Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
![]()
I can turn that right back at you. This whole surge in open white nationalism that helped Trump win the WH is also populist in nature. It's just framing "real" (read: white) Americans as the put-upon victims.
My point is that we shouldn't be trusting something this arbitrary, nor should we be putting too much faith in those who rely on it to win.
Edited by M84 on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:22:01 PM
Disgusted, but not surprisedWhich just illustrates the entire criticism of it is meaningless drivel. If anti-racists and racists both use it, then it's not something that has any inherent ideology to it.
It's like criticizing drinking water.
It's just a way of appealing to voters.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Sep 5th 2020 at 7:23:57 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.How you appeal to voters matters. If you play to their fears and prejudices; if you offer them easy solutions; if you scapegoat "elites" or "intellectuals" or "liberals" or "centrists"; if you make populism an ideology that only "enemies" oppose... you are making things worse regardless of whether your actual political beliefs align left or right.
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:27:46 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
![]()
But it seems we have demonstrated that it isn't an ideology, it's rhetoric that is used by all sides.
Therefore it matters much more what someone is trying to accomplish with said rhetoric then the fact that they are using it at all.
![]()
Considering that you were insinuating before that populism often trends towards anti-intellectualism as a means to dismiss it entirely, it doesn't seem particularly unreasonable for someone to be skeptical of anti-populism as having anti-democratic and illiberal sympathies.
Edited by Mio on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:30:53 AM
How you appeal to voters matters. If you play to their fears and prejudices; if you offer them easy solutions; if you scapegoat "elites" or "intellectuals" or "liberals" or "centrists"; if you make populism an ideology that only "enemies" oppose... you are making things worse regardless of whether your actual political beliefs align left or right.
The problem with this argument is that you're including a number of rather divergent groups into a category of "do not criticize". Yes, going after intellectuals is questionable and indicates bad things about one's movement. Liberals too is a rather broad phrase that it's counterproductive for a leftist movement to go after.
But centrists are certainly worthy of criticism, centrism is at best an obstacle to meaningful progress. Centrists tend to oppose critical reform such as abolishing the filibuster or reforming the electoral college. It's not "bad" populism for a movement to be highly critical of them.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangIt is if you want "centrists" to actually vote for you. You can't win an election only by appealing to your most committed voters. I'm not even talking about fence-sitters; if you consider Obama and Biden to be "centrists", you've completely lost the thread.
Regardless, you just perfectly illustrated the point of my argument. Congratulations. "Othering" people is bad for politics; you just othered people to make a political point. Slow Clap.
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:33:42 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I feel that anti-populism should maybe be dropped for, "anti-racism", "pro-intellectulism", and other issues than attacking, "dumb dirty masses."
But I'm done. I won't say anymore on it.
Kyle Rittenhouse is trying to legalize mass-murder by arguing private militias have the authority to execute people.
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Sep 5th 2020 at 7:33:56 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.@ M84, saying populism is bad is like saying technology is bad, because technology can be misused, but technology is a neutral concept, not a bad one, same thing for populism.
I would argue right-wing populism is bad, because it's just dressed up fascism and is false.
I think Thought Slime is a bad person to start with in terms of left-wing internet types, he is too much to start with, I think someone like Vaush is a better person.
I also think Breadtube is important because it can counter the alt-right on Youtube and it can appeal to laymen and the younger people, the alt-right presented its ideology in a fun manner to younger people, so I think if the left doesn't do that too, it gives up ground to the alt-right.
Edited by Overlord on Sep 5th 2020 at 7:37:35 AM
![]()
Seriously. Don't link to videos to make your points for you. That's not how OTC works.
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:35:42 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"![]()
![]()
The problem is that in practice, anti-intellectualism tends to follow anti-elitism. Again, it's probably because academia and education in general are seen as traits of elitism. Even if one had to work their ass off paying for college and/or taking out student loans.
Edited by M84 on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:40:01 PM
Disgusted, but not surprised@Fighteer: I hate to break it to you but "othering" people in politics is kind of unavoidable since no political program can satisfy every-ones material and political interest.
Saying that appeal to centrist is important enough not to antagonize them is fine, but trying to frame it in these kind of essential/ normative ways is at best not useful.
My personal observation is that in the American Left, anti-intellectualism and anti-elitism often go hand in hand. This is the enduring legacy of Thomas Jefferson, who exalted the "salt of the earth" in his political views. He thought that wisdom could be found in farmers: simple people who understand simple facts.
That hasn't exactly worked out for us.
If we are going to make policy about climate change, I want people who have actually studied climate science to have the loudest voices. If we are going to make policy about economics, I want people who have actually studied economics to have the loudest voices. If we are going to make policy about racism, I want people who have actually studied racial history to have the loudest voices. If we are going to make policy about science and technology, I want people who have actually studied and work in science and technology fields to have the loudest voices.
I don't think this is unreasonable. Call me elitist if you want, but I don't want the people on fucking Honey Boo-Boo to be deciding the future of our country. That's how we get Idiocracy.
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:40:18 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Part of the issue I've found is the Right has the weird Boomerang Bigot effect on its writers. It constantly shouts out against elites while serving as the stalwart defenders of the 1%. It talks greatly about morality while practicing none. It also claims to be the working man's class while, obviously, is not.
So its populist rhetoric is just simply...lying.
One small benefit of Trump is that he's done away a lot of this just to be simple racism and cruelty.
Generally, the working class votes Democrats. The rich and afluent middle class vote Trump. It is not the poor and simple who are the problem but the, "fuck you, I got mine."
Edited by CharlesPhipps on Sep 5th 2020 at 7:42:07 AM
Author of The Rules of Supervillainy, Cthulhu Armageddon, and United States of Monsters.![]()
![]()
The salt-of-the-earth thing wouldn't be a problem if people at least acknowledged that climate scientists know better.
Heck, I'm pretty sure farmers would be angry at people who aren't farmers trying to act as if they know more about growing tomatoes.
Edited by M84 on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:42:16 PM
Disgusted, but not surprisedConceded: farmers know more about farming and should have the loudest voice there. I figured that was obvious. Except that if you look at facts, agribusiness makes food quite a bit more efficiently than private farms, so maybe not. Thinking about the anti-GMO and organic lobbies here...
Edited by Fighteer on Sep 5th 2020 at 10:44:24 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

@M84: Exactly, so when you encounter a populist it is way more important to figure out how they are utilizing their populism, rather then just recognizing they are using populism and leave it at that.