How Democrats Can Learn Populism

[CountDeMoney]

But the problem I have with your view is where you fit Maggie and Reagan for example?  I think they were populists but were about a lot more than stirring hate, because it's a style of politics rather than an ideology.

I'm not a student of UK conservatism, but Maggie and Reagan were the natural result of positive nationalism.  I understand the '70s were a bit depressing for Brits.

Reagan was the tonic for a decade of post-Vietnam lethargy, perceived Carter failings on energy policy, inflation, and 444 days of the most powerful nation on earth taking it in the nuts from a bunch of unshaven dune coon students.  He was, in a term, refreshing.  And made it fun to be an American again. 

And Maggie's digits went through the roof when she fought The Last Colonial War over some barren rocks in the South Atlantic, didn't they?

[Tamas]

I think to an extent you're projecting.  Populism at its heart is anti-elitism, but you're right there's normally a suspicion that they're kind-of all in it together.  But the problem I have with your view is where you fit Maggie and Reagan for example?  I think they were populists but were about a lot more than stirring hate, because it's a style of politics rather than an ideology.

Well I guess we are back to the topic of defining populism.

And I don't think I have a clear one.
But in my book, real "populism" is about  catering to the current short-term and basic "interests" and impulses of the people, for the short term goal of gaining or keeping power.

[Sheilbh]

Since the Depression.  Hell, the GOP is STILL trying to roll back FDR.  Civil Rights and 1964 merely cemented it.
Bryan was as much an evangelical as he was an economic populist, btw.

I don't think the two are, should be, necessarily opposed.
Why can't the Democrats shift that back?  Especially in the aftermath of an economic crisis.

How so?  Race and economic inequality went hand-in-hand, and you couldn't address one without the other.

I agree entirely.  But I think Johnson did a mean line in populist politics too. 

But after Kennedy was killed I think there was an elite myth built up around his White House.  The whole Camelot story - with footage of them in black tie at a White House art event organised by Jackie.  The people who historically defined and defended the Kennedy Administration were guys like Schlesinger.  And the Democrats saw him as the lost great hope, he became a greater President having died than he was alive.  I think the Democrat idea of what a President should be shifted with Kennedy, for the worst.

[CountDeMoney]

But in my book, real "populism" is about  catering to the current short-term and basic "interests" and impulses of the people, for the short term goal of gaining or keeping power.

That's just because you're an Eastern European.

[Razgovory]

You need a new book.

Here's the dictionary.  it's good at defining words.

a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people; especially often capitalized : a member of a United States political party formed in 1891 primarily to represent agrarian interests and to advocate the free coinage of silver and government control of monopolies
2
: a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/populist

[Tamas]

But in my book, real "populism" is about  catering to the current short-term and basic "interests" and impulses of the people, for the short term goal of gaining or keeping power.

That's just because you're an Eastern European.

Dude. You have the Tea Party. Even our populists are of more quality than that.

[Sheilbh]

I'm not a student of UK conservatism, but Maggie and Reagan were the natural result of positive nationalism.  I understand the '70s were a bit depressing for Brits.

Reagan was the tonic for a decade of post-Vietnam lethargy, perceived Carter failings on energy policy, inflation, and 444 days of the most powerful nation on earth taking it in the nuts from a bunch of unshaven dune coon students.  He was, in a term, refreshing.  And made it fun to be an American again. 

And Maggie's digits went through the roof when she fought The Last Colonial War over some barren rocks in the South Atlantic, didn't they?

I think a lot of that's the same with Maggie.  But there's also that she was fighting for Middle England against the unaccountable, out-of-touch trades union leadership (her elite to tilt against), academics and 'special interest groups'.

But I think the populist streak was best summed up in Norman Tebbit who responded to the Brixton riots like this 'I grew up in the '30s with an unemployed father. He didn't riot. He got on his bike and looked for work, and he kept looking 'til he found it.'  And moaned about relativism, 'thus was sown the wind; and we are now reaping the whirlwind.'  But it's also there in her social conservatism and reaction against nasty bad art.

[CountDeMoney]

But in my book, real "populism" is about  catering to the current short-term and basic "interests" and impulses of the people, for the short term goal of gaining or keeping power.

That's just because you're an Eastern European.

Dude. You have the Tea Party. Even our populists are of more quality than that.

The Tea Party is a minority within a minority, which isn't really "populist" in a sense.
Your definition of populism is crafted more for dictatorship, which is probably what you're used to seeing.

[Tamas]

But in my book, real "populism" is about  catering to the current short-term and basic "interests" and impulses of the people, for the short term goal of gaining or keeping power.

That's just because you're an Eastern European.

Dude. You have the Tea Party. Even our populists are of more quality than that.

The Tea Party is a minority within a minority, which isn't really "populist" in a sense.
Your definition of populism is crafted more for dictatorship, which is probably what you're used to seeing.

How is the Tea Party not populist? Minority sure, but how they are not populist, even by the dictionary standard Raz "Smartass" Gorovy posted?

[CountDeMoney]

How is the Tea Party not populist? Minority sure, but how they are not populist, even by the dictionary standard Raz "Smartass" Gorovy posted?

If populism is claiming what the "Common People" represent, then everything's populist, isn't it?  My cat is populist, because the Common Cat wants soft food.

Go ahead, keep corkscrewing down into diminishing returns.

[Tamas]

How is the Tea Party not populist? Minority sure, but how they are not populist, even by the dictionary standard Raz "Smartass" Gorovy posted?

If populism is claiming what the "Common People" represent, then everything's populist, isn't it?  My cat is populist, because the Common Cat wants soft food.

Go ahead, keep corkscrewing down into diminishing returns.

Actually, I did not want to make that point, weary of yet another "your opinion is based on Eastern Europe"  reply (which is kinda funny btw - we are discussing the dangeres of populism, and my opinion is set aside because I hail from a region destroyed by rampant populism, ie. I know where it can lead if spiralled out of control).

But if you are so certain about the Tea Party not being populist, then fine, I concede the issue.

[Eddie Teach]

Was Communism really all that populist by the 40s?

[MadImmortalMan]

The communism we know was never really populist at all. The main thrust came from the upper middle class and educated elites in places where that was an extremely small portion of the population.

[Admiral Yi]

I think Fireblade actually has the point.  Santorum's deal is not that he wants to lynch bankers, he is celebrating the working man.  Big difference.

Well I got that from the article, not FB:

I was trying to point out that you and Crook are both missing the point of Santorum's populist appeal.

Another point that you and Crook seem to be missing is that Obama has been playing the anti Wall Street card for all it's worth, it just hasn't been generating the desired results.  (Although I think it will be part of Obama's play book come the general election.) 

The Michael Moore wing of the Democrats thinks bankers should be in prison.  For what?  Lending money to people who didn't pay it back?  That's not a crime.  For "causing a recession?"  That's not a crime either.  Moorites like the spin the narrative that Wall Street hasn't gotten what they deserve because they are bed with Congress, but they forget about things like the rule of law.

[Valmy]

Moorites like the spin the narrative that Wall Street hasn't gotten what they deserve because they are bed with Congress, but they forget about things like the rule of law.

Well they are in bed with Congress but that is not their fault.  All their competitors are in bed in Congress if they are not well...