Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Disregard for scientific facts and knowledge holders has usually been identified as a distinguishing feature of the penal populists’ politics. But is penal populism always anti-intellectual? In this article, I provide some deeper insight into the role of expertise in (penal) populist activity, especially in the context of the currently observed redefinition of expertise (some call it “the death of expertise”) and rapid development of new technologies that enable easy aggregation of citizensʼ collective wisdom. Will crowdlaw-making platforms prevent (penal) populism? Or will they strengthen it by facilitating the justification of radical and unnecessary changes in (criminal) law? Is there a place for traditionally conceived experts and established knowledge in crowdsourced law-making process, and if so, what should be their role?
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michalina Szafrańska (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: