CODING RUBRIC AND ANCHOR TEXTS FOR THE GLOBAL POPULISM DATABASE A TEAM POPULISM PROJECT WITH THE GUARDIAN March 5, 2019 These are the documents used in training example of a 0, and that of Stephen Harper coders and coding speeches for the Global (Canada) as a 1. These are given during the Populism Database, a database measuring the first day or in preparation for the second day populist discourse of country chief and are considered relatively easy speeches executives across the globe, constructed by to code. The speeches by Sarah Palin (US), members of Team Populism in collaboration Barack Obama (US), and George W. Bush with a number of partners, including The (US) are given in preparation for the third day Guardian, Brigham Young University, and are more challenging. The speech by Central European University, IE University Obama is the most straightforward and is and Universidad Diego Portales. given between a 0 and 0.5. The one by Palin The same documents have been used for is another “in between” speech, with a score training coders since 2013, and with minor around 1.5. The Bush speech is the most modifications since the very first round in challenging and is used to highlight the 2005 (in 2011, a second round of practice importance of content over tone; its speeches was added, and in 2013 minor Manichaean outlooks hints at something changes in wording were made to the rubric strongly populist (many coders give it a 2 at and the criteria for sampling). The first is a first), but the absence of a conspiring elite blank copy of the coding rubric (2 pages), (Islamic fundamentalists are not a followed by a description of the criteria for meaningful international or domestic elite) or sampling speeches (1 page). Both of these any references to restoring a subverted were distributed and discussed during a series system demonstrate that it deserves of four training sessions. something much closer to a 0. Following these are copies of all of the Coders are given an additional set of three anchor texts (the speeches used in training). training speeches in preparation for a fourth The first speech, by Robert Mugabe and final day of training. These are selected (Zimbabwe), is used during the first training from the countries they will be coding, in session, while the others are given to coders their native language; whenever possible, to read on their own as homework; the results these are speeches that other coders have were discussed in the following session. already coded. Speeches are selected to The speeches by Mugabe and Evo reflect a range of populist discourse, from Morales (Bolivia) are given as examples of a low to high. Because these are customized for score of 2, that of Tony Blair (UK) as an each country, they are not reproduced here. 2 Name of politician: Title of Speech: Date of Speech: Category: Grader: Date of grading: Final Grade (delete unused grades): 2 A speech in this category is extremely populist and comes very close to the ideal populist discourse. Specifically, the speech expresses all or nearly all of the elements of ideal populist discourse, and has few elements that would be considered non-populist. 1 A speech in this category includes strong, clearly populist elements but either does not use them consistently or tempers them by including non-populist elements. Thus, the discourse may have a romanticized notion of the people and the idea of a unified popular will (indeed, it must in order to be considered populist), but it avoids bellicose language or references to cosmic proportions or any particular enemy. 0 A speech in this category uses few if any populist elements. Note that even if a manifesto expresses a Manichaean worldview, it is not considered populist if it lacks some notion of a popular will. Populist Pluralist It conveys a Manichaean vision of the world, The discourse does not frame issues in moral that is, one that is moral (every issue has a terms or paint them in black-and-white. strong moral dimension) and dualistic Instead, there is a strong tendency to focus on (everything is in one category or the other, narrow, particular issues. The discourse “right” or “wrong,” “good” or “evil”) The will emphasize or at least not eliminate the implication—or even the stated idea—is that possibility of natural, justifiable differences of there can be nothing in between, no fence- opinion. sitting, no shades of grey. This leads to the use of highly charged, even bellicose language. The moral significance of the items The discourse will probably not refer to any mentioned in the speech is heightened by reified notion of history or use any cosmic ascribing cosmic proportions to them, that is, proportions. References to the spatial and by claiming that they affect people temporal consequences of issues will be everywhere (possibly but not necessarily limited to the material reality rather than any across the world) and across time. Especially mystical connections. in this last regard, frequent references may be made to a reified notion of “history.” At the same time, the speaker will justify the moral significance of his or her ideas by tying them to national and religious leaders that are generally revered. 3 Although Manichaean, the discourse is still Democracy is simply the calculation of votes. democratic, in the sense that the good is This should be respected and is seen as the embodied in the will of the majority, which is foundation of legitimate government, but it is seen as a unified whole, perhaps but not not meant to be an exercise in arriving at a necessarily expressed in references to the preexisting, knowable “will.” The majority “voluntad del pueblo”; however, the speaker shifts and changes across issues. The common ascribes a kind of unchanging essentialism to man is not romanticized, and the notion of that will, rather than letting it be whatever 50 citizenship is broad and legalistic. percent of the people want at any particular moment. Thus, this good majority is romanticized, with some notion of the common man (urban or rural) seen as the embodiment of the national ideal. The evil is embodied in a minority whose The discourse avoids a conspiratorial tone and specific identity will vary according to does not single out any evil ruling minority. It context. Domestically, in Latin America it is avoids labeling opponents as evil and may not often an economic elite, perhaps the even mention them in an effort to maintain a “oligarchy,” but it may also be a racial elite; positive tone and keep passions low. internationally, it may be the United States or the capitalist, industrialized nations or international financiers or simply an ideology such as neoliberalism and capitalism. Crucially, the evil minority is or was recently The discourse does not argue for systemic in charge and subverted the system to its own change but, as mentioned above, focuses on interests, against those of the good majority or particular issues. In the words of Laclau, it is the people. Thus, systemic change is/was a politics of “differences” rather than required, often expressed in terms such as “hegemony.” “revolution” or “liberation” of the people from their “immiseration” or bondage, even if technically it comes about through elections. Because of the moral baseness of the Formal rights and liberties are openly threatening minority, non-democratic means respected, and the opposition is treated with may be openly justified or at least the courtesy and as a legitimate political actor. minority’s continued enjoyment of these will The discourse will not encourage or justify be seen as a generous concession by the illegal, violent actions. There will be great people; the speech itself may exaggerate or respect for institutions and the rule of law. If abuse data to make this point, and the data is abused, it is either an innocent mistake language will show a bellicosity towards the or an embarrassing breach of democratic opposition that is incendiary and standards. condescending, lacking the decorum that one shows a worthy opponent. Overall Comments (just a few sentences): 4 CRITERIA FOR SELECTING SPEECHES road, park, or building. You will probably April 2013 find a number of these on the government website. Given a choice, look for a speech Generally, we need a speech that is at least 2- that is given to a small, local audience rather 3 pages long, or about 2,000 words, in order than a national one, and to a domestic to have enough text to analyze. We will use audience rather than an international one— an extremely long speech (>5 pages) if it is we prefer something obscure in order to see the only one available in the category or is whether the chief executive uses a populist clearly the right speech for that category (as discourse in settings with little apparent in the case of a famous speech), but given a significance. If you have a lot to choose from, choice, we prefer something shorter to make pick the most recent. your work a little easier. We will also use an extremely short speech (1 page or less), but International: Here we are looking for a only if it is the only one available. Where the speech whose primary audience, or a leader has been in office several years (say, significant part of the audience, consists of because this is the last year in a 6-year term) citizens from other countries—leaders, and there are a variety of speeches available diplomats, or even ordinary people. There for a category, we generally prefer the most will be quite a few international speeches recent ones because they are the easiest to available, including on websites besides find.