This is the tenth issue of Populism, meaning that this is the end of our fifth full year of publication. To be sure, the work needed to get to this point began well before our first issue appeared in Spring 2018, but the proof, as they say, is in the puddling. Journals are for publishing. By that standard, we’ve made it five years.
As editor, I thought this would be an appropriate time to take stock of what the journal has achieved – as well as to assess areas it needs help improving on. Accordingly, I am presenting what might be called an Interim Report on what we’ve done, who we’ve done it with, and where we’d like to go moving forward.
So far (not including this second issue of 2022), we have published forty-eight scholarly articles and twenty-one book reviews. The topics of the scholarly manuscripts have been broad. Twenty have approached populism from a generally theoretical, non-region specific perspective, offering analyses of various conceptual elements of the phenomenon. Of those with a more identifiably regional focus, Europe has drawn most of our attention with fifteen articles. Many fewer have focused on the politics of Asia, the Middle East, Latin and South America, and the United States. So far, none have touched on politics in sub-Saharan Africa.
Beyond the total of articles published, we have also collaborated with various scholars on two special issues – ventures the journal is happy to support. The first, in our Spring issue of 2019, was titled, “Exploring Global Populisms,” and sought to center populist analysis in an integrative, broad context. The second, which appeared in the Fall issue of 2020, was titled, “Assessing Populism at Europe’s Margins.” It aimed at understanding populism outside of the Western European context. Both these were exceptional issues and highlighted aspects of populism that often escape notice.
As an aside, let me note that we are always interested in exploring special issues with collaborators. While I don’t want to limit anyone’s creativity, I would note that two obvious regions that are under-explored, at least in terms of submissions to our journal, are sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. That said, issues of communication, globalization, psychology, among many others, seem ripe for fuller exploration in a special issue. If you have ideas, get in touch. Let’s see what we can work out.
Moreover, there’s no reason just to restrict analyses to established social science approaches to populism. Populism, as a phenomenon, is multifaceted; so, too, should be analysis of it. If there is good work being done regarding populism and theater, the arts, popular culture, and more, we are open to it.
In terms of gender, the journal has published seventeen women authors, either as solo or coauthors on articles or book reviews. Two women have served as special edition co-editors as well. The journal has also been sensitive to ensuring women are contacted as reviewers; however, given the gap between the number of people who are solicited as reviewers and the number who actually agree to do reviews, we have not kept a detailed breakdown on gender and reviews. In any case, gender representation is an area the journal is seeking to improve.
The journal has, notably, been quite successful in receiving submissions from, and ultimately publishing, scholars based around the world. While a preponderance of the journal’s articles have been Eurocentric and theoretical, their authors have come from a wide variety of backgrounds, universities, and perspectives. We hope this continues.
Both our field and the political world we inhabit are changing – rapidly. We look forward to provide a vehicle for exploring populism as a phenomenon as it evolves in our dynamic environment. Here’s to another five successful years!
Lane Crothers
Editor POPU, Illinois State University, Normal, USA
