A renewed understanding of charisma is constitutive of a political sociology that rethinks the relationship between leadership, representation and populism. Much of the literature conflates charismatic and populist leadership, thereby reinforcing a moralised and antagonistic conception of representation. This chapter argues that charisma should be reclaimed as a distinct sociological category, analytically separate from both populist personalisation and celebrity politics, in order to illuminate the changing logics of personalisation in contemporary democracies. Charisma advances a specific representative claim. Whereas populism constructs an exclusive and polarised image of the people, charismatic leadership is grounded in recognition, trust and the articulation of transformative horizons. Its authority is relational rather than antagonistic. Making this distinction explicit enables a reconsideration of personalisation beyond its reduction to populism or anti institutional politics, and situates charisma as a potential counterweight to both polarisation and the superficiality of celebrity culture. The chapter also engages broader debates on democratic legitimacy, technocracy and depoliticisation. In contexts increasingly shaped by procedural rationality, charisma may re-emerge as an alternative mode of representation anchored in personal trust, while remaining intrinsically ambivalent in its capacity to intensify personalisation and to place strain on institutional resilience.
Charisma and Charismatic Leadership in Contemporary Democracies
viviani lorenzo
2026-01-01
Abstract
A renewed understanding of charisma is constitutive of a political sociology that rethinks the relationship between leadership, representation and populism. Much of the literature conflates charismatic and populist leadership, thereby reinforcing a moralised and antagonistic conception of representation. This chapter argues that charisma should be reclaimed as a distinct sociological category, analytically separate from both populist personalisation and celebrity politics, in order to illuminate the changing logics of personalisation in contemporary democracies. Charisma advances a specific representative claim. Whereas populism constructs an exclusive and polarised image of the people, charismatic leadership is grounded in recognition, trust and the articulation of transformative horizons. Its authority is relational rather than antagonistic. Making this distinction explicit enables a reconsideration of personalisation beyond its reduction to populism or anti institutional politics, and situates charisma as a potential counterweight to both polarisation and the superficiality of celebrity culture. The chapter also engages broader debates on democratic legitimacy, technocracy and depoliticisation. In contexts increasingly shaped by procedural rationality, charisma may re-emerge as an alternative mode of representation anchored in personal trust, while remaining intrinsically ambivalent in its capacity to intensify personalisation and to place strain on institutional resilience.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
