5 ms·
I'm not sure what you mean by that? Isn't there a pretty obvious distinction between the interest and desires of the mass of people vs the interests of powerfu
by vivekd 4y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by that? Isn't there a pretty obvious distinction between the interest and desires of the mass of people vs the interests of powerful special interest groups like corporations and the very wealthy.
I mean we have no problem looking at historical society and drawing a distinction between nobility and the masses. Why does that logic fall apart in modern day societies
- twblalock 4y agoPopulists would love to convince you that "the elites" and "the people" are distinct groups that are pitted against each other in an eternal struggle. They do this in many cases to convince "the people" to adopt radical fringe views. In the past (and present!) this false narrative has been used to push mostly bad things: nativism, xenophobia, and really dumb economic policy. By falling for this false distinction you are priming yourself to be susceptible to demagoguery and similar bad ideas. If you look at reality you'll find that most distinctions between "the elites" and "the people" collapse and there is substantial overlap between both groups, both in membership and in their political self-interest.
- Xeoncross 4y agothis is a non-answer unfortunately
- twblalock 4y agoNo, it’s a very clear answer: the elite-people distinction is mostly false, therefore populism operates on a false premise.
- andrekandre 4y agook, so whats the alternative interpretation, and what better future does that enable?
- night862 4y agoDon’t you see? In The People vs The Elite, there are people and there are elite people. People are people and elite people are people, therefor the people are the elite! Qed