Gransnet forums

News & politics

Populism on a sharp decline

(71 Posts)
Whitewavemark2 Tue 27-Oct-20 07:52:12

You-gov survey in 25 countries throughout Europe shows that people are rejecting key statements of populism.

Good.

(Probably because they look at the failing government in the U.K.)

People are rejecting emotional responses in favour of listening to experts, like scientist and facts.

I think the decline will get a big boost if Trump loses as well.

Johnson will be on the wrong side of history.

Callistemon Tue 27-Oct-20 11:12:09

Interesting, Iam64 and lemongrove

Feelings of anxiety, feeling depressed are surely normal reactions to a crisis such as the one we are all coping with at the moment. Perhaps because the threat is invisible makes people more nervous and resentful of their fellow human beings whom they see flouting the rules.
However, those normal feelings being referred to as a mental health illnesses is worrying in itself, especially when the terms are used by those without training in MH.

I understood that populism as a term refers to the rights of ordinary people as opposed to elitism which seems a more apt description of what some people think of our present government.

Callistemon Tue 27-Oct-20 11:17:17

It is often used to define what is seen as “the people” against the elite. So it is an ideology of division, setting what it terms as the virtuous will of the people against the corrupt elite. It is used in any area that is useful to divide the population.

So are we led to believe that we have many populist governments when in actual fact they are elitist?

Ie the corrupt elite

varian Tue 27-Oct-20 11:18:03

Why New Zealand rejected populist ideas other nations have embraced.

Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand’s Labour prime minister who was returned to power for a second term with a commanding majority, has often been hailed internationally as a foil to global surges in right-wing movements and the rise of strongmen such as Donald Trump and Brazil’s leader, Jair Bolsonaro.

But the historic victory of Ardern’s centre-left party on polling day – its best result in five decades, winning 64 of parliament’s 120 seats – was not the only measure by which New Zealand bucked global trends in its vote. The public also rejected some political hopefuls’ rallying cries to populism, conspiracy theories and scepticism about Covid-19.

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/19/why-new-zealand-rejected-populist-ideas-other-nations-have-embraced

Whitewavemark2 Tue 27-Oct-20 11:30:10

Callistemon

^It is often used to define what is seen as “the people” against the elite. So it is an ideology of division, setting what it terms as the virtuous will of the people against the corrupt elite. It is used in any area that is useful to divide the population.^

So are we led to believe that we have many populist governments when in actual fact they are elitist?

Ie ^the corrupt elite^

No - what characterises populists is the rhetoric of division.

So Trump talked about emptying the swamp. Pitting the voter against this amorphous entity.

Likewise Cummings and Johnson pitting the northern voter against the London elite or Westminster elite.

It always seeks to divide.

Callistemon Tue 27-Oct-20 11:38:44

Thanks.

But at the same time managing to remain the corrupt elite?

Whitewavemark2 Tue 27-Oct-20 11:40:45

Callistemon

Thanks.

But at the same time managing to remain the corrupt elite?

?

MaizieD Tue 27-Oct-20 11:55:57

Callistemon

Thanks.

But at the same time managing to remain the corrupt elite?

That seems to be another defining feature of populist regimes. Lots of rewards (usually financial) to those who support the government... Applies to both right and left wing regimes

LadyHonoriaDedlock Tue 27-Oct-20 11:57:40

Whitewavemark2, I don't think anybody, not any reputable scientist anyway, accepts climate change as 'fact'. That's not the way scientists work. That rapid climate change and the associated disruption to global weather patterns is caused by human activity is a theory based on consistency of observation, and a theory holds until observations consistently contradict it. Scientists deal in scepticism and there's a Nobel Prize, not to mention the undying gratitude of very wealthy oil squillionaires, waiting for the scientists who convincingly overturns climate change theory, but none ever has. If any scientist claims otherwise, check who's bankrolling them.

'Facts' are the stock in trade of the populist. 'Fact' says to the uninformed person that what the populist is saying is irrefutable, so don't bother trying. 'Common sense' works the same way, it says 'just accept it without question' or 'don't you worry your pretty little head about it'. Listen to the creationist dismissing evolution as 'just a theory', which is abusing the proper meaning of 'theory'. A theory is not a whim, an idea, a hypothesis, it's an explanation that has proved consistent with observations over a period of time. Evolution has held up for a century and a half. Ah, says, the creationist, but can you prove that evolution is true (I know that creationism is true because it says so in this here book, written thousands of years ago and mangled by generations of translators, and everything in the book is true because the book says it is). You can't prove a theory, you can only amass more and more observational evidence that fits. You can disprove it; a fossilised rabbit in the Devonian fossil record would do it, but no such thing has ever been found. Squillionaire mineral conglomerates like creationists and other biblical literalists; it gives them dominion over nature!

It's funny how populists never get so animated about quantum theory. It's held up perfectly since the last decade of the nineteenth century and, as the late Richard Feynman said, anybody who says they understand it is lying.

Whitewavemark2 Tue 27-Oct-20 12:05:06

LadyHonoriaDedlock

Whitewavemark2, I don't think anybody, not any reputable scientist anyway, accepts climate change as 'fact'. That's not the way scientists work. That rapid climate change and the associated disruption to global weather patterns is caused by human activity is a theory based on consistency of observation, and a theory holds until observations consistently contradict it. Scientists deal in scepticism and there's a Nobel Prize, not to mention the undying gratitude of very wealthy oil squillionaires, waiting for the scientists who convincingly overturns climate change theory, but none ever has. If any scientist claims otherwise, check who's bankrolling them.

