The term ‘populism’ has gained consistent usage in both the political science literature and in the everyday language of politicians, the press, and daily interactions between citizens. Kurt Weyland’s book is a significant contribution to the terminological understanding of the concept, its implications in democratic regimes, and the particularisation of certain characteristics according to territorial context. Examples such as Latin America, Europe, and the United States are used in the work to highlight tendencies towards charisma, nostalgia for past regimes, or economic nationalism. Going beyond the ‘traditional’ traits associated with populism (anti-elitism and the division between the people and the elite), the author proposes a tempered approach to the inevitable path towards the death of democracy (as noted by a significant number of researchers). According to him, causal relationships should not be analysed solely based on descriptive case studies but require a comprehensive view of populist leadership patterns. The generalisation of results is thus made possible by systematising the damage done to democracy by populist leaders, in tandem with certain favourable internal conditions (eg institutional fragility). Given these contexts, the magnitude of the changes occurring in democracies is difficult to standardise and, even more so, difficult to make uniform in terms of impact, duration, and contributing factors. Consequently, the legitimacy given to populists through voting, as Weyland points out in the seven chapters of his book, is not an exclusive prerequisite for catastrophic scenarios for democracy. The author develops his argument by referring to crucial factors and conditions such as opposition adherence, institutional stability, and the sustainability of the rule of law. Their deficiencies or shortcomings allow, through circumstantial opportunities, the maximisation of the destructive power of populists within the political system. The comparative frameworks proposed by the author, in examining Latin America, Europe, or the United States of America, nuance the explanatory dynamics by highlighting the structural differences and commonalities of populist manifestations. In addition, to reduce the scale of catastrophic scenarios for democracy, Weyland brings to the fore a topic of interest to readers: the survival of populists in contexts of electoral failure. Whether they were forced to relinquish power (eg Igor Matovič’s resignation as prime minister of Slovakia) or the electorate did not grant them the necessary mandate to govern (Andrej Babiš in the Czech Republic in 2021), the situations mentioned above highlight the predisposition of populists to suffer defeats, in some cases even irreparably. Drawing a parallel between populism and risky political strategy, Weyland focuses his study on analysing populists from the last four decades to determine the feasibility of the threat to democracy. The characterisation of populist leaders, inherently influenced by local political issues, their comparison, and the assessment of their impact all lead to the author’s positive view of their effects on democracies.

In line with the ideas summarised above, the book uses a qualitative methodological approach, focusing on different types of populism across these regions. To avoid generating a one-sided view of the subject, the analysis includes both case studies that confirm the erosive effect of populism on democracy and others in which its influence is marginal. In the first chapter, the author integrates his study into the specialised literature, emphasising the viability of defining populism in a political-strategic manner. The approach, which is also based on previous studies, focuses on the tendency of leaders to increase their power (initially legitimised by the citizens’ vote) to limit liberal pluralism. Also, to strengthen the definitional perspective, the author highlights the gaps in some competing explanatory paradigms (populism as ideology, as discourse). Vital differences can be found in perspectives: populists before and after taking power, respectively, empirical analysis of leadership versus narrative construction, mark the discrepancies in status, but also the argumentative expositions shaped by the perception of authority. Following on from the theoretical aspects, Chapter 2 focuses on two related elements: populist leaders’ appetite for control and their potential to mobilise the masses. Unlike other researchers who establish a causal relationship between populist leaders and the deterioration of democracy, Weyland observes this dynamic in a conjunctural manner. The constant closeness of populists to the people is not the only condition for the metamorphosis of democracy, even in situations where portraits of ‘saviours’ produce coalitions. Chapters 3-6 highlight the types of populism in Latin America, Europe, and the US. Through examples of the undermining of democracy (Alberto Fujimori in Peru and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador), the author emphasises the ‘success’ of these changes based on systematic, successive crises, used at the discursive level as subjects of popular mobilisation. Left-wing populists are not overlooked in the work either. The inspiration provided by Hugo Chávez, coupled with the unstable context of countries such as Bolivia and Ecuador, illustrates a populist leadership in which redistribution ensures the defence of the people, to the detriment of the centralisation of power. Chapter 6 of the book presents populist fluctuations in Europe, favoured by political and institutional configurations that allow for transformations in power equations. The most obvious examples are crises and their management. They allow populist leaders to rally support and, in specific cases, to take advantage of opportunities to centralise power. Erdoğan in Turkey and Orbán in Hungary are European models of structuring actions to ensure political hegemony. While the former has steadily built the path to a strong presidential system (in which the judiciary and parliament have reduced powers), Orbán has benefited from broad popular support that has doubled, through formal legal channels, the path to authoritarianism. According to Weyland’s approach, the context in which populism manifests itself in the spectrum of leadership plays a vital role in ensuring personalistic leadership with a tendency to centralise power. He calls these factors circumstantial. Alongside existing institutions and the opposition, they are vital elements in populist leadership and, subsequently, in the degradation of democracy.

Following up on the previous information, in Chapter 6 Weyland highlights the characteristics of Trump’s presidency, its imminent integration into a populist paradigm, but also the leader’s failure, during his 2017–2021 term, to impose his political hegemony. Chapter 7, dedicated to theoretical conclusions, reiterates the importance of the political-strategic definition of populism, as well as the factors that influence the ability of populist leaders to alter democracy (institutions, contexts, opposition). To the detriment of the empirical approach proposed by the book (an analysis of actual behaviours, not narratives), it could be complemented by a broader analysis of shaping factors (eg electoral cohesion and education, social fragmentation, cultural perception of the leader, and collective experiences in democratic and authoritarian regimes). Because populism is inconsistent but connected to the expectations of the electorate, it is necessary to particularise analyses to capture specific elements. These can vary, depending on the society, from a state’s actual relations with other international actors to the quality of domestic education, the exercise of collective action, or sufficient electoral coverage. In summary, the book provides a rigorous explanatory framework in which the trends towards the weakening of the democratic system exposed by populist leaders are subjected to a factorial analysis. Weyland emphasises that democracies can survive populist leaders if institutions, the opposition, or the electorate activate (individually or collectively) democratic mechanisms to minimise authoritarian leadership through personality.