2
Defeat of the aspen groves of Colorado valleys,
The bluebonnets of old Texas,
By the Pittsburg alleys.
Defeat of the alfalfa and the Mariposa lily.
Defeat of the Pacific and the long Mississippi.
Defeat of the young by the old and the silly.
Defeat of tornadoes by the poison vats supreme.
Defeat of my boyhood, defeat of my dream.
“Bryan, Bryan, Bryan, Bryan,” Vachel Lindsey
Populism, as both ideology and social movement, is nearly a universal, albeit
sporadic, feature of all modern democratic political systems. Populism is also arguably
the only example of an indigenous radical mass movement in America and after the
discredited state of socialism, the only continuing source of democratic protest. Yet
populism does not enjoy a central place in democratic theory. In fact, many writers
contend that when populism arises, it has a destabilizing effect on democratic regimes.
Even when others attempt to credit populism, they acknowledge the existence of
significant negative features. This essay reviews the contested status of populism and
suggests a greater appreciation of its positive contribution to democratic theory can be
reached through an analysis of Philip Roth’s “American Trilogy.” Like Roth, students of
populism place their assessments in the context of historical narratives. Thus Roth’s
fictional recreations of post-war America can be compared to the analyses of “populist
moments” in America analyzed by both populist critics and defenders. Unlike most
democratic theorists, however, Roth is willing to explore the nature and source of
populist anger and related expressions and thus expose its poignant dimensions. By
appending Roth’s insights, it is possible to ameliorate populism’s contested status in
democratic theory by acknowledging the positive role of emotion, properly understood,
in political protest.
Convention