Is Hitler the only racist left?

[Louis VI the Fat]

'Populist' in common parlance does not mean a party which represents the populace at large, or represents the will of the people.

Populist is a pejorative term, for demagoguery, for 'easy' quick-fix solutions, for form over content.

This is why a populist party never refers to itself as such, no more than an environmental party refers to itself as 'tree-huggin' hippies'. Populism is not by definiton rightwing.

A populist party will always claim to represent the true will of the people, usually contrasted to an out-of-touch elite, or an even more sinister conspiracy.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

'Populist' in common parlance does not mean a party which represents the populace at large, or represents the will of the people.

Yes, in common parlance perhaps, but not in the definition provided. In effect, a democracy can and should run on "populism." Populism is intended to represent the will of the people, even if it does not always precisely do so. If they promote unpopular policies they aren't really populist in the true sense. The danger in representing populism as you do is that when the claim of an out of touch and autocratic elite is legitimate, they are easily demonized and ignored.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Yes, in common parlance perhaps, but not in the definition provided. In effect, a democracy can and should run on "populism."

No, I am afraid you miss the point of the word 'populism'. Populism is a pejorative term. When a populist party is accused of being 'populist', their common answer to this allegation will be to insist that 'We are not populists! We simply represent the will of the people'.

Hugo Chavez is 'a populist'. By this, his critics do not mean he is a fine democrat. What is meant, is that he is a demagogue etc.