Why Populism is Really Statism

Conservative Review ^ | 03/17/2016 | Mark Levin

[MLL]

On Thursday night, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin took on the rising tide of "populist nationalism" with a history lesson.

Populism, Levin explained, is really just progressivism. The populist movement in America was the forerunner of the progressive movement, and both populism and progressivism share the same disdain for constitutionalism that conservatives reject.

[Pelham]

It was national interest in the view of Hamilton, the driving force behind the bill. It was expressly intended to give protection to American manufactures.

[Pelham]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Report_on_Manufactures

“The Report on the Subject of Manufactures, generally referred to by its shortened title Report on Manufactures, is the third report, and magnum opus, of American Founding Father and 1st U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton. It was presented to Congress on December 5, 1791 and recommended economic policies to stimulate the new republic’s economy and ensure the independence won with the conclusion of the Revolutionary War in 1783.

It laid forth economic principles rooted in both the Mercantilist System of Elizabeth I’s England and the practices of Jean-Baptiste Colbert of France. The principal ideas of the Report would later be incorporated into the “American System” program by Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky and his Whig Party. Abraham Lincoln, who called himself a “Henry Clay tariff Whig” during his early years, would later make the principles cornerstones, together with opposition to the institution and expansion of slavery, of the fledgling Republican Party.

Hamilton’s ideas formed the basis for the American School of economics.”

[JLS]

You do understand the founders were the original majority whose passions the US Constitution was written to constrain? They did not view themselves as infallible or perfect and thus they wrote a constitution that:

1. Tried to constrain the power of government.

2. Allowed for amendments to correct any issues that cropped up with the constitution they wrote.

[Pelham]

“1. Tried to constrain the power of government.

“2. Allowed for amendments to correct any issues that cropped up with the constitution they wrote.”

That came from the anti-Federalists, founders like George Mason and Patrick Henry who opposed the Constitution on the grounds that it granted far too much power to the central government.

They insisted that the Virginia Bill of Rights be incorporated into the Constitution as amendments to try to reign in the power granted to the national government. Otherwise it would not have been ratified and the Articles of Confederation would have remained in effect.

[Iscool]

Words are funny things. This “populism” used to be called patriotism, national security, sound economic policy.

Isn't that how all people are elected...Who's going to vote for the non populist president??? Is that what they are trying to do??? Get us to vote for the one who isn't as popular by claiming if we were smart we'd go with the unpopular person because he's better president material??? If it is, I'm not buying it...

[Baldwin77]

Wasn’t it Ted Cruz just one week ago that stomped on the 1st Amendment - apparently Cruz has the right to say what he wants to at his rallies, but Donald Trump does not.

[Publius22]

Being an ideologue is what everyone should be. Being an ideologue means you actually have beliefs and principles and a moral foundation. That is the difference between a man and an animal.

Anyone can be a “patriot.” It’s a relativistic term. A patriot in Nazi Germany was immoral. A patriot in the U.S.A. in WW2 was a hero. Patriot doesn’t tell you anything without the context. Ideology tells you everything. Beliefs transcend a country or borders and are immutable. They are what a leader NEEDS to have to be good.

I hope people will reread the above quote. It is the basis for globalism.

[Travis McGee]

But if Congress becomes filled with cowards and “go along” sellouts, and the POTUS rules by decree, and the future cultural Marxist SCOTUS backs him up, then we have become the USSR, which also had a pretty Constitution, on paper.

I don’t see an outbreak of courage in Congress, so it will be civil war instead.

[Publius22]

Interesting. Russell Kirk called conservatism the antithesis of ideology. But what would he know...

I bet only a small percentage of the "true conservatives" could give you two names out of "The Conservative Mind." To them, conservatism was invented in 1980 and Rush, Beck, and Levin are the great intellects of the movement (the absurdity of conservatism being either 35 years old or a movement is laughable).

[nathanbedford]

You have stood the plain meaning of the English language on its head, Ted Cruz engaged in free speech by criticizing Donald Trump for inciting the mob to shut down speech by violence.

[nathanbedford]

Our institutions created by separation of powers and charged with maintaining checks and balances are clearly breaking down. Congress not the least among them.

My question is whether we should blame Congress, Pogo, or "us?"

[MNJohnnie]

Requiring society, especially Government, to obey the rule of law is “Progressive”?

[Travis McGee]

It's a sign of the times. End times, IMHO. We're not fixing this. We're way past several bingo fuel points flying over an ocean. The airports are now all out of range, and we must prepare for a water landing. At best. Meanwhile, the cabin crew is telling lies to the restive passengers to prevent panic.

(Link to the full-length Free Republic thread)

[MNJohnnie]

The GOP ran on a campaign of specific promises in 2010 and 2014. Voters gave them the right to represent them based on those promises. They failed to act on those promises and instead actively worked with opposition to the voters determent.

Now voters are looking to others who will actually represent them.

So yes, blame Congress. We did not fail us, they failed us and in this election we have chance to rectify that error.

[Baldwin77]

You sound like Hillary.

spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-spin-

[nathanbedford]

I quite agree that with a very few prominent exceptions like Ted Cruz, the Congress of 2010 and 2014 betrayed the very people who put them in office.

But overall we are equally culpable with the people who tell us what we want to hear and vote the way we actually want them to vote. You know that the first words out of Donald Trump's mouth were to the effect that he was going to protect Social Security and extend healthcare. He claims he's going to pay for it by finding waste fraud and abuse. When a politician tells you he will find waste fraud and abuse reach for your pocketbook and run screaming as fast as your legs can carry you away from him.

The truth is that we voters want our entitlements, we want our subsidies for biofuels in Iowa (and Donald Trump was damn sure to give it to them), we want our Medicare etc. Entitlements are the main cause of our fiscal imbalances yet we punish those politicians who tell us the truth about entitlements and reward those politicians who tell us what we want to hear.

God knows a congress critter is one of the most despicable humanoids on earth but they know their constituents and they serve up (or routinely since Dwight Eisenhower) what their constituents want. Republicans whom we blame so readily for cowardice are smart enough to know that they are on the losing side of an appeal to voters when they say, eat your spinach and no dessert for you tonight.

Pogo, human nature is us.

[nathanbedford]

Twice in two replies you have stood the English language on its head, this time confusing spin with truth.

[BfloGuy]

If it was truly "free trade", then there is no need for negotiation or even treatise for that matter.

So true, it bears repeating.

Thank you. What we have is managed trade [or crony-capitalist trade if you prefer]; not free trade.

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

The analogy doesn’t apply. You seem to think protectionism is marxist. The Founding Fathers founded America as protectionist nation. So were they or not?

[SaraJohnson]

Actually, globalism is Marxism. We should fight with the left over US policy - not fight with the elite (foreign and domestic) over global policy.