Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

Sep 19, 2023, 9:16 PM

Good gosh I’m tired of TNet’s lefties raging about “Populism” as being a political philosophy that is limited to the approaches of Che Guevara, Castro, H.Chavez, Mao, Ayatollah Khomeini, and … wait for it … Hitler.

Long post; there have been volumes (cumulatively) previously written on TNet by well meaning but partially informed people who liberally use ‘populist’ in their posts. I hope that one long post will enlighten those numerous abusers of this term.

These limited cases of populist dictators are promulgated as being THE ONLY types of populist politicians; this abuse of the term ‘populist’ is used to distort what populism really means, and thereby associate of populism as a means to disparage RFK Jr, Javier Miles, and Trump type of populist.

From Britannia:

“Populism: Political program or movement that champions or claims to champion, the common person, usually by favourable contrast with a real or perceived elite or establishment. Populism usually combines elements of the left and the right, opposing large business and financial interests but also frequently being hostile to established liberal, socialist, and labour parties.

The term populism can designate either democratic or authoritarian movements. Populism is typically critical of political representation and anything that mediates the relation between the people and their leader or government. In its most democratic form, populism seeks to defend the interests and maximize the power of ordinary citizens, through reform rather than revolution. In the United States the term was applied to the program of the Populist Movement, which gave rise to the Populist, or People’s, Party in 1892. Many of the party’s demands were later adopted as laws or constitutional amendments (e.g., a progressive tax system). The populist demand for direct democracy through popular initiatives and referenda also become a reality in a number of U.S. states.”

Democrat Psrty has long promoted radical populist programs that would destabilize the USA. Direct popular vote, as opposed to each state ‘voting’ via electors, is an obvious populist policy. This version of populism is dangerous.

On the other hand, who among reasonable Americans approve of the federal government’s laws that are OK with insider trading by members of Congress? Populists don’t like this.

Who among Americans still believe that control of the Southern border represents some kind of racist populism? Most Democrats voters have joined most Republican voters in recognizing the destabilizing aspects of the open southern border. Big money donors to the political class, on the other hand, get to keep their open border preferences despite phonies such as TX gov. Abbot’s public statements to the contrary. Is populism bad in this case?

American politics is replete with populist in politics. Student loan forgiveness? Special interest $ giveaway … populist. Govt’s mandate to only purchase EVs from union shop car manufacturers? Special interest (anti-competitive advantage to pander to Union workers) … populist. Impossible to achieve quick implementation outlawing of ICE powered cars (impossible because electrical grid won’t be able to handle this within ~ 25 years) … populist (to greenies).

Populists as dictators … with Trump being that dictator? Impossible. The federal bureaucracy hates Trump (after all, he is threatening to eliminate some agencies; those which are not on his hit-list are afraid that they may get on the hit-list). As we’ve seen in both the Trump and Biden administrations, the federal bureaucracy acts with a large degree of independence from the president. IMO, the federal bureaucracy’s perpetual attacks on Trump and extraordinary efforts to avoid investigating Biden are not so much as being from direct order by Biden, but rather by the power that the bureaucracies possess to target THEIR political enemies and to protect THEIR political allies.

Furthermore, the entirety of elected Democrat politicians and the majority of elected Republican politicians HATE Trump. Trump threatens to expose and then dismantle the means by which elected politicians enrich themselves.

Trump simply could not become a dictator, regardless of his popularity … not just from those constituents who got him elected in 2016, but also by a rapidly growing percentage of Hispanics and blacks. His most fervent detractors include, but are not limited to, welfare recipients, federal government bureaucrats, public school system employees, university employees, news organizations who receive special access to ‘non-public’ govt information via the ‘leaker’ network, and vendors who make their living by selling goods or providing services to the above.

Non-populist politicians label themselves as ‘conservatives’ or ‘liberals’ and recite those tried & true tropes such as ‘right to life’ vs ‘pro-choice,’ ‘free marketplace’ vs ‘environmentally friendly,’ ‘strong on military’ vs ‘building alliances with our friends,’ etc. These are the guys who have built their political careers and wealth via special rules for politicians. In other words, the political establishment that so reviles the country’s recent interest in non-establishment / non-special interest politics.

Yet … brainwashed Americans cannot see past -or- will not allow themselves to see past their misaligned association between the H.Chavez / Guevara / Castro / Mao / Ayatollah Khomeini / Hitler type and the non-dictatorial RFK Jr., Javier Melei, and Trump type populists.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

There's actually a ton of that post I agree with. Yes, populism can be right-wing or left-wing, and there are populists on both sides. They're just playing to the working class...and they're both lying. Populism is performative politics and it's intrinsically dishonest; the people who are doing it all know better and rely - with often dismaying success - on the continued duplicity of low-information working people to pull it off.

What astounds me is you obviously know all that...and yet are somehow completely blind to the fact that Trump isn't just by far the most populist leader of the last 100+ years, he's also gone so far into his populism he's actually crossed the line into fascism, much like very similar politicians like Erdogan and Orban.

You think you're cynical, but you aren't. You actually believe the crap Trump and Fox spew and don't seem to recognize it's every bit the populist grift that the likes Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and Eric Swallwell and Gavin Newsome are cynically spewing from the left. Heck, even a gay drag queen con man from Brazil got himself elected to Congress by playing the role of Real 'Merricun Working-man George to his constituency. With a more liberal constituency he'd have been playing the role of Comrade George.

This is the actual game. Believing in either side is exactly how these folks have gotten away with this sh!t...at our expense. It isn't a red issue or a blue issue...the issue is that we have a professional political class at all. They ALL need to go and the only way that happens is with term limits and dark-money bans and a complete flush of these performers "fighting" for their "side."

Period.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_members_of_the_United_States_Congress_by_wealth#:~:text=As%20of%202020%2C%20over%20half,members%20was%20approximately%20%241%20million

List of current members of the United States Congress by wealth - Wikipedia

Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

Re: Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

Re: Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

It's hard to do with long-winded drivel...

Says the sycophant suckin' up to the entrenched political

Okay.***

Not really, but keep on soldiering...***

I just can't believe someone figured out...

Re: I just can't believe someone figured out...

He knows why, even if you don't... I WILL react...ALWAYS!***

I know. You have a little obsession going on.

Key word, "react". You know you started it. You're the joke***

Okay.***

True, but "listening" doesn't have anything to do with it.***

Re: Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

He falls for about any trick

Re: Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

Re: Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

See... We can agree. ;~)***

Re: Populism defined (w/o hyperbole) - with examples & context

TigerBoard POTD