My Sunday column, in which I reflect on the prospects of a healthy conservative populism, and highlight the nascent Kansas political career of our friend Caleb Stegall.
I've said from time to time that 2010 should be an insurgent year for populists from the left and the right. Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas is retiring in 2010. I hope Caleb runs an outsider campaign to get the GOP nomination. His could be a great test case for a new conservative populism in this country.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
A major problem with his reform perspective is that he's a lawyer. Is there any class of citizens who have brought more misery or ignorance upon the populace than lawyers?
What the U.S. needs is a Christian Democrat party to openly advocate for the wisdom of the West and the culture of the ages.
What's the difference between populism and socialism? The Socialists thought up the ideology follow it. Populists lack perspective. They eventually do the same thing - create the nanny state. Socialists do so because they believe in the nanny state as a moral imperative to "save" imperfect people with perfect government. Populists do it because they're in government, and have the "child with a hammer problem", which is "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".
This is why I reject populism. It is the expression of people of limited and narrow vision. Populists believe THEY are the solution to other's problems, and seek goverment to empower themselves to "do stuff". Without the restraints of conservative judgement, both do all the same damage of unrestrained government excess.
Basically, no real conservative ever wants "populism". It is the opposite of conservative belief.
To add the thread's perspective... there is no and cannot be a "populism" movement from the right. Well, there could be, but it amounts to rejection of the view of limited government, and the adoption of unlimited belief in government.
Definition of Populism -
Take the wealth of the rich (anyone more successful than you) and give it to the poor and the middle class. (which includes you). In addition, build up an unhealthy chip on your shoulder about anyone who is smarter, works harder and gets more than you. Never consider the advantages that you have over others, but get really angry over the advantages others have over you.
In the republican version, include anger at immigrants and blame them for any and all of your personal shortcomings.
In both the democrat and republican versions, inherited wealth is untouched and considered somehow more valid than wealth that has been earned by the current generation.
Feel free to add to this definition.
There isn’t going to be any “populism” from either side of the aisle in 2010. A large part of the electorate is still going to be self-satisfiedly preening at itself in the mirror over being “advanced” and electing a black man President. No prairie fires there.
The next large part will be the heads of the large corporations and their hangers-on; they want bailout money, and in quantities. They'll (continue to) get it; campaign contributions will do that.
Another large part of the electorate is going to be too busy trying to keep above water financially to care overmuch about politics. They’ll take one look at the various bailouts that the Government is going to be throwing around and asking where their bailout is. Populism requires anger to fuel it. What motivates this segment of the populace is fear. No spontaneous organizations here.
The other major part of the electorate that will be trying to act their shoe size rather than their age is the Boomers. They’ll be looking to guarantee that their entitlement programs remain intact, and they won’t care overmuch if taxes go up (as they certainly will). Time to cooperate and compromise with the New Obama Establishment; no protests to be had here.
American politics in the next 20 years won’t be about “raising less corn and more Hell”. Rather, it will bear a strong resemblance to the old wag about “democracy”: three wolves and a pig deciding on what to eat for dinner.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.