weird how "populism" always seems to change meaning depending on the class interests that are at stake
The problem is they treat populism like it's an ideology. The reason it's possible for two different "populists" to believe wildly contradictory things is that populism isn't an ideology, it's a rhetorical strategy that basically anyone can use (though, right wing populists have to lie constantly).
Elitists conveniently ignore this, which lets them pretend that everyone who makes any reference to the concerns of common people, in any context, is part of the same ideology as Trump/Bolsonaro/some other bad guy.
Of all the dumb lib shit “things that people like are bad, actually” has gotta be the dumbest
What’s the point of government besides giving people what they want?
Obviously the answer in the US is protecting entrenched systems / capital / assuring the flow of cheap commodities from an exploited global south but a lib would never admit that. Or maybe they would idk
What’s the point of government besides giving people what they want?
Liberalism is, at its core, the belief that you know better than just about everyone else.
Liberal politics are defined by being either unwilling or unable to identify enemies outside of individual politicians
Populism and scapegoating are two different words for a reason, zukowski.
if you acknowledge there are real problems instead of vague issues, you are a fascist.
"I am against being popular and saying popular things"
Libs literally saying that they don't want to be popular is a chunk of the reason the middle is collapsing.
Liberals take the fact that everyone hates the government is a sign that it's working
I fucking hate the term "populist". What the fuck does it even mean? You advocate for policies that are popular? Wow what a fucking groundbreaking political strategy.
A wise man once said, good and bad things are exactly the same, you imbecile, you fucking moron, or something like that. :matt-jokerfied:
