Populism is seemingly sweeping the globe, threatening the established status quo. Optimistically, it promises to bring about much needed change to what appears to be a corrupt political and economic order. More ominously, it is dangerously promoting racism, sexism, xenophobia, jingoism, and attacking basic human rights around the world.

It is therefore important not to blithely conflate different populist and grassroots movements. The left-wing movements championing greater inclusion are plainly very different from right-wing ones keen on reinforced or increased exclusion. But despite their profound differences, they have one thing in common: they claim to represent a supposedly victimised popular majority, “the people”.

Exactly who these “people” actually are is far from clear. All sides are embroiled in an ongoing struggle to determine how to define which populations count and which do not. Lost in the public outcry regarding populism is a deeper conflict over who matters socially, economically and politically.

In the wake of the recent upsurge in populist movements, there have been a number of attempts to better define what the word “populism” actually describes. Perhaps the best and clearest recent definition comes from Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell, who write that populism “pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice”.

But populism doesn’t just appeal with an “us-versus-them” attack on elites; it also offers its supporters a passionate sense of solidarity. It mobilises individuals and communities under a common identity, one that can be socially invigorating and politically empowering. Populism is therefore an opportunity to dramatically redefine the political landscape, and to fill the relatively vacuous term of the “people” with any of various new meanings.

But just as some ideas of “the people” are exclusionary, others are radically inclusive.

The late political theorist Ernesto Laclau declared that at its roots, populism is linked to a specific politics – that even the most seemingly mundane protest can reveal the limitations of an existing system and the potential to establish something radically different. If those in power cannot meet these demands, they and the values they represent will suddenly look vulnerable and replaceable.

While Laclau was writing about the general logic of populism, the content of this demand matters greatly for the specifics of these fraught times. Calls for greater democracy, for instance, focus popular attention on democratising political and economic organisations. By contrast, fearmongering against immigrants (to take one example) seeks to restrict political power and economic benefits, making them the preserve of a chosen population.

Populism has the radical potential to foster not just exclusion, but greater inclusion. By instilling a shared sense of injustice, inclusive movements can alert their followers to the plight of other people whom they’ve been socialised to ignore, forging bonds first of empathy and then of solidarity. This in turn means their preferred definition of “the people” can be expanded to include more and more citizens.

In recent years, a number of scholars and commentators have challenged how far the label “populism” should be extended. They question whether figures such as Jeremy Corbyn should even be called populists, arguing that failing to make the distinction between exclusive and inclusive movements reflects lazy and even disingenuous thinking. When any challenge to “sensible”, “moderate” politics is derided as populist regardless of its stated aims, the political dominance of the establishment is consolidated.

