The new populist tendencies that characterize much of the modern globalized world have not bypassed the new democracies in the post-Communist countries. The pattern of populism tends to adjust to different societal contexts and while much research, both theoretical and empirical, on this phenomenon has been conducted in the countries of the European West, literature is scarce concerning the rise of populism in the European periphery. Additionally, populism has existed in the United States and South America, but its recent manifestation in the former Socialist states, starting from the 1990s, remains greatly under-researched. In fact, populist tendencies in national politics are especially interesting to study in post-transition countries that experienced destructive conflicts in the period following the collapse of Communism. Bosnia and Herzegovina is precisely such a country. Hence, the purpose of this article is to analyse and clarify the specificities of modern populism in the Bosnian political sphere, which is marked by ethnic divisions and ethno-nationalist tendencies rooted in the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords which ended the 1992–1995 war. More precisely, this study will explain the ways in which populism generates power for the ethno-nationalist elites and reinforces their political and economic supremacy. Applying discourse that emphasizes the permanent antagonisms between the three major ethnic groups, fear, belligerence and the “us” vs. “them” paradigm, right-wing populists rely on prosaic rhetoric which undermines the country’s re-integration and societal healing, as well as its Euro-Atlantic integration. Against the backdrop of classical works on populism, we examine the populist behavior and tendencies of major populists in terms of the following indicators: the role of language and culture; ethnicity (the “us” vs. “them” discourse) and promotion of cultural harmony through emotions and simple language (the focus here is on ethnic harmony), coupled with anti-establishment discourse. Moreover, ...

The theoretical legacy of Zygmunt Bauman is an inexhaustible source of inspiration for sociological analysis, particularly bearing in mind the scope of his work and the diverse range of modern day problems that this British-Polish author dealt with. The first part of this article examines the question of personal identity in liquid modernity, which is the starting point of Bauman’s work. Similar to some other authors, Bauman discusses the paradox of the individual who is not free in an individualized society. Bauman’s diagnosis carries pessimistic features which in some places correspond to insights developed in classical sociology. Bauman makes occasional and sporadic incursions into the pitfalls of conservative thought, particularly in relation to the dichotomies of individual versus community, individualism versus togetherness, and egoism versus solidarity. However, it seems that the author manages to skilfully avoid the inherent theoretical traps of sociology, turning towards cosmopolitan theory. The second part of this article presents the thesis that Bauman’s thought is in fact cosmopolitan, especially bearing in mind his final public appearances and writings. This argument is based in his description of global society that is simultaneously integrating and developing, and dramatically disintegrating and regressing. Bauman writes about violent killings and expulsions of people in the 21st century and their inability to find refuge in the Western and democratic world that promotes human rights. Recalling the crucial cosmopolitan principles of solidarity and hospitality, Bauman makes an appeal to progressive forces to consolidate and work on opening and reaffirming the “cosmopolitan condition” of contemporary society.