An outstanding article by Dr. Steven J. Allen! A virtual standing ovation for you sir! Populism in of itself is certainly not a bad thing at all. Quite the opposite, it has been a force for good throughout our nation's history and is as American as baseball, apple pie and ice cream! There are those who have taken populism and misused it for purposes of promoting racism, xenophobia, authoritarianism, and other horrendous things. For example, segregationist Tom Watson, the KKK of the 1920s, dictators Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, Alabama Governor George Wallace when he ran for President in 1968, and the far-right parties like UKIP in Britain, the National Rally in France and the AfD in Germany. But they distort and pervert what populism is really all about. Populism is NOT about elevating a demagogue to absolute power and building a cult of personality around him. Nor playing on the prejudices, fears and nostalgia of the great unwashed masses. This is a stereotype and misunderstanding of populism that has been perpetuated by the mainstream media. REAL populists would be folks like Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, William Jennings Bryan, Ronald Reagan, Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump. Real populism stands for a natural aristocracy based on virtue and talent, the equality of all people, having confidence in the American people as the safest repository of power, and fighting entrenched power in all its forms. This is precisely why those in the establishment wing of the Democratic and Republican parties, the political, economic, social, and cultural elites of our country and the mainstream press fear it and do their upmost to discredit, smear and vilify folks like Senator Sanders and former President Trump. They see them as a threat to the status quo, our republic and national security interests of this country or at least as they see these things. They threaten power and our elite's entrenched view of the world. That is why for example, Bernie's supporters were smeared as sexists who troll women online and threaten their lives and the mainstream press ran countless hit pieces denigrating the honorable Senator from Vermont. That is why Democrats, Anti-Trump Republicans, the Pentagon, the intelligence community, Hollywood, and others go after
Trump by comparing him to Hitler, calling him racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, etc., fearmongering about how he'll become a dictator and take away minority group's rights if elected, accusing him (wrongly) of trying to lead a revolution at the capital on January 6th, trying to put him in jail, etc. Also, you made a great observation there Dr. Allen when you explained that when the founding fathers said "all men are created equal" they meant it to apply to ALL people, women and people of color included. They just meant the word "equal" in a different way than we would use that word now. But they did indeed see the humanity in women, blacks and Native Americans too. This article belongs on the front page of the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal and should be printed out and distributed to every high school civics class and college political science class in the nation!
Such a great and nuanced comment Noah! You explained why I think populism gets written off as a dirty word today. I wonder if there's a better term to describe the distortion of populism by demagogues. Maybe this would help people discern the difference between the populism described by Jefferson and the faux-populist rhetoric used by those ultimately seeking the opposite of populism.
Also, I totally forgot about how Bernie supporters were smeared as sexists when he ran! Wow, really makes it clear how much that move is just part of a propaganda playbook.
Where's the evidence backing your claim? It's not sufficient to merely make a statement as if it's a fact with no evidence that can be grappled with.
The evidence that I have to the contrary is the multiple instances where Democrats questioned the validity of elections results without being accused of trying to "overturn" them, despite that obviously being the intention:
- In 2000, for Al Gore vs George W. Bush (which led to legal challenges and recounts, ultimately reaching the Supreme Court.)
- In 2004, for George W. Bush's vs John Kerry (which led to objections during the Electoral College certification).
- In 2016, when some Democratic politicians questioned aspects of Donald Trump's victory, and alleged foreign interference and again, issues with the electoral system.
Additionally, Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC funding the compilation of the Steele Dossier, which falsely accused Trump of colluding with foreign enemies right on the heels of his victory in 2016.
To me, it seems like questioning and even concerted attempts to undermine election results—even going so far as to levy false criminal allegations against the opposing candidate—doesn't get treated with the same concern if it isn't Trump.
In fact, I'd say it's far more malicious and dangerous that an established politician like Clinton funded what could have put her political opponent in prison.
Perhaps the media you're considering isn't sufficiently balanced, which leads to weighing the same actions of different people very differently.
