The article makes populism’s potential as either an anti- or pro-democratic tool very clear. In this context, populism can be viewed as a mirror to democracy that either supports the people by giving them an unmediated voice or falls victim to a problem democracies are often faced with: the non-representation of unheard minorities. Certain forms of populism are then explained to be unique products of the postcolony, wherein the strong leader fills a power void. I found the insights I could gain from the article very relevant, as especially the implications of colonial influences in postcolonial populism might be an interesting field of study within the seminar.
The documentary helped me contextualize the theoretical knowledge I gained from the article. Specifically practical elements of populism that I would have otherwise found difficult to understand, like constructing plebs as populus, were demonstrated. It helped me diversify my previously quite negative view on populist leaders with the example of Chàvez in Venezuela, about whom I had next to no prior knowledge. I would love to know more about why populist left-wing leaders are seen as such a threat, as became clear in both the article and documentary.