2+2=5
Well, sometimes in the case of extremely high values of 2....
Yes, we’ve seen it in Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Castro, all of them. Their populism is a means of gaining more power and more control.
"We're not illegal immigrants, we just are just Document-Challanged"
"Most populist movements have contempt for mechanisms which dilute or delay people power."
So much for the "Nuclear Option" against the filibuster, eh?
It's taken me many years of my adult life to realize just how much of the 19th century American history I learned in high school was really just populist nonsense. All those "robber barons", "evil corporations", culminating in the Great Depression, until FDR saved us from capitalism. All just leftist, populist rhetoric.
I don't often read Jonah's columns, but this one is a keeper.
The primary task of Populist leaders of whatever stripe is to overthrow those things -- they tend to get in the way of the simplistic explanations that drive "the movement."
An interesting example of this is the prominence of the "pundit class" in driving public debate. Pundits -- be they leftist shills or Rush Limbaugh -- leave out a lot of facts and considerations when propounding their views. One finds that it's very difficult to find any one place to get a good discussion of the facts of any issue.
It strikes me that much of the turmoil in today's politics can be explained as the clash between two (or more) competing populist movements. The mess that is Congress reflects two major components of this clash.
While I would agree with his general take on Populism (it is the ultimate "might makes right" concept)... any and all ideas stand on there own
Just because an idea become part of a Populism movement neither makes it right or wrong ...the idea stands on its own....
Why do I bring this up...(illegal)immigration .... I get the impression that the writer ultimate reason at least in this article on the evils of Populism was to link(illegal)immigration to a Populism ...
But then which side? ...
The pro(illegal)immigration side?...with there mass street demonstration they do seem to be a classic Populists movement
But the writer just speak of conservatives and the (illegal)immigration issues...in his waring of the evils of Populism.... interesting...I smell a Red Herring coming in the next few day .....
Idea's stand on there own
...pro(illegal)immigration Populism movement is neither makes it right or wrong
And a anti(illegal)immigration Populism movement (should in it ever rival the Pro illegal) neither makes it right or wrong ....the idea's stand on there own
This is similar to what Rush Limbaugh was talking about today. Rush pointed out that politicians are motivated by poll numbers, even if the majority of the people polled are dead wrong, misguided, dumb, don't understand the facts, etc.
He even used the analogy that if most people say 2+2=5, well then, the politician will agree, 2+2=5.
It doesn't help when the populace is under educated (due to the sorry state of public education), and constantly misled by the MSM and popular "culture".
Second, I’m not trying to say that conservatives who resort to populist arguments are crypto-left-wingers or anything like that.
Nah, nothing like that.
From the mobs storming Versailles
The ancien regime in France didn't fall because of a populist uprising, it fell because a decidedly unpopulist feudal system had driven it into bankruptcy. Sometimes the bogeymen are real.
I will shamelessly note that I recently made much the same point ("The People" and Their Frailties). For purposes of preserving our freedom we are probably best served by thinking of the world as one in which there is usually no such thing as "the public interest," only eternally quarreling factions arguing in its name.
I'll take it a step further, if one finds themself on the spectrum in any way, they're a populist to some degree. In some ways, I'm on the spectrum...but I sure the hell strive to stay off of it.
I, myself, strive to promote markets and hope that people, through voluntary interaction, using they're own preferences, can self-govern and be the beneficiaries of personal and desirable outcomes. Utopian and impossible? Yes! But history has shown what happens to a society when it gives up on the self-governing and market embracing ideals. I'll stick my Utopian dreams, thank you.
By the way, thanks for posting this editorial. It's one of the most important editorials to kick off a thread on this website in the last few weeks...and the saddest part of that is that the people who should be reading it will either quit three-quarters of the way through or not even bother to respond to it with their comments.