Yeah, this isn't very convincing. Most of this applies a double-standard to Trump, whereby his mistrust of the voting processes and vote counting is cast as an attempt to overthrow the election, meanwhile I listed multiple other instances of the same behavior coming from Democrats—although often in more polished or through more "official" channels—and nobody bat an eye at it.
There's also the flaw of mind-reading, where the author claims he has special insight into Trump's mind and can *just tell* he knew he had lost and was pretending otherwise. The main piece of evidence for this is the testimony of an individual unconstitutionally appointed to investigate Trump by his political opponents: https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1790860530195791990. Pretty shoddy evidence and in fact, makes more of a case that the "attempted coup" narrative has been cultivated intentionally for the purpose of lawfare.
And this is ultimately why I don't buy into the hype about Trump "attempting a coup," which besides sounding absurdly dramatic on its face, is revealed to be more dependent on the media's framing of the very same things that previous politicians have done than on anything particularly unique to Trump.
That said, I disagree with Trump's reaction to the election because it's ultimately an unproductive way to raise concerns about election corruption and only provided his opponents with fodder to concoct grandiose narratives about him "attempting a coup." But there's a world of difference between being a bad sport about losing and attempting a coup. As all the other points I made previously show, only Trump gets journalized in a way that takes the same behavior other politicians have done and paints it as the End of Democracy™.
A good example of why this is likely propaganda is the fact that a coup never actually happened nor did it come close to happening. Usually real tyrants try a little harder, perhaps like Clinton funding a smear campaign that almost led to the false imprisonment of her election opponent...but somehow that just doesn't get the same attention.
An outstanding article by Dr. Steven J. Allen! A virtual standing ovation for you sir! Populism in of itself is certainly not a bad thing at all. Quite the opposite, it has been a force for good throughout our nation's history and is as American as baseball, apple pie and ice cream! There are those who have taken populism and misused it for purposes of promoting racism, xenophobia, authoritarianism, and other horrendous things. For example, segregationist Tom Watson, the KKK of the 1920s, dictators Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, Alabama Governor George Wallace when he ran for President in 1968, and the far-right parties like UKIP in Britain, the National Rally in France and the AfD in Germany. But they distort and pervert what populism is really all about. Populism is NOT about elevating a demagogue to absolute power and building a cult of personality around him. Nor playing on the prejudices, fears and nostalgia of the great unwashed masses. This is a stereotype and misunderstanding of populism that has been perpetuated by the mainstream media. REAL populists would be folks like Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, William Jennings Bryan, Ronald Reagan, Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump. Real populism stands for a natural aristocracy based on virtue and talent, the equality of all people, having confidence in the American people as the safest repository of power, and fighting entrenched power in all its forms. This is precisely why those in the establishment wing of the Democratic and Republican parties, the political, economic, social, and cultural elites of our country and the mainstream press fear it and do their upmost to discredit, smear and vilify folks like Senator Sanders and former President Trump. They see them as a threat to the status quo, our republic and national security interests of this country or at least as they see these things. They threaten power and our elite's entrenched view of the world. That is why for example, Bernie's supporters were smeared as sexists who troll women online and threaten their lives and the mainstream press ran countless hit pieces denigrating the honorable Senator from Vermont. That is why Democrats, Anti-Trump Republicans, the Pentagon, the intelligence community, Hollywood, and others go after
Trump by comparing him to Hitler, calling him racist, sexist, anti-Semitic, homophobic, etc., fearmongering about how he'll become a dictator and take away minority group's rights if elected, accusing him (wrongly) of trying to lead a revolution at the capital on January 6th, trying to put him in jail, etc. Also, you made a great observation there Dr. Allen when you explained that when the founding fathers said "all men are created equal" they meant it to apply to ALL people, women and people of color included. They just meant the word "equal" in a different way than we would use that word now. But they did indeed see the humanity in women, blacks and Native Americans too. This article belongs on the front page of the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal and should be printed out and distributed to every high school civics class and college political science class in the nation!
