The second chapter, Learning from Thatcherism, goes back to the mid-1970s, when the
tensions in the social-democratic hegemony began to multiply. An exponent of this crisis,
the Thatcherite offensive involved questioning the legitimacy of the welfare state. The
legitimacy crisis was amplified by economic factors, such as the 1975 oil crisis, but also
by the contesting role of the new social movements that advocated greater individual
rights and freedoms. This historical weakness of the welfare state and the hegemony
that legitimized it were relentlessly used to erect a new hegemony, the neoliberal one.
The strategy included the construction, at the discursive level, of "us", that is, the
hardworking people, victims of bureaucrats and a "them” that encompassed the forces
of the system, state bureaucrats, trade unions, and the beneficiaries of social benefits.
The hegemonic strategy of Thatcher's populism resulted in a combination of traditional
Conservative Party themes, such as self-interest, individualism, support for competition
and a strong anti-state culture. The intervention occurred at several levels: economic,
political, and ideological, in order to establish a new cultural hegemony.
The consolidation of neoliberal hegemony included the adoption of aesthetic canons of
counterculture such as authenticity, self-management and the absence of hierarchies,
allowing the neutralization of new social movements.
In the third chapter, Radicalizing Democracy, Mouffe begins by postulating what she calls
hegemonic formation, stating that “(...) it is a configuration of social practices of different
natures: economic, cultural, political and legal, and their articulation is ensured around
some key symbolic signifiers that shape “common sense” and offer the normative
framework of a given society” (2019: 53). Basically, we are facing a social structure that
aims to replace the dominant regulatory framework. It is based on this that social
practices are guided, including those based on common sense.
According to the author, the institutional bodies that support Western societies are faced
with a growing erosion not only of the trust placed by the citizens, but also regarding
their own functioning, especially when prioritizing freedom, especially economic, to the
detriment of equality as the basic principle of democratic life.
It is paradoxical that there is no robust opposition/rejection to/of the neoliberal project
for financialization of the economy and other aspects of social activity. At this point, the
author “sees” an opportunity for left-wing populism, capturing and mobilizing the
discontent of broad social categories regarding the regime's elites.
It is up to left-wing populism to radicalize democracy. The constitution of an actor capable
of carrying out this transformation at the level of social and political institutions should
consider and start from the contribution of three types of the leftist actor: pure
reformism; radical reformism; and revolutionary politics. All of them will necessarily have
the State as an agonistic space as imperative for their action. To this end, it is not just
any version of the extreme left, but a left that promotes a break with the neoliberal status
quo.
As a consequence, left-wing populism as a collective political actor should intensify the
agonistic confrontation in society and, in particular, in the structures of the State.
The fourth and final chapter, entitled The Construction of a People, is where the author
problematizes the process of radicalization of democracy, which should include the