So here is my own definition. By ‘populism’, I mean two things: first, a brand of politics in which a strong, charismatic leader appeals to ‘the people’ by counterposing it to a rhetorical oppressor such as the ‘oligarchy’ or ‘establishment’ (or ‘Washington’ in Trump’s case). He or she purports to be a saviour, blurring the distinction between leader, government, party and state, and ignoring the need for the restraint of executive power through checks and balances. Secondly, populism has often, but not always, involved redistribution of income and/or wealth in an unsustainable fashion.
