The Denial of Science in the Antisystem Populist Rhetoric

  • Carla Montuori Fernandes Department of Postgraduate Studies in Communication - Universidade Paulista - UNIP, São Paulo/SP, Brazil
  • Luiz Ademir de Oliveira Department of Postgraduate Studies in Communication - Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora - UFJF, Juiz de Fora/MG, Brazil
  • Fernando de Resende Chaves Department of Postgraduate Studies in Communication - Universidade Paulista - UNIP, São Paulo/SP, Brazil
  • Pedro Farnese Department of Postgraduate Studies in Communication - Universidade Paulista - UNIP, São Paulo/SP, Brazil
Keywords: Populism, Denial of Science, Politics, Media, Online Social Networks

Abstract

The article aims to carry out a conceptual resumption of antiscience populism, revisiting theoretical research that points to the “us” versus “them” binarism that characterizes the movement, shifts away from political elites and focuses on scientific elites, portraying them as antagonists of common people and political leaders. The study starts from the premise that populism against science refers to a political performance style that arises in contexts of democratic crises and that manifests itself in a generalized disbelief in traditional institutions. It highlights the importance that the media played in consolidating populism against science. In the pre-digital era, the effectiveness of populist leadership depended a lot on the leader's personal abilities, his oratory and the team's ability to articulate speeches adjusted to different media. Contemporary populism, on the other hand, is structured by the consonance between the media apparatus, the discursive mechanism and a tactic politics for the construction of hegemony. The article uses bibliographic research as a methodology and lists some classic and contemporary trends in populism. The results show that anti-science populism is a movement that derives from the character of contemporary populism that emerges in the context of institutional crises and uses digital media as an apparatus.

Author Biography

Pedro Farnese, Department of Postgraduate Studies in Communication - Universidade Paulista - UNIP, São Paulo/SP, Brazil
Postgraduate Program in Communication, Universidade Paulista, São Paulo, Brasil. Permanent journalist at IF Sudeste MG and Doctoral Student of the Postgraduate Program in Communication at Universidade Paulista (UNIP) with a Capes scholarship.

References

M. Lowy. “Far right and neo-fascism: a planetary phenomenon – the Bolsonaro case.” In: V Faria and M. L. B. Marques (Org.). Turns to the right: Analyzes and perspectives on the liberal-conservative field. Sobral: Sertão Cult, 2020, pp. 13-19.

P. C. Dibal. “The radical right in post-redemocratization Brazil: the Jair Bolsonaro case.” Master, Federal University of Bahia, Brazil, 2018.

P. Norris. “The ‘new cleavage thesis and the social basis of support for the radical right’.” Opinião Pública, vol. 11, pp. 1-32, 2005.

A. P. Tostes. “Reasons for Intolerance in Integrated Europe.” Dados - Revista de Ciências Sociais, vol. 52, pp. 335-376, 2009.

N. Napolitano. “You cannot deny knowledge’, says history teacher from USP." Internet: https://istoe.com.br/nao-se-pode-negar-o-conhecimento-diz-professor-de-historia-da-usp/, Apr. 4, 2019 [Aug. 10, 2020].

AVELAR, Alexandre de Sá. “Hungarian Historical Revisionism and the Ghost of the Holocaust.” Internet: https://www.cafehistoria.com.br/revisionismo-hungria-monumento, Aug. 19, 2019 [may. 12, 2020].

E. H. E. Fargoni and J. R. Silva Junior. “Bolsonarism: Brazilian necropolitics as a pact between fascists and neoliberals.” Electronic Journal of Education, vol. 14, pp. 1-26, 2020.

M. Lowy. “Conservatism and the extreme right in Europe and Brazil.” Serv. Soc. Soc. [online], vol. 124, pp. 652-664, 2015.

J. Farkas and J. Schou. Post-Truth, Fake News and Democracy: Mapping the Politics of Falsehood. New York: Routledge, 2019.

