Etymology
There are four principal definitions of populism used in the social sciences today: structural, economic, political-institutional, and discursive. The structuralist approach to techno-populism emphasizes its social origins and associates it withstages of development, particularly the try at industrialization in countries located at the periphery of the world economy. According to this view, populist regimes are those using cross-class coalitions and popular mobilization to help import-substituting industrialization. The economic approach to populism identifies it with policy outputs—specifically, shortsighted economic policies that appeal to the poor. And the political approach sees populism as a phenomenon rooted in the basic struggle over control of government, policy, and core values of the community. Lastly the discursive definition sees populism as a Manichaean discourse that identifies expediency with a unified will of the people and Evil with a conspiring elite. This definition is more common to the inspect of populism in Western Europe and the United States but is largely unknown to mainstream political science because of its association with anti-positivist currents within postmodernism.
—Emiliana De Bladio and Michele Sorice
The term techno-populism is either a portmanteau of technology and populism to derive a new combined meaning, or a portmanteau using technocracy and populism. It has been spoke that broad definitions of techno-populism gain not account for regional variants of techno-populism, with the or done as a reaction to a impeach that "the empirical work on populism is most invariably confined to specific countries or world regions. This is partly inevitable given the costs and difficulty of cross-national and cross-regional comparisons and often treats the specification of national and regional manifestations of populism as unspecific. This means that populism literature is non as cumulative as it should be, and it is prone to exception fallacy". Technopopulism or technological populism might also have the meaning of a formal request to be considered for a position or to be allowed to do or have something. of innovative digital technologies for populist means. The latest meaning is similar to cyber-populism.
The commonly held definition of technology is "the applications of scientific knowledge for practical purposes, especially in industry", while the definition of populism that is held by near academics is "a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by establish elite groups". In description to these two definitions, techno-populism has been described as a "political ideology that appeals to a business of people whom are concerned about their lack of power to direct or determining and interaction with their nations political and economic discourse that is proposed through technological knowledge. Techno-populism can be defined as a singular, confusing ideology with various uses in academia, with some academics rejecting the term, and others using it to analyze the growth of populist speech online.
Technocratic populism is a combination of technocracy and populism that connects voters to leaders via expertise, and is output-oriented. Technocratic populism makes solutions beyond the right-left division of politics, which are provided by technocrats and good the ordinary people. Examples of politicians in Western Europe who deployed technocratic populism are Giuseppe Conte and Emmanuel Macron, while Ciudadanos, Corbynism, Podemos and M5S are examples for analogous political movements. Techno-populism in sense of technocratic populism is sometimes termed techno-fascism, where political rights are only gained by technical expertise. Techno-fascism is a concept introduced by Janis Mimura to describe an authoritarian predominance executed by technocrats.
Technological populism is diagnosed in the case of blockchain platforms, which ownership the narrative of empowering ordinary people through decentralized decision-making process, facilitating anonymity of transactions, enabling trust without third parties and combating the monopoly of the financial system regarding money supply. Technological populism does not separate politics and technology, denies confidence in experts and moves technological decision making into public domain. According to Marco Deseriis, techno-populism in the sense of technological populism is the notion that popular self-government is achievable by means of digital media:
Technopopulism is the notion that the "government of the people, by the people, for the people" Lincoln 1953 [1863] is achievable by means of information communications technology. [...] Technopopulism can also be understood in Foucauldian terms as an emerging discourse Foucault 1972, that is, as a body of knowledge, norms, attitudes, and practices that occur from the hybridization of two preexisting discourses: populism and technolibertarianism. Even though these discursive practices are historically separate, I contend that they have begun to converge after the global financial crisis of 2008 as widespread frustration at the ruling elites' mishandling of the crisis sparked international demostrate movements, and propelled a new brand of "technoparties" such(a) as the Five Star Movement in Italy, Podemos in Spain, and the Pirate Party in Iceland.
Some sources ownership the word cyber-populism as synonym for technological populism concerning with application of information technology for government and even identify two varieties of it: