Populism

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Politics}}{{cquote|A useful heuristic: Be very suspicious of anyone who is firmly entrenched in power but rails against 'elites.'|||Dan Gardner (on [[Stephen Harper]])}}'''Populism''' is a strange political beast, as nobody knows what it is, and fewer identify with it, but in theory should be the prevailing political ideology in a [[democracy]]. Miriam-Webster's defines it as as "the belief in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people."<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/populism Merriam-Webster's definition of populist]</ref>  
+
{{Politics}}{{cquote|A useful heuristic: Be very suspicious of anyone who is firmly entrenched in power but rails against 'elites.'|||Dan Gardner}}'''Populism''' is a strange political beast, as nobody knows what it is, and fewer identify with it, but in theory should be the prevailing political ideology in a [[democracy]]. Miriam-Webster's defines it as as "the belief in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people."<ref>[http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/populism Merriam-Webster's definition of populist]</ref>  
  
 
Populism is closely aligned with [[elitism|anti-elitism]]. Populism can be either [[left-wing|left]] or [[right-wing]]. Generally speaking, it involves a [[Personality cult|charismatic leader]] galvanising support from among the general population, on an issue that arouses a great deal of [[emotional appeal|passion and concern]]. Depending on the prejudices and outlook of the great masses of the people, this can be either a good or an awfully bad thing. For example, Daniel O'Connell was probably the first populist of the [[Industrial Revolution]] who used "people power" in his campaign for [[Catholic]] Emancipation in [[Britain]]/[[Ireland]]. On the other hand, [[Hitler]] and stuff.
 
Populism is closely aligned with [[elitism|anti-elitism]]. Populism can be either [[left-wing|left]] or [[right-wing]]. Generally speaking, it involves a [[Personality cult|charismatic leader]] galvanising support from among the general population, on an issue that arouses a great deal of [[emotional appeal|passion and concern]]. Depending on the prejudices and outlook of the great masses of the people, this can be either a good or an awfully bad thing. For example, Daniel O'Connell was probably the first populist of the [[Industrial Revolution]] who used "people power" in his campaign for [[Catholic]] Emancipation in [[Britain]]/[[Ireland]]. On the other hand, [[Hitler]] and stuff.

Revision as of 08:53, 8 December 2013

It doesn't stop at the water's edge:

Politics

link=:category:
Key players
Theory
Practice
Philosophies
Other concepts
Country sections

Flag of the United States.svg
Flag of the United Kingdom.svg


A useful heuristic: Be very suspicious of anyone who is firmly entrenched in power but rails against 'elites.'
—Dan Gardner
Populism is a strange political beast, as nobody knows what it is, and fewer identify with it, but in theory should be the prevailing political ideology in a democracy. Miriam-Webster's defines it as as "the belief in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people."[1]

Populism is closely aligned with anti-elitism. Populism can be either left or right-wing. Generally speaking, it involves a charismatic leader galvanising support from among the general population, on an issue that arouses a great deal of passion and concern. Depending on the prejudices and outlook of the great masses of the people, this can be either a good or an awfully bad thing. For example, Daniel O'Connell was probably the first populist of the Industrial Revolution who used "people power" in his campaign for Catholic Emancipation in Britain/Ireland. On the other hand, Hitler and stuff.

Contents

Trouble with defining populism

Many attempts at defining populism run into trouble because they try fitting populism somewhere on the left-right political spectrum, or on a two dimensional spectrum of economic and social freedom. Populism doesn't belong in any one place on the political spectrum because it is a rhetorical style, not a political ideology. Populism can occur anywhere on the political spectrum. It is simply appeal to the common people in rhetoric, policy, or both, and proclaiming ones identification with common people and against an "elite," however defined. Critics of far-right populism would do well to keep in mind that it isn't the "populism" part that is the main problem, it's the "far-right" part.

Libertarian analyses, such as the Nolan Chart, enframe populism as the opposite of libertarianism, but do not see it as being as extreme as totalitarianism. If one thinks of libertarianism as the belief in economic and social freedom, liberalism as the belief in social freedom and economic regulation and conservatism as the belief in social regulation and economic freedom; populism forms the natural fourth quadrant of social and economic regulation. How this gets interpreted can enter into comedy; see Australia's Bob Katter, who is (in equal measure) a homophobe, anti-immigrant, global warming denier, MRA and gun nut yet supports Keynesian economics.[2]

Many far-right groups would conform to the Nolan definition of populism. The Nazis combined a autarkic economic policy with a far-right racist policy on the ideal of an "Aryan race." Today in modern Britain the British National Party opposes participation in the European Union and is "committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration," whilst having a economic policy that supports import tariffs which is further to the left than the Labour Party.

Populism in practice

In a less extreme version, populism is merely choosing the political positions which have the largest voter support, essential a pick-and-mix based on opinion polls on what should win the most votes. Most politicians choose to avoid the populist label as it is easy for their opponents to attack them as unprincipled and pandering to gain votes.

Also, for this reason, populist politicians may find themselves forced to make unrealistic proposals; for example, while the voters may love a proposal to hand out lots of free cash from the treasury, and vote for someone who proposes it, they might not love the heavy taxation and/or heavy deficits necessary to fund such largesse, and will vote against any politician who admits to these necessities. The populist politician is therefore stuck between ignoring such potential consequences to get himself elected, or facing up to them and losing votes. This is illustrated by a quote often misattributed to Alexis de Tocqueville:

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.[3]

Another one of the main issues with populism is that, regardless of where it appears on the political spectrum, it tends to trail behind it vehement anti-intellectualism. This is mainly because academia and education is seen as a trait of elitists, and is therefor rejected by populists. Some, such as Mao Zedong, went so far as to kill "elitist" intellectuals, but most populists just reject the advice of "elitist professors" and the like in favor of "common sense" policies, leading to economic and social woes.

Some notable populists

Left-wing

Right Wing

Centrist

(# = debatable whether they belong in that category)

Note: Not all of these populists are as far to the right or left as others in their category.

See also

Footnotes

  1. Merriam-Webster's definition of populist
  2. And that's just the start.
  3. Notice that for many right-wingers and libertarians who constantly quote this that "bribing the public" only applies to spending on public programs, whilst promising massive tax cuts don't count as bribing the public, for whatever reason
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support