Abstract
This entry examines a central feature of populist politics, namely, the "critical distance" that populist movements, parties, and leaders posit between themselves and the ideological and institutional apparatus of the liberal democratic state, while working toward taking control of this very state – we call it "populist ambivalence." It explores the precise nature of this "distance(s)," traces their differing implications for democracy, and identifies the dangers and potentials of this ambivalence. To illustrate this, we trace out certain broad features of contemporary Indian democracy that corresponds to the populist paradigm and discuss some ways in which a particular kind of agent/agents – we discuss the example of the Kerala CPIM (Communist Party of India [Marxist]) in this regard – can productively operationalize such "populist ambivalence."