- 12 Dec 2016 06:52
#14748660
It has become evident that a number of people on this forum have become oddly attached to the word 'populism,' particularly with regard to Trump and his many contradictory statements. it apparently means something to them. Something beyond what most historians and political scientists have observed (exemplars being William Jennings Bryan, Huey Long, or perhaps even Teddy Roosevelt). The New Populists are more accurately what could be described as Humpty-Dumpty Populists.
“When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.”
If we take the word populism at face value, it would seem to indicate a belief in the power of regular people, and in their right to have control over their government rather than a small group of political insiders or a wealthy elite. How one squares that with Trump's recent actions in a mystery I cannot solve. But then I am old school enough to believe words have actual meanings.
At any rate, if populism is to have any meaning whatsoever it will have to address this:
Cheney was a populist in one respect - he recognized that "deficits don't matter." Money is a means to an end, not the end to itself. The true populist takes it one step further. He realizes that money and budgets aren't the limiting factor in political action; the limiting factor is the wealth of a nation and its political will to use it.
For the Humpty-Dumpty Populists none of this matters. Their populist makes some noise about the people, and then appoints CEOs to slash Social Security.
“When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.”
If we take the word populism at face value, it would seem to indicate a belief in the power of regular people, and in their right to have control over their government rather than a small group of political insiders or a wealthy elite. How one squares that with Trump's recent actions in a mystery I cannot solve. But then I am old school enough to believe words have actual meanings.
At any rate, if populism is to have any meaning whatsoever it will have to address this:
The economic problems we face are great, but the true dangers are not budget deficits or public debt but the risk that these non-problems will be used as a pretext for failing to address the real problems: mass underemployment, extreme inequality and poverty, environmental degradation, the corruption of government and a powerful financial elite and the system itself that produces these outcomes. The fact that austerity measures could even be contemplated at a time of high unemployment and excess capacity indicates the effectiveness of the neoliberal propaganda blitz of the past thirty-five years.
Cheney was a populist in one respect - he recognized that "deficits don't matter." Money is a means to an end, not the end to itself. The true populist takes it one step further. He realizes that money and budgets aren't the limiting factor in political action; the limiting factor is the wealth of a nation and its political will to use it.
For the Humpty-Dumpty Populists none of this matters. Their populist makes some noise about the people, and then appoints CEOs to slash Social Security.
The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters. -Antonio Gramsci
- By SpecialOlympian
- By Unthinking Majority
- By Saeko
- By Tainari88