Prompt: Over the course of the last several years, there has been a lot of debat

Prompt: Over the course of the last several years, there has been a lot of debate as to whether populism is “good” or “bad” for democracy, with some scholars, such as Benjamin Moffitt contending that whether populism is “good” or “bad” depends on how populism is performed and on its political context. Using readings relating to the European experience with populism, is populism “good” for democracy in the European context? Why? Why not?
Start with introduction defining populism and thesis statement and then continue to from below: –
1. Briefly define the three components of the “populist political style.” (The three components are “people vs. the elite,” bad manners, and performing crisis).
2. Detail how/whether each of the three components of the “populist political style” could be performed in ways which are “good” for democracy.
3. Describe how/whether each of the three components of the “populist political style” could be performed in ways which are “bad” for democracy.
4. Apply the above to the European context (address each above components) to build your argument as to whether populism is “good” for democracy in the European context.
PLEASE don’t use outside sources more than 3 and please create works cited also make sure it’s not plagiarism. And please let me know if you have any questions regarding the format. Thank you so much!