'Facts' are the stock in trade of the populist. 'Fact' says to the uninformed person that what the populist is saying is irrefutable, so don't bother trying. 'Common sense' works the same way, it says 'just accept it without question' or 'don't you worry your pretty little head about it'. Listen to the creationist dismissing evolution as 'just a theory', which is abusing the proper meaning of 'theory'. A theory is not a whim, an idea, a hypothesis, it's an explanation that has proved consistent with observations over a period of time. Evolution has held up for a century and a half. Ah, says, the creationist, but can you prove that evolution is true (I know that creationism is true because it says so in this here book, written thousands of years ago and mangled by generations of translators, and everything in the book is true because the book says it is). You can't prove a theory, you can only amass more and more observational evidence that fits. You can disprove it; a fossilised rabbit in the Devonian fossil record would do it, but no such thing has ever been found. Squillionaire mineral conglomerates like creationists and other biblical literalists; it gives them dominion over nature!

It's funny how populists never get so animated about quantum theory. It's held up perfectly since the last decade of the nineteenth century and, as the late Richard Feynman said, anybody who says they understand it is lying.

? thank you. I needEd to check with DD before I posted.

Your explanation is much more eloquent.

25Avalon Tue 27-Oct-20 12:16:02

Lady HD I once had a disagreement with someone who claimed that if a large number of people believed something to be a fact then it was!
Now I understand!

MaizieD Tue 27-Oct-20 13:27:38

Some of you might be interested in this. I know its got 'brexit' and 'fascism in the URL, but fascism is built on populism...initially...

westcountrybylines.co.uk/brexit-and-fascism-heed-the-warning-signs-while-you-still-can-mr-mangnall-a-constituent-writes-to-his-mp/

varian Tue 27-Oct-20 13:42:11

Thanks Maizie. The analysis is pretty convincing but I do hope it's wrong. I doubt whether the people who should read this ever will.

growstuff Tue 27-Oct-20 14:15:14

Callistemon

^It is often used to define what is seen as “the people” against the elite. So it is an ideology of division, setting what it terms as the virtuous will of the people against the corrupt elite. It is used in any area that is useful to divide the population.^

So are we led to believe that we have many populist governments when in actual fact they are elitist?

Ie ^the corrupt elite^

"Volk" is the German word for "people". Hitler and Goebbels used the word frequently as part of their propaganda war to make the people believe they were at the centre of everything, whereas the opposite was true.

Nazism was populist because it "sold" the idea of people's power against rational thinkers, who had historically influenced public opinion. The people, of course, weren't in power, but were softened up to believe irrational thinking, much of which contradicted the people's previous moral values.

MaizieD Tue 27-Oct-20 16:11:11

varian

Thanks Maizie. The analysis is pretty convincing but I do hope it's wrong. I doubt whether the people who should read this ever will.

What do you think/hope might be wrong about it, varian?

What is scaring is that the indications are based on proposed legislation and, to a lesser extent, on government actions. Doesn't history tell us that once a government is given powers it will use them?

MayBee70 Tue 27-Oct-20 20:05:16

I just saw a Trump supporter on Ch4 News say that if Biden wins she’ll move to Canada. Can anyone make sense of that?

petra Tue 27-Oct-20 20:17:46

Urmstongran
Did you see that. And yet another assumption that we don't read anything. So predictable.

Davidhs Tue 27-Oct-20 20:21:20

MayBee70

I just saw a Trump supporter on Ch4 News say that if Biden wins she’ll move to Canada. Can anyone make sense of that?

She can’t move to Canada the border is closed, Covid regulations.

It’s hard to see Trump as a winner he is 10points behind with only a week to go, and the rednecks don’t like it one bit.

Urmstongran Tue 27-Oct-20 20:30:19

Whitewavemark2

To my mind it is a parasitic ideology that sits on the back of mainstream ideologies which are themselves grounded in a wide systematic set of beliefs

Good grief.
Do you talk this way in real life?

Do you ever find yourself sitting alone at parties?
?

varian Tue 27-Oct-20 20:31:20

Also she possibly hasn't noticed that Canada is a far more Liberal country than the USA - it even has a Liberal Party government, somewhat more liberal than Joe Biden.

MaizieD Tue 27-Oct-20 22:11:52

petra

Urmstongran
Did you see that. And yet another assumption that we don't read anything. So predictable.

Have you read it then?

Either of you?

MaizieD Tue 27-Oct-20 22:15:08

Urmstongran

Whitewavemark2

To my mind it is a parasitic ideology that sits on the back of mainstream ideologies which are themselves grounded in a wide systematic set of beliefs

Good grief.
Do you talk this way in real life?

Do you ever find yourself sitting alone at parties?
?

God, the anti-intellectuals are out in force today...

with their ad hominems at the ready grin

MayBee70 Tue 27-Oct-20 22:18:18

MaizieD

petra

Urmstongran
Did you see that. And yet another assumption that we don't read anything. So predictable.

Have you read it then?

Either of you?

Exactly!

Dinahmo Tue 27-Oct-20 22:26:56

MayBee70

I just saw a Trump supporter on Ch4 News say that if Biden wins she’ll move to Canada. Can anyone make sense of that?

It's an example of how uneducated some Americans are.

lemongrove Tue 27-Oct-20 22:36:46

I remember a poster on GN saying she would move to Scotland if Johnson won! Needless to say, it’s all rhetoric and doesn’t mean that anyone is uneducated, British or American.

Urmstongran Wed 28-Oct-20 08:04:48

Actually WW I want to apologise sincerely for my mean post. I was being a smart-mouth and thought I was being amusing but with hindsight it wasn’t.

I was going to ask GNHQ just to delete my post but then I thought ‘no, a few people will have read it already’ and feel an apology is better.

I was being flippant and silly and I hope you will forgive me.