'Populist'

I’ve listened to your link Baggs and I’m afraid I think he is overly optimistic.

I think it will be a very long time before a phoenix rises from the ashes to save the centre ground of British politics and in the meantime a divided country is a danger to us all.
As for parliament reflecting society, I think there should be an element of leadership alongside the element of management.

I think that rather than the baying mob as you say Monica I would say populist is imagining what the man on the Clapham Omnibus agrees with is the more apt
I agree lemongrove - populist is not the same as the right-wing extremists whose views disgust most ordinary voters.

Well they are popular amongst labour voters.
I'm not so sure about that, mycat
I think Labour would be riding very high were it not for Momentum and their puppets.

It just said on tv that populists 'create fear and then come up with simple solutions'.

Also, the whole point of elected representatives is that if they don't do what enough of the people want them to do, i.e. represent the people, then the people vote them out and put someone else in to represent them.

Further to my first paragraph, an elected representative can never literally represent all their constituents but they must take their constituents views into account when making decisions. If this is not the case, why would we ever lobby our MPs about things we feel stronly about?

I'm sure that sometimes MPs views change when they listen to their constituents too.

I understand the argument about elected representatives but I find it sits uncomfortably with my own feeling that MPs are to represent the people's views. This does not necessarily mean they will need to make decisions that they believe are not in the interests of society as a whole. I see democracy as a constant discussion.

I don't think our current laws on such things as homosexuality or the death penalty were made by parliament deciding against views of the populus; I think such changes in the law as those have come about as a result of changes in attitudes in the population as a whole which, of course, does not mean everyone agrees.

I think parliament reflects society rather than society 'following' parliament. There will be examples that can be used to argue either way. Populism is not a simple thing, nor is it necessarily a negative thing. It's unfortunate that it's often portrayed as negative in the media. Some of it is, of course, but not all by a long shot.

This ten minute Point of View on R4 gives an interesting view of populism as a balancing influence.

I agree janeainsworth. The first duty of an MP is never to willfully inflict harm on his/her constituents, or the country. She/he is a representative, not a delegate obliged to vote and act as instructed by constituents, but to do what she/he judges to be in their best interests. I hope that our MPs do that and Revoke Article 50 rather than allow a disastrous no-deal brexit to happen.

Democracy is all about populism

Baggs I beg to differ.
A representative democracy means that our elected representatives are chosen to make decisions on our behalf.
The decisions they take should be in the best interests of society as a whole and are frequently at variance with what (some of) the population thinks it wants.
A government of integrity would be prepared to take unpopular decisions in the national interest.
Sadly, it’s quite a long time since we’ve had one of those. The era of sound bite politics has given people the idea that politics is a simple matter and ‘the will of the people’ is all that matters. Successive governments have bent to this idea and now we have the result.

It’s quite possible that if we were ruled by ‘the will of the people’ homosexuality would still be illegal and we would still have capital punishment.

Not necessarily Labaik. You might well have thought that for all I knew!

A very good description Baggs of populism.??

Momentum are ‘populist’ I suppose (with a lot of Labour members as opposed to voters giving them backing.)

Populist causes could be climate change, politics, or almost anything.

I think that rather than the baying mob as you say Monica I would say populist is imagining what the man on the Clapham Omnibus agrees with is the more apt.

Populism means what the people want. Quite often (always?) the elite, those with power, do not want the same as what the common people want so some of them are disparaging about it.

Democracy is all about populism.

I wouldn't argue with that yggdrasil, but they have an awful lot of policies that are not in the manifesto and they will not countenance anybody in the party, especially MPs who do not do exactly what they demand.

'momentum' is not 'populist' unless the labour party as a whole is. They have the same aims as the wider party, which covers a great deal of policies as per the Manifesto.
They are just the other end to the Blairites .

Populist means responding to the lowest common denominator of public opinion. the views of the baying mob,

Hence it being used mainly for rightwing parties that would ban immigration, bring back hanging and flogging and keep women in the home.

It was obviously a typing error Jabberwock....happy for you to point out any other errors I make...xx

Hitler didn't have a party before WW1!

Well they are popular amongst labour voters.

Mycat except that Momentum isn't particularly popular...

I think these terms are used by everyone to suit their own agenda to be honest.

It seems to me that populist politicians exploit the legitimate grievances of ordinary people, particularly the disadvantaged, by pointing the finger of blame at "elites" or "immigrants" or "foriegners" or even sections of these disadvantaged themselves such as "benefit claimants".

The key to getting votes for populist parties is, firstly whipping up feelings of anger and resentment, secondly targetting those to be held responsible (whether they actually are or not) and, most importantly, offering very simple answers to very complicated questions - you vote for us, we'll get out of the EU/ deport all asylum seekers / slash foriegn aid / cut the benefits of scroungers/ build more prisons/ bring back hanging / cut taxes etc.

They will not usually offer up all these wonderful policies at once, as it could confuse the voters, so to keep it simple, start with just one thing, say leave the EU, then make it "no-deal - WTO terms" and only if that is successful might other policies come along later. The key to success for populism is KEEP IT SIMPLE.

No that could apply to left wing populist too. Like momentum.

'populist' all over Europe is a polite way of saying right-wing bordering on Fascist.

So, isn't elite a slightly derogatory term? And how can the Brexit party have MEP's who live in France, a leader who lives a very rich lifestyle [funded we know not how] Rees Moggs sister who, I would imagine is pretty rich etc be regarded as 'populist' and not 'elitist'. So can someone explain to me what 'elitist' means?. [it's all beginning to resemble something out of Gullivers Travels].