Why is populism supposed to a bad thing? Why do they use it as if it's some sort of detracting statement when a populist is literally someone who agrees with the needs of the common people?
It should be considered an insult for someone to claim you are not a populist.
Its used in a new meaning, powered by marxist deconstruction, new meaning for old words
Obama used it negatively.
Good fucking riddance.
Because when the MSM has so much power they are able to easily brainwash idiots into following their ideology. And anyone who doesn't agree are not considered ordinary people i.e Clinton calling Trump supporters deplorables.
Hence, people hide their true intentions by claiming to be a "populist" and be for the "ordinary people"
Because the ruling class wants to stay the ruling class and they can't do it if they listen to the plebs unless they go full Marx and that's just retarded because it would mean wrecking your entire economy and standard of living. Also, politicians are terrible at "owning" insults.
According to libshits, democracy is the highest ideal that "humankind" can attain while populism is pure nazi evil.
I don't think their brains work like normal people's do, to be able to compartmentalize all that contradictory information away from each other is extraordinary.
Because we know what's best for you, silly goyim
It often ends up on parties offering retarded shit that please the people on the short term, ensuring that they'll support said party instead of solid, long term planning and healthy policies.
The people then shit on the party that tries to shift from the short term pleasing to long term planning. And finally, it's easy to corrupt.
t. the country of populism™
Democracy was always meant to be populist. Now that democracy has been widely abolished (especially in Europe through the EU) it is frowned upon to care for the little people. That's why it is important that as many countries as possible leave the EU. Britain is only the beginning!
The pope is a retarded peronist, he has no say on anything regarding populism
populism has its problems but its better than this importing 3rd worlders meme
Don't listen to this "populist is bad" bs. Andrew Jackson was a populist and he was still loved by the people who voted for him after he left office.
>Democratically elected candidate
Candidate (((they))) like.
>Populist candidate
Candidate (((they))) don't like.
The same way "dictator" just means "ruler we don't like".
Populism is like any other political strategy. If you do it effectively, people will demonize it to stop you.
Cognitive dissonance is a hell of a drug
It's a bad thing for the elites who have been trying to cultivate the lower class (ie everyone who isn't a politician or donates to politicians) into being nothing but highly dogmatic, low IQ tards who are heavily reliant on government handouts.
And now Andrew Jackson is hated, hmm...
Because fuck ordinary people and fuck Ronald Flumpf
>Approx. 7,800 posts a year
What country is this...
Hated by the same libshits who always hated him. Don't fall for memes.
it's just a big joke. every party in germany is populistic. that's essentially what all politicans do all the time.
but like we got called racists and x-phobes, which has no meaning anymore, the liberals no try to find another bullshit-term: right-populists.
just ignore it. they are desperate
Got any source for that, buddy?
Yes, it's true that populism is literally just the antonym of elitism, and populism can be either left-wing or right-wing. However, all of the populists gaining traction lately have been right-wing populists, so populism is now synonymous with alt-right white supremacist shitlords.
It depends on what those needs are and how they abuse the needs of the people to foster their own powerbase.
Its more useful to use the term demagogue instead. Although, Trump is a regressive populist demagogue by definition while Bernie was a progressive populist.
I know Sup Forums is mainly highschoolers but still.
A populist is someone who pushes an us vs them narrative towards the elites without actually providing any solid political program relying on saying shit like "We're going to take back our government from the MAN and work for the little people" and promising free gibs for voters.
History has proved over and over again that people running on platforms like these are inclined to coruption, nepotism and general incompetence once they get in power.
If you don't believe me take a look at how Argentina is doing after a century of populist politics. They used to be 8th biggest GDP in 1920 and now they're some 3rd world shithole.
>It often ends up on parties offering retarded shit that please the people on the short term, ensuring that they'll support said party instead of solid, long term planning and healthy policies
This. Populism has negative connocations because it's not about helping the people, it's pleasing the people, and as we all know, people are morons. It's bread and circuses, just with a larger scope.
Populists are just politicians who are actually loved by the people, instead of having their supporters begrudgingly vote for them.
>sent the country into one of the biggest economic shitfests of the 19th century
>great leader
pick one
Democracy = demos (the people) + kratos (power)
Populism = populus (the people) + -ism suffix (describing a system)
Both word have the same meaning.
One is greek, the other is latin.
Democracy = Populism