Brexit casualties Show all 10 1 /10 Brexit casualties Brexit casualties Andrea Jenkyns - Resigned from Parliamentary Private Secretary at the ministry for housing, communities and local government role May 2018 - The Morley and Outwood MP said: “We want to see a new relationship with Europe, with a new model not enjoyed by other countries – nothing that leaves us half-in, half-out. “And in order to achieve this, we need to leave the customs union.” Ms Jenkyn’s also said she wished to dedicate more of her time to Parliament’s influential Exiting the European Union select committee, after a series of “unbalanced” reports produced by MPs PA Brexit casualties David Davis - Resigned from Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union role July 2018 - quit following a major row with May over her plans for post-Brexit relations with the EU. Davis resignation letter said: “As you know there have been a significant number of occasions in the last year or so on which I have disagreed with the Number 10 policy line, ranging from accepting the [European] Commission’s sequencing of negotiations, through to the language on Northern Ireland in the December Joint Report. “At each stage I have accepted collective responsibility because it is part of my task to find workable compromises, and because I considered it was still possible to deliver on the mandate of the referendum, and on our manifesto commitment to leave the Customs Union and the Single Market. “I am afraid that I think the current trend of policy and tactics is making that look less and less likely.” He went on to argue that the “general direction” of Ms May’s policies would leave the UK “in at best a weak negotiating position, and possibly an inescapable one”. AFP/Getty Brexit casualties Steve Baker - Resigned from Minister at the Department for Exiting the European Union role July 2018 - Mr Baker, a key Tory figure in the Leave campaign, was David Davis’s main lieutenant at Dexeu, and was hailed as ”courageous and principled” by other Brexiteer Tories as he also left. Reuters Brexit casualties Boris Johnson - Resigned from Foreign Secretary role July 2018 - resigned over May's Chequers plan. In his resignation letter to the prime minister, Mr Johnson said: "On Friday, I acknowledged that my side of the argument were too few to prevail and congratulated you on at least reaching a Cabinet decision on the way forward. "As I said then, the government now has a song to sing. "The trouble is that I have practised the words over the weekend and find that they stick in the throat." Reuters Brexit casualties Conor Burns - Resigned from Parliamentary Private Secretary to Foreign Secretary role July 2018 - A Brexit supporter who worked alongside Boris Johnson stated in his resignation letter: “I've decided it's time to have greater freedom. I want to see the referendum result respected. And there are other areas of policy I want to speak more openly on.” Rex Brexit casualties Chris Green - Resigned from Department for Transport role July 2018 - The Bolton West MP said: "Parliament overwhelmingly decided to give the decision of whether to leave or remain in the European Union to the British people and they made an unambiguous decision that we ought to leave. "I have always understood the idea in 'Brexit means Brexit' is that the final deal should be clear to me and my constituents - that we have, in no uncertain terms, left the European Union. Twitter Ads info and privacy "The direction the negotiations had been taking have suggested that we would not really leave the EU and the conclusion and statements following the Chequers summit confirmed my fears. "I recognise that delivering Brexit is challenging, however I had hoped at tonight's meeting that there would be some certainty that my fears were unfounded but, instead, they have been confirmed. "I have been grateful for the opportunity to serve as Parliamentary Private Secretary and it is with regret that I offer my resignation with immediate effect." PA Brexit casualties Maria Caulfield - Resigned from Conservative Party vice-chair for women role July 2018 - resigned over May's Chequers plan. Lewes MP warned that the direction of travel did “not fully embrace the opportunities that Brexit can provide”. Ms Caulfield said in her letter to the PM: “The policy may assuage vested interests, but the voters will find out and their representatives will be found out. This policy will be bad for our country and bad for the party. “The direct consequences of that will be prime minister Corbyn.” PA Brexit casualties Ben Bradley - Resigned from Conservative Party vice-chair for young people role July 2018 - resigned over May's Chequers plan. The Mansfield MP said: “I admit that I voted to Remain in that ballot. What has swayed me over the last two years to fully back the Brexit vision is the immense opportunities that are available from global trade, and for the ability for Britain to be an outward looking nation in control of our own destiny once again. “I fear that this agreement at Chequers damages those opportunities; that being tied to EU regulations, and the EU tying our hands when seeking to make new trade agreements, will be the worst of all worlds if we do not deliver Brexit in spirit as well as in name, then we are handing Jeremy Corbyn the keys to No10.” PA Brexit casualties Robert Courts - Resigned from Parliamentary Private Secretary role July 2018 - resigned over May's Chequers plan. MP Mr Courts said: “I have taken a very difficult decision to resign my position as [parliamentary private secretary] to express discontent with the Chequers [plans] in votes tomorrow. “I had to think who I wanted to see in the mirror for the rest of my life. I cannot tell the people of Woxon that I support the proposals in their current form.” Getty Brexit casualties Scott Mann - Resigned from Parliamentary Private Secretary role July 2018 - resigned over May's Chequers plan. "I fear elements of the Brexit white paper will inevitably put me in direct conflict with the views expressed by a large section of my constituents. I am not prepared to compromise their wishes to deliver a watered-down Brexit. "The residents of North Cornwall made it very clear that they wish to have control over our fishery, our agricultural policy, our money, our laws and our borders. I will evaluate those principles against the Brexit white paper and ensure that I vote in line with their wishes." Rex

This argument for a tighter definition of populism is prudent, but inclusion-minded movements shouldn’t be let off the hook entirely. If movements on the left remain fixated on bringing down maligned or incompetent elites, they will tie themselves to a dangerous politics of sovereignty, one where the overriding goal is simply to take power. This is a very narrow vision. Instead, the imperative must be to find new ways to more equitably organise society and share power.

Ultimately, these sorts of political movements should always be thought of as beginnings, not ends in themselves. Radical, inclusive politics should be much more than a critique of those at the top; it needs to be an ongoing debate over who “we” are and how “we” can be empowered. In an age when the forces of xenophobia and nativism are on the rise, these concerns are perhaps more timely than ever before. Modern politics isn’t just a struggle between left-populists and right-populists: it’s a race to define and expand who the “people” are and what they can achieve together.

Peter Bloom is senior lecturer in organisation studies at the Department of People and Organisation, The Open University