The Interregnum of the Crisis

The democratic crisis is worsening on a global scale, with a growing disconnect between those who govern and those who are governed, between representatives and those they represent. In this context, following Antonio Gramsci’s famous adage, “morbid phenomena” are emerging, foremost among them the rise of the far right on a global scale, with ideological sensibilities that vary depending on the context. There are two categories used to describe this aspect of our era: populism and fascism. This raises a twofold question: from an analytical standpoint, which term is more precise for describing these new authoritarian governments? From a practical standpoint, which is more effective in encouraging citizens to fight against them?

This lecture evaluates the respective advantages and disadvantages of both concepts, emphasizing their conceptual and historical relevance. It highlights the aporias of “populism” as a framework for analyzing contemporary far-right movements and concludes that “fascism” is a more precise term—but only when considered in comparison with classical fascism. Along these lines, it proposes a political and transhistorical definition of fascism as a way of constituting organic, exclusionary, and embodied political communities through specific propaganda that breaks with the conventions of the democratic game—that is, what one can think, say, and do in politics. In the face of this new form of fascism, which exploits and hollows out democracy for its own ends, popular resistance movements are emerging that seek precisely to reconstruct a new democratic common sense—a new sense of the common good—such as the 2026 student movement, which is taking on a European dimension.

Supported by: Franco-Uruguayan Center for Advanced Studies at the University of the Republic.