C. M. Fernandes et al. “A Pós-verdade em tempos de Covid 19: o negacionismo no discurso de Jair Bolsonaro no Instagram.” Liinc Em Revista, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 1-18, 2020.

L. Santaella. Is After-Truth True or False?. Barueri, SP: Letters and Colors Station, 2019.

S. Amadeu. Democracy and the invisible codes: how algorithms are modulating behavior and political choices. São Paulo: Edições Sesc, 2019.

N. G. Mede and M. S. Schäfer. “Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science.” Public Understanding of Science, vol. 29, pp. 473–491, 2020.

J. Ferreira. Populism and its History: debate and criticism. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 2001.

C. Mudde. “The Populist Zeitgeist.” Government and Opposition, vol. 39, pp. 541-563, 2004.

H. G. Betz. “The new politics of resentment: radical right-wing populist parties in Western Europe.” Comparative Politics in full, vol. 25, pp. 413-427, 1993.

E. Laclau. The Return of the "People": Populist Reason, Antagonism and Identities. Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 23, pp. 9-34, 2005.

M. Rooduijn, S. L. Lange and W. V. D, Brug. “A populist Zeitgeist? Programmatic contagion by populist parties in Western Europe.” Party Politics, vol. 20, pp. 563-575, 2014.

C. Mudde and C. R. Kaltwasser. Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2017.

J. Jagers and S. Walgrave. “Populism as Political Communication Style: An Empirical Study of Political Parties’ Discourse in Belgium.” European Journal of Political Research, vol. 46, pp. 319-345, 2017.

K. Hawkins, K. Venezuela’s Chavismo and Populism in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

M. S. Galito. “Populism: conceptualization of the phenomenon.” Working Paper CEsA CSG, vol. 58, pp. 1-32, 2017.

F. C. Weffort. Populism in Brazilian politics. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Paz e Terra, 1978.

E. U. Cervi. “The seven lives of populism.” Journal of Sociology and Politics in full, vol. 17, pp. 151-156, 2001.

L. Cesarino. “How to win an election without leaving your home: the rise of digital populism in Brazil.” Internet & Sociedade, vol. 1, 91-120, 2020.

P. Gerbaudo. “Social media and populism: an elective affinity?.” Media, Culture & Society, vol. 40, pp. 745-753, 2018.

A. Albuquerque and R. Quinan. “Epistemological crisis and conspiracy theories: the anti-science speech of "professor terra plana" channel”. Mídia e Cotidiano, vol. 13, pp. 83-104, 2019.

E. Amend and D. Barney. “Getting It Right: Canadian Conservatives and the “War on Science”. Canadian Journal of Communication, vol. 41, pp. 9-35, 2016.

G. A. Poland and R. M. Jacobson. “The Age-Old Struggle against the Antivaccinationists. “The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 364, no. 2, pp. 97-99, 2011.

E. Merkley and P. J. Loewen. “Anti-intellectualism, populism, and motivated resistance to expert consensus.” Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 84, pp. 24-48, 2020.

T. Ylä-Anttila. “Populist knowledge: “Post-truth” repertoires of contesting epistemic authorities.” European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, vol. 5, pp. 356-388, 2018.

C. Sagan. The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1996.

S. O Hansson. Defining science and pseudoscience. Philosophy of pseudoscience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. p. 61-77.

L. Van Zoonen, L. “I-pistemology: changing truth claims in popular and political culture.” European Journal of Communication, vol. 2, pp. 56-67, 2012.

M. J. Silveirinha. “Bubbles of truth: Five pins to (re)build democracy.” Estudos em Comunicação, vol. 2, pp. 35-45, 2018.

R. Recuero and A. Gruzd. “Cascades of Fake News Politics: A Case Study on Twitter.” Galáxia, vol. 41, pp. 31-47, 2019.

D. C. S. Maynard. “Ciberespaço e extremismos políticos no século XXI”. Cadernos do Tempo Presente, no. 14, pp. 71-80, 2013.

C. Mouffe. The democratic paradox. London: Verso, 2020.

Published
2022-01-01
Section
Articles