SCIENTIFIC-POLITICAL POPULISM AS A «NEW INQUISITOR»: WITCH HUNTS IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY

  • Olha Andrieieva Educational and Scientific Institute of International Relations, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4587-1267
Keywords: globalization, national security, expert knowledge, post-truth, war in Ukraine, digitalization of society, information resilience

Abstract

The article analyzes the phenomenon of scientific-political populism as one of the most dangerous transformations of contemporary populism in the twenty-first century. It demonstrates that, under current conditions, populism transcends classical ideological divisions and functions as a political-discursive technology aimed at reducing the complexity of social reality and mobilizing society through moral dichotomization. The attention is paid to science-related populism as a form of delegitimization of expert and academic knowledge, manifested in the symbolic construction of an image of the «internal enemy» among scholars, experts, and intellectual minorities.

Employing the metaphor of the «new inquisitor», the author conceptualizes contemporary witch-hunt practices not as a historical anachronism but as a recurrent socio-political mechanism of response to systemic crises, security uncertainty, and radical structural transformations. The article demonstrates historical continuity and identifies three stages of witch hunts which, despite differences in targeted groups and mechanisms, retain a common logic of moral exclusion and control over the truth.

Special attention is devoted to the Ukrainian case in the context of the full-scale war of Russian Federation against Ukraine. It is argued that the combination of postcolonial experience, the accumulated trauma of the 2014–2022 war period, and the existential threat that emerged after 2022 has created a specific environment of heightened security vigilance in which the risk of transforming rational security practices into a witch-hunt logic increases significantly. The article demonstrates that, in this context, science-related populism undermines democratic institutions, academic freedoms, and informational resilience, while simultaneously serving as an instrument of short-term political mobilization. The study concludes that recognizing the boundaries between security imperatives and populist moral mobilization is critically important for preserving science as a core element of national security.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Olha Andrieieva, Educational and Scientific Institute of International Relations, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine

Doctor Of Political Sciences, Professor of International Information Department.

References

Mede, N. G., & Schäfer, M. S. 2020. Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science. Public Understanding of Science, 29(5): 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520953947

Mudde, C. 2004. The populist zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4): 541–563. URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/2CD34F8B25C4FFF4F322316833DB94B7/S0017257X00002372a.pdf/div-class-title-the-populist-zeitgeist-div.pdf

Mudde, C., & Rovira Kaltwasser, C. 2017. Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press. URL.: https://psi424.cankaya.edu.tr/uploads/files/Mudde%2C%20Populism_%20a%20very%20short%20introduction%20%282nd%20ed%2C%202017%20--%20Oxford%20University%20Press%29.pdf

Merton, R. K. 1973. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago Press.

Foucault, M. 1977. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Pantheon Books.

Fricker, M. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/110.1111/j.1467-9329.2009.00439.x

McIntyre, L. 2018. Post-truth. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118799184

Pomerantsev, P. (2019). This is not propaganda: Adventures in the war against reality. Faber & Faber, London. 288 р.

Davies, W. 2018. Nervous states: Democracy and the decline of reason. W. W. Norton & Company.

Sunstein, C. R. 2018. #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.

Andrieieva, O. 2009. National security of Ukraine in the context of national identity and relations with Russia. K.: Parliamentary Publishing House.

Lazarovych, N. & Korol, N. 2025. Discourse of Postcolonialism in the Context of Modern Ukrainian Socio-Cultural Space. Culturological almanac 1: 345–351. https://doi.org/10.31392/cult.alm.2025.1.39

Hrabovska, I. 2019. Postcolonialism as a Conflict-Generating Factor in the Cultural-Historical Space of Modern Ukraine. Young Scientist 2(66): 558–561. https://doi.org/10.32839/2304-5809/2019-2-66-119

Published
2026-04-30
How to Cite
Andrieieva, O. (2026). SCIENTIFIC-POLITICAL POPULISM AS A «NEW INQUISITOR»: WITCH HUNTS IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY. The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series "Issues of Political Science", 49, 7-13. https://doi.org/10.26565/2220-8089-2026-49-01