Do Populists Defend Popular Self-Government? The Construction of "the People" in Belgian Parliamentary Debates on Democratic Innovations

Populist actors are often presented as the champions of "the people" against political elites. Yet it remains unclear whether this defence of the people translates into support for institutional arrangements that would give citizens a greater role in political decision-making. This paper addresses this question by examining how populist parties construct "the people" as a political actor in parliamentary debates on democratic reform in Belgium. The paper focuses on discussions surrounding two democratic innovations that have been debated and progressively institutionalised since the mid-2010s: citizens' assemblies selected by lot and popular consultations, a consultative form of referendum. These reforms provide a particularly useful lens through which to investigate competing understandings of popular sovereignty and political representation. Drawing on a qualitative analysis of parliamentary debates and legislative initiatives, the paper explores how populist parties position themselves toward proposals intended to expand citizen involvement in representative government. Do they support reforms that enable citizens to participate more directly in political decision-making, or do they primarily invoke "the people" as a source of political legitimacy? By examining the relationship between populist discourse and proposals for democratic reform, the paper contributes to broader debates on the construction of political identities, the meaning of "the people" in contemporary representative democracies, and the democratic implications of populism. In doing so, it sheds light on the tension between populist claims to represent the people and support for institutions that would allow the people to govern themselves.