Populism has been the major political phenomenon affecting democracies in the name of a frustrated and disenchanted «people». The deep transformation and globalisation of the markets, the technological revolution have contributed to radically alterate the democratic expectations of the citizenry. Protest of various origins and intensity have been labelled as forms of «populism». Its precise definition is rather problematic but its core dimensions are constituted by protest rather than by a precise and encompassing ideology or program and by a radical anti-elite stance. Eliminating is more important than proposing. This virulent and simplistic attitude raise difficult challenges where and when populist movements reach power. In most cases they are unable to deliver their demagogical promises and face great difficulties in government due to the lack of expertise or competent political/administrative personnel. The paper argues that while «populism» in its variegated forms will remain a permanent feature of representative liberal democracies, the populist movements are faced with two uncomfortable choices: either to become similar to mainstream parties (with the risk of break ups and secessions) or to radicalise further by becoming illiberal and authoritarian. In the first case, populism triggers a mere renewal of political elites while in the second hypothesis it deeply transforms
the meaning of democracy to the point of denying its complex and full meaning.