Populism Is the Other Socialism
Thomas Frank explains how oligarchs have given populism a bad name with those of us who might embrace it:
https://scheerpost.com/2020/11/20/thomas-frank-dont-believe-anything-you...
An so the “left” is prevented from joining with the “right” by being given something to keep each in a permanent tizzy. Each side fears the other. Each side is kept from recognizing vast common ground they share.
This election has proved that the issues that “loser” Bernie Sanders ran on for the Democrat Party nomination were more popular than the Democrats themselves. Fight for Fifteen, legalized marijuana and other Sanders issues passed in states where Democrats themselves lost.
HA! Take that Democrats, you manipulative rats!
Sorry, couldn’t help myself.
And yet the media can reach down into our very souls and have us absolutely retching in revulsion with a few images of what we associate with populism or socialism. This alienation didn’t begin this century or even the last, but in the Nineteenth Century when populism arose as a response to the first Gilded Age. Frank explains how we have gone from a Jeffersonian vision of the letting those who aren’t products of elite schooling and upbringing to have a voice as opposed to a Hamiltonian vision where elites rule.
Frank argues that Trump’s faux populism allowed him to co-opt those dissatisfied with the status quo which explains his relative popularity. Democrats condemned populism which offered people the voice we no longer have in our government. This left the GOP a opening to get the support of the disaffected.
The link leads to a transcript and a podcast of Frank being interviewed by Robert Scheer. I leave it to you to visit the link to hear his view of populism. His argument is compelling and explains how oligarchs has manipulated our emotions by charging both socialism and populism with negative associations.
Comments
A good read
In some ways populists are anti intellectual, considering the 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation Harvard grads that run our nation are the epitome of intellectualism these days. The Merit-o-crats like the Clintons that indeed forgot (at lightning speed) where they came from. They still talked the talk, but in the end it was the royalty costuming themselves and pretending to be peasants.
The dems and the r's have both agreed that "socialism" is bad, and rather than address minimum wage, health care, education, child care.... they throw defund the police, antifa and gender fluidity at the wall until something sticks and call it socialism. Thank the press for the tsunami of words that essentially mean nothing, and then berate the working class for being uninformed.
As for all the things that concern the lives of most Americans, well, now is not the time, we need to go slow, keep the powder dry, play 8th dimensional chess..... election after election after election.
royalty costuming themselves
well put
The interests of the 99%
Thank-you for bringing this interview with Thomas Frank to light for us, Lily O Lady.
Like Frank, I was born and raised in that part of Kansas where the Populists formed. It was something I was quite aware of in my youth. I know Thomas Frank saw the vestiges of it as he grew up, and being even older than Mr. Frank, so did I. So, having personally known people who considered themselves Populists (yes, they were all quite old and I was quite young), it tends to grate on me when I see Trump referred to as such. He damn sure is not one.
Thomas Frank gets into exactly this point during the interview. For that matter, so does Robert Scheer - the interviewer.
Indeed, there is a vacuum. Trump is no genius, but he did recognize this and exploited it. The Republicans have never championed the common man, but the Democrats - at least starting with FDR - made an attempt to do so. Their sincerity can be questioned - rightly, but by the 30s there was no Populist option for most people in the US. In our time, Bernie re-ignited that spark; Occupy did it as well. It is seen most brightly shining in our young people. That's something that gives hope.
And yes, it is indeed the other Socialism. It's from the people and for the people. It's not ignorant, it's not racist, but it most certainly is a threat to the meritocracy religion of the Democrats and the oligarch-ass-kissing of the Republicans. Personally, I see it as one of the underlying tenets here at C99, in that C99 "...is about the interests of the 99%," as is mentioned in The Dreaded Site Meta #2.
I think we, here, know
We just can't figure out why this is rarely talked about at liberal/democratic sites. You are right. It is a vacuum. From living day to day, to all the polls on what the average voter wants there is a kick the can down the road attitude. Tax cuts, tax incentives, wars, jails all business as usual.
As long as the donors are willing to keep writing checks and their kids can Lori Loughlin through life, it's full speed ahead. Everything else we just can't afford. Heck of a country where the people we're supposed to admire are judged by their success at being greedy or what their inheritance brought them.
I won't say this with any elegance or depth, but at the
end of the interview Frank makes a few statements and Scheer agrees that the Democrats of the 1890s and in MLK's time were what they are today. They enforced literally the control by the elites (those who were college educated and/or rich). It's not new as I had previously thought.
Anybody who espouses including working class/people who work with their hands, who create things and do manual work, in those who might be smart, be interested in philosophy or good at creativity and new ideas, is Bojo'd on so-called democratic/liberal sites.
The Democrats in charge don't want that kind of thinking or talk. They will do anything to suppress it and create a common narrative.
This place is an island of the internet.
A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.
Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.
I’ve got the status quo blues.
Someone talented should write that song. It would make a great campaign song for the third party we long for.
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
"The People, NO" is Frank at his best
I have admired Frank's writing for years but this is arguably his finest work. The time is long overdue for someone to rescue historical Populism from the ninth-rate intellectual hacks who use the term to smear anyone they don't like and Frank is more than up to the task.
I tried to explain my admiration for his work by attempting to write a review of his incredible book. It devolved into a history of Minnesota's Farmer-Labor Party which as a lifelong member of the Minnesota DFL, I know quite a bit about.
And no, Sarah Palin and Donald Trump are NOT Populists. Not. Even. Close!
Amen!
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"
If we can ever start a 3rd party
we have to define ourselves, and use our own terms. Whatever words we use will be assaulted by anyone with a computer or microphone. How? I don't know for sure but, all the old terms have been twisted or morphed into whatever the PTB say they are. After watching liberal dem be equated with populism, to be equated with socialism, to be equated with communism, to be equated with nazi-ism, if we don't forcefully own our own definitions we'll be defined into a mosh pit of conflicting meanings and forced to defend everything we say over and over.
Call it out
Over the years, we've watched as various words have had their meanings perverted. Words such as "liberal" have been consistently mis-represented. This was no accident. I remember Limbaugh being particularly good at this. He even said he was doing it and how. If there was pushback, I don't remember much of it. With little or no pushback, the whole scheme kept being taken to the next higher level. The word "progressive" met the same fate.
With the word "populist," it's not only the hard right attacking, it's also the Democratic party neoliberals. Today, the attacks are not much different than they were at the turn of the Twentieth Century. This is what Thomas Frank covers so well.
What I hope to see is some fight and some pushback. Those who understand need to correct the (usually intentional) misuse of the word "populist" whenever it is found. This is not simply a defensive measure;; it can be used as a chance to open up eyes and ears which have been subject to propaganda. I consider the pushback as a chance to show to the 99% that the issues important to them are not those of the neoliberals, nor of the extreme-right fascistic elements.
Whenever I encounter the word "populism" being misused, I try to call it out and attempt to use the opening against those perverting its meaning. Make it a positive moment. I've had pretty good success with all but the most die-hard neoliberals and rightists.