What is a populist? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

User avatar
By AFAIK
#14920237
I always thought the general principle of a democracy is that the most popular policy, candidate or party is the one that gets enacted/elected via voting. In that context what does it mean to be a populist? Why would a population eschew or embrace populism? Is populism a euphemism?

How can a 'populist' lose an election?
Surely if they lost then they're not as popular as first thought.
User avatar
By One Degree
#14920270
A populist is someone who thinks that is the way it should be, but it isn’t due to corruption, lobbyists, and propaganda. This makes it possible for a populist to be an informed minority.
By Rich
#14920272
Well the word is not well defined, but the only sensible meaning is pretending to or giving the appearance of supporting polices that you don't. It means being a hypocrite. A classic example is Boris Johnson. For decades he has worked to flood Europe with Turkish Muslims. For decades he's sought to get Turkey into the EU and destroy European Christian civilisation. Yet in the Brexit referendum, he used the threat of Turkish entry to argue for a leave vote. This is classic Jewish supremacist policy by the way. European nations must be annihilated by flooding them with Muslims and other non (culturally) Europeans, while no measure is too extreme to defend Jewish race supremacy in Israel.
By Decky
#14920690
Populist is a world the capitalists use when someone they dislike wins an election nothing more. when someone the capitalists love wins and election it is a "victory for democracy", when someone they dislike wins it is populism. There is no actual objective definition. It is entirely based on the whims of the banking families at any one particular point in time.
User avatar
By AFAIK
#14920701
So it's just used to insult people irregardless of their ideology? Like calling someone a fascist/ socialist/ communist/ racist without justification.
By Decky
#14920702
Exactly. How could you draw up a "populist" manifesto? What is popular electorally is different in different places anyway. It isn't an ideology, like liberalism or anarchism, or socialism.
User avatar
By Albert
#14920723
"Populist" is a term that the establishment gives to people who they disagrees with. It could refer to left wing or right wing people of political inclination. It is basically a person who is against the status-quo and the established way of things that people in power of various institutions want to continue on with.

"Alt-right" is also a term popularized by Hillary Clinton who labeled Trump supporters as such. Again it is not necessary accurate term to label the current movement that is going against the establishment. Even though some people like Richard Spenser, (who I believe has Neo-Nazi ideological foundations), have embraced the label.
#14920772
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism

    Populism is a political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against a privileged elite.[1] Critics of populism have described it as a political approach that seeks to disrupt the existing social order by solidifying and mobilizing the animosity of the "commoner" or "the people" against "privileged elites" and the "establishment".[2] Populists can fall anywhere on the traditional left–right political spectrum of politics and often portray both bourgeois capitalists and socialist organizers as unfairly dominating the political sphere.[3]

    Political parties and politicians[4] often use the terms "populist" and "populism" as pejoratives against their opponents. Such a view sees populism as demagogy, merely appearing to empathize with the public through rhetoric or unrealistic proposals in order to increase appeal across the political spectrum.[5]

    Populism is most common in democratic nations and political scientist Cas Mudde wrote: "Many observers have noted that populism is inherent to representative democracy; after all, do populists not juxtapose 'the pure people' against 'the corrupt elite'?".[6]

It also seems to apply to those politicians and pundits who appeal to “the common people” and support the type of democracy where the majority can bote on whether or not minorities have rights.
#14920776
One of the main characteristics of a populist is anti-elitism. That's what distinguishes him/her from a merely popular politician or party.

It's definitely a term that lends itself to misuse.
User avatar
By Rancid
#14920790
AFAIK wrote:irregardless


I suggest you replace this work with irrespective, or regardless. The use of irregardless is usually not recommended.

Kaiserschmarrn wrote:One of the main characteristics of a populist is anti-elitism. That's what distinguishes him/her from a merely popular politician or party.

It's definitely a term that lends itself to misuse.


Yea, that makes sense, as populism is basically for the people. The elites in any society are often not for the people, and just themselves.
#14920850
Rancid wrote:I suggest you replace this work with irrespective, or regardless. The use of irregardless is usually not recommended.

Potemkin, is that you?

Rancid wrote:Yea, that makes sense, as populism is basically for the people. The elites in any society are often not for the people, and just themselves.

Indeed, although as used by journalists, politicians and social science research, the anti-elitist aspect has always had a negative connotation. Populists are generally portrayed as unreasonable people who rail against a non-existent enemy, which is sometimes true but not always.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#14921114
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Potemkin, is that you?

The pupil has become the master... *a single tear of pride trickles slowly down Potemkin's cheek* :*(
User avatar
By One Degree
#14921163
Populists demand ‘irregardless’ be given the respect it has earned from countless repetions for at least 200 years. How can this injustice continue after even ‘ain’t’ was accepted?
User avatar
By AFAIK
#14921246
Since the question has been answered and I don't care if the thread gets derailed...

@Potemkin what's your opinion of the descriptive vs. prescriptive view of language?
#14921249
Potemkin wrote:The pupil has become the master... *a single tear of pride trickles slowly down Potemkin's cheek* :*(

:D

I just realised that Rancid's post has a spelling mistake, so there's still some work for you to do.

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]