Populism
> support for the concerns of ordinary people
Dutch News
> Dutch PM - "we must stand against populism!!"
> Breaking News -- "Dutch leader holds off populists"
so...... ordinary people aren't important?
it's a good thing we're giving power to :
- the elites
- turkish people
If you really want your jimmies rustled look at the definition of 'bigot'
i never understood why populism is bad. it's everywhere in the media, yet all the definitions i look up are like "using common sense to appeal to the people and gain support". seems reasonable to me.
I think the critiques of populism are that it focuses low-income people against an imagined bogeyman of "the elites".
Here's the thing:
1. The world is a complex place and "common sense" answers to complex problems are almost always the wrong answers. A systems-level view often results in counter-intuitive, but ultimately more appropriate responses.
2. Most people are not specialists in key topics and thus directly appealing to them requires oversimplified "common sense" answers that more often than not are again, wrong. This is the danger of direct democracy: the populace are stupid and emotional and should not directly be the source of decision making.
Examples?
Its a holdover from the days before the middle class existed when appealing to the lower classes was seen as unbecoming
Fucking kek.
>implying it is the governments job to solve these super duper complex problems...
Fill the potholes, make sure the trains are on time, and fuck off back your offices. Get the fuck out of here with your complex problem bullshit.
But then surely the problem is an uneducated population making poor choices?
this is particularly interesting.
so is this a form of elitarism? in the end, most politicians are complete ignorants regarding most subjects, often moreso than the people they represent.
> Populism
Exactly. Saint Savonarola was first elected populist and was killed by papists for this.
or you just over think things to seem like an intelligent weirdo and complicate things than since you complicate things you make yourself think there complex
>elitarism
>You mean elitism?
If so, then yes. Politicians are all autist that just want to validate their existence by exerting control onto other people. They stick their noses in places they don't belong because they've convinced themselves that only they can save the world.
There is a reason why the founding fathers emphasized small government, and it isn't because they feared some unforeseen tyrannical dictate. It is because government just isn't that big of a deal. Most people will go about their lives as decent citizens and people if you let them. Most people like following the rules because it makes their life easier.
We wouldn't have any need for big brother if big brother wasn't fucking shit up all the time.
>imagined
Spotted the kike
When you suffocate people for so long, have experts lie point blank to them, and pass legislation that blatantly benefits the lying elites while fucking us over even though they said it wouldn't, what do you expect?
The only thing that is complex is the vast networks of special interests that get their piggly hands in every bill out there. Look at the ACA, over 1000 pages of healthcare legislation written by special interests that the people who voted on it didn't even read. Nancy Pelosi saying "we need to pass the bill before finding out what is in it." That is complete and utter bullshit. You want to sit here and say the common person isn't effective at making policy decisions, what about the people voted into office who don't even read what they vote on? These are the best and brightest, with beautiful Ivy League resumes, so surely they should be able to at least read the bills they pass.
Or is just that they don't give a shit about throwing shit at the people who elect them. You can only mislead and then talk about complexity, patience, and trusting experts for so long before people give you the boot. Elites don't get to run the country unchecked, they need to remember who gives them the privilege to run the country.
>people still don't get why populism is treated as so (((dangerous))).
I'm trying to give the argument from the perspective of the wealthy, but yes, I am a Jew.
this is the age-old appeal of aristocrats. but it does nothing to address the reality that the upper classes and lower classes have essentially divorced in terms of values and identity.
The upper class doesn't have fine-tuned, learned responses to assimilation and inter-group tension: they do not regard these as problems, and those who insist against egalitarianism are either A. gripped by psychopathology and projecting it outwards on to innocent 'Others' or B. led astray by some conniving demagogue preying on their dim minds, for nefarious purposes.
So if that majority of a native population says 'no thank you' to millions of new alien neighbors, there is no response from the enlightened patriciate except hectoring and moral condemnation. And of course, another boat load of migrants to 'solve' this problem demographically. Which seems to me like just cutting the gordian knot instead of applying their incandescent minds to the task of untying it.
Oversimplified 'common sense' solutions like 'send them back' or at least 'no more' are the only solutions if you consider this a problem. There is not outsmarting it or dodging because there is no outsmarting nature, and these conflicts are a product of nature.
Why is the leaf either based or a menace? There is no in between, it is always one or the other.
right wing populism = bad.
left wing populism = "socialdemocracy/liberalism".
I want to fucking kill myself
Move to Germany and vote afd, m8