): 11-29.
60. Worsley, Peter (1969). “The Concept of Populism”, Ionescu, Ghita ve Ernest Gellner (Der.), Populism: Its Meaming and National Characteristics (London: The Macmillan Company): 212-250.
61. Zelizer, Julian E. (2017). “American Conservatism from Roosevelt to Johnson”, Golz, Anna von der ve Britta Waldschmidt-Nelson (Der.), Inventing the Silent Majority in Western Europe and the United States: Conservatism in the 1960s and 1970s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 19-37.