Such a great and nuanced comment Noah! You explained why I think populism gets written off as a dirty word today. I wonder if there's a better term to describe the distortion of populism by demagogues. Maybe this would help people discern the difference between the populism described by Jefferson and the faux-populist rhetoric used by those ultimately seeking the opposite of populism.
Also, I totally forgot about how Bernie supporters were smeared as sexists when he ran! Wow, really makes it clear how much that move is just part of a propaganda playbook.
Trump did try to overturn the results of the 2020 election. He did attempt a coup.
Where's the evidence backing your claim? It's not sufficient to merely make a statement as if it's a fact with no evidence that can be grappled with.
The evidence that I have to the contrary is the multiple instances where Democrats questioned the validity of elections results without being accused of trying to "overturn" them, despite that obviously being the intention:
- In 2000, for Al Gore vs George W. Bush (which led to legal challenges and recounts, ultimately reaching the Supreme Court.)
- In 2004, for George W. Bush's vs John Kerry (which led to objections during the Electoral College certification).
- In 2016, when some Democratic politicians questioned aspects of Donald Trump's victory, and alleged foreign interference and again, issues with the electoral system.
Additionally, Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC funding the compilation of the Steele Dossier, which falsely accused Trump of colluding with foreign enemies right on the heels of his victory in 2016.
To me, it seems like questioning and even concerted attempts to undermine election results—even going so far as to levy false criminal allegations against the opposing candidate—doesn't get treated with the same concern if it isn't Trump.
In fact, I'd say it's far more malicious and dangerous that an established politician like Clinton funded what could have put her political opponent in prison.
Perhaps the media you're considering isn't sufficiently balanced, which leads to weighing the same actions of different people very differently.
Here’s a good summary of the evidence: https://open.substack.com/pub/benthams/p/trump-attempted-a-coup
Yeah, this isn't very convincing. Most of this applies a double-standard to Trump, whereby his mistrust of the voting processes and vote counting is cast as an attempt to overthrow the election, meanwhile I listed multiple other instances of the same behavior coming from Democrats—although often in more polished or through more "official" channels—and nobody bat an eye at it.
There's also the flaw of mind-reading, where the author claims he has special insight into Trump's mind and can *just tell* he knew he had lost and was pretending otherwise. The main piece of evidence for this is the testimony of an individual unconstitutionally appointed to investigate Trump by his political opponents: https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1790860530195791990. Pretty shoddy evidence and in fact, makes more of a case that the "attempted coup" narrative has been cultivated intentionally for the purpose of lawfare.
And this is ultimately why I don't buy into the hype about Trump "attempting a coup," which besides sounding absurdly dramatic on its face, is revealed to be more dependent on the media's framing of the very same things that previous politicians have done than on anything particularly unique to Trump.
That said, I disagree with Trump's reaction to the election because it's ultimately an unproductive way to raise concerns about election corruption and only provided his opponents with fodder to concoct grandiose narratives about him "attempting a coup." But there's a world of difference between being a bad sport about losing and attempting a coup. As all the other points I made previously show, only Trump gets journalized in a way that takes the same behavior other politicians have done and paints it as the End of Democracy™.
A good example of why this is likely propaganda is the fact that a coup never actually happened nor did it come close to happening. Usually real tyrants try a little harder, perhaps like Clinton funding a smear campaign that almost led to the false imprisonment of her election opponent...but somehow that just doesn't get the same attention.
What kind of twisted sick individual you are to have taken that and soun it like that.
You are CLUELESS!!!
DO YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND THE ARTICLE!
WOW YOU ARE SOMETHING ELSE! 🤣🤣🤣
I think you might have misread his comment!
I either misunderstood him... or I misunderstood you.
Either way keep your rhetoric if that's all it is...
I'm out.
Why didn't you just start with the fact that you see Frump like a messiah and can't think for yourself!
Glad not to waste anymore time on this as I will SEEK OUT THE REAL SOURCES of UNBIASED TWISTED HALF TRUTHS!
Wait what?