ABSTRACT
The recent debate on populism has generated interesting proposals in relation to the historiographical classification and the identification of specific historical typologies. Most neo-populisms are part of a global context where the impacts of globalization represent a fundamental factor in their formation and where the sovereignty of the nation-state is gradually being eroded, due to both globalization itself and to new external geopolitical equilibriums. Recent cases in Venezuela, Russia and Turkey, however, have raised the issue of the profound relationship between populism and democratic degeneration, in the context of liberal-democratic systems in the classical sense. The idea of populism as strategy is based on diametrically opposed premises. According to this approach, populism's socio-structural dimensions take analytical precedence, such as social crises, economic crises, social mobilization and its changes, political organization, political participation and geopolitical factors. Conceiving populism as a strategy means considering all its factors as a unique social dynamic of power, which asserts itself to replace the dominant elite.
