Memory and Populism from Below

Project Information

MEMPOP

Grant agreement ID: 101076092

DOI

10.3030/101076092

EC signature date 16 June 2023

Start date 1 January 2024

End date 31 December 2028

Funded under

• European Research Council (ERC)

Total cost

€ 1 492 268,00

EU contribution

€ 1 492 268,00

Coordinated by

ETNOLOGICKY USTAV AKADEMIE VED CESKE REPUBLIKY VVI - INSTITUTE OF ETHNOLOGY OF THE ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
Czechia

Periodic Reporting for period 1 - MEMPOP (Memory and Populism from Below)

Reporting period: 2024-01-01 to 2026-06-30

Summary of the context and overall objectives of the project

Political polarisation and the rising support for populist movements constitute one of the most pressing global challenges of our time. To provide a novel perspective on this phenomenon, the project proposes a radical shift away from three taken-for-granted assumptions in populism studies: first, the temporal assumption that presumes populism to be a recent phenomenon; second, the geographical assumption that naturalises contemporary nation-states as the primary units of analysis; and third, the methodological orientation that privileges political elites and adopts a predominantly top-down perspective. The MEMPOP: Memory and Populism from Below research project instead focuses not only on recent historical developments, but also on imperial legacies that continue to shape current sociopolitical realities. The team conducts ethnographic research in post-imperial, transnational borderlands, which allows the project to move beyond the nation-state framework. By adopting a bottom-up approach, it investigates the everyday mnemonic practices and populist sentiments of people living in such contexts.

The project has three main objectives. First, it seeks to bring memory studies and populism studies into a sustained dialogue in order to understand what role memory plays in populism and, conversely, whether certain types of collective remembering may be conducive to populist polarisation. Second, it aims to develop a theoretical framing and conceptual vocabulary capable of capturing the diverse manifestations of the memory–populism nexus. Third, it intends to deliver substantial empirical insights into the interaction between memory and populism as they manifest across five selected transnational borderlands: Bukovina, Burgenland, Galicia, Istria, and Silesia. Although these insights derive from specific regional contexts, the project seeks to transcend their geographical and geopolitical boundaries and generate findings of broader, potentially global, relevance.

Work performed from the beginning of the project to the end of the period covered by the report and main results achieved so far

During the reporting period, the project completed its main phase of empirical research and moved into comparative analysis. Ethnographic fieldwork was carried out across several European post-imperial borderland regions and beyond. The research combined participant observation, semi-structured interviews, visual materials, and archival work. In total, the team conducted 65 weeks of fieldwork and approximately 180 interviews, generating a substantial and systematically documented body of qualitative material for comparative analysis.

On the basis of cross-case comparison, the PI developed an analytical framework centred on the concept of “mnemonic inclusion and exclusion in populism.” This framework explains how references to the past become embedded in processes of political identification and in the politics of belonging. It provides a conceptual tool for analysing how collective memory can both incorporate and marginalise social groups within populist narratives.

Methodologically, the project employs a coordinated multi-sited design that enables systematic comparison while remaining firmly grounded in ethnographic fieldwork. The analytical framework has been tested and refined across different regional contexts, including transnational borderlands such as Bukovina, Burgenland, Galicia, Istria, and Silesia, as well as additional comparative cases beyond the initial study regions, such as Serbia, Georgia, and England. This cross-regional validation has strengthened the robustness and transferability of the project’s conceptual approach.

The project has also established clear procedures for data management and research ethics, including independent ethical advice and structured practices for data protection, anonymisation, and archiving. With the main fieldwork phase completed, the project is now focused on comparative interpretation and the consolidation of its theoretical contributions.

Progress beyond the state of the art and expected potential impact (including the socio-economic impact and the wider societal implications of the project so far)

Although the project is at its mid-term stage, emerging results already demonstrate its potential to move beyond the current state of the art in both populism studies and memory studies. The project advances a novel analytical perspective by systematically integrating these two fields, which have so far largely developed in parallel. By introducing the concept of “mnemonic inclusion and exclusion in populism,” it shifts the focus from elite-driven explanations toward the ways collective remembering shapes political identification and belonging in everyday contexts. As such, this bottom-up, historically grounded approach expands existing theories of populism and political polarisation. By situating its analysis in post-imperial, transnational borderlands, the project also challenges methodological nationalism and moves beyond the nation-state as the default unit of analysis. This enables a deeper understanding of how imperial legacies and cross-border entanglements continue to inform contemporary political imaginaries.

In methodological terms, the coordinated multi-sited ethnographic design demonstrates how in-depth qualitative research can generate comparative and conceptually innovative insights. The potential impact of these results lies in their capacity to reshape interdisciplinary debates within the social sciences and humanities and to provide a new conceptual vocabulary for analysing populist polarisation. In the remaining project period, further theoretical refinement, comparative synthesis, and high-impact publications will be essential to consolidate and disseminate these contributions.