I've just been reading an article about Trump. Based on statistics, case study research and polling. They found he does not appeal to American voters on economic grounds but on core cultural values.
One of which is an appeal to popular sovereignty over and above liberal democracy. So the argument is that moral virtue and power should be with the ordinary people and not the elites.
The second dimension is anti-establishment, and this is opposed not just to political and economic elites but also to other perceived power-holders, like intellectuals or journalists or other groups at the top of society.
And then thirdly, even though it's about popular sovereignty in practice, there aren't that many mechanisms. Mechanisms like public opinion polls or other forms of democratic referendum are typically weak. So in practice, what happens is the power is seen to reside in the individual leader, the charismatic leader who represents the voice of the ordinary people.
So you can think of populism as a way to critique liberal democracy, which opens the door for a variety of leaders who have different ideologies, whether we're talking Hugo Chavez in Venezuela or Donald Trump in America.
The only thing populist leaders seem to have in common is authoritarianism. Left or right this is what their followers are looking for.
So populism is rather an empty shell when it comes to what its positives are, but it is always clear what it is against: established power.
Is that what this country would welcome Curtaintwitcher?. Whether it is the stamp of the Jackboot or the insidious re-education of those in Mao suits, we have fought these things to grasp democracy. Are you really saying you share the core cultural values of those who want authoritarianism rather than democracy?
www.vox.com/conversations/2017/3/27/15037232/trump-populist-appeal-culture-economy
