The fascinating aspect of this current movement is that the person they are rallying around is someone of the elite class. Donald Trump doesn’t know what it is to be one of the little guys.
Yes, but for many in his base, he speaks as they do. Andrew Jackson didn't have the advantages of his elite forbearers, so he could very much lay claim to understanding the plight of the little guy. Trump has lived his whole life as an elite, but has a limited vocabulary. I think that's something that appeals to them . . . "Hey, here is this super rich guy, but he talks like me and uses words I understand and says all the things I haven't been allowed to say." It's empowering for them, especially if they have felt forgotten or not served by either party or presidents in previous years. He has no real use for them beyond needing their votes. He will not make their lives better and by the time they figure it out, it will be too late. And let's be clear, I said "many" not "all." I am not trying to be insulting here. I have family members among the "many." There are plenty of elite people trying to get Trump elected as we are well aware. I am pointing out one of the ways he is appealing to the little guys.
Lisa, your summary of Trump’s appeal is well-articulated, and, unfortunately, so true. I have a friend who has lived a very privileged life, never working outside the home, high school graduate, married at 20, lives in the same suburb where she was born, has millions of dollars, who feels oppressed! Trump speaks her language. She has no empathy for immigrants, the “have-nots”, single moms, people struggling just to get by. She feels if “those people” are supported, it is somehow taking something away from her. She has recently told me that she feels scared of what will happen to our country if Trump does not win. She is influenced by Fox “News” and believes she needs to be afraid all the time. There is no give and take in a conversation; just intractable emotion. The world is just a scary place for her.
I was literally just about to type the very same comment. It's absolutely baffling how they can think he's anti-elite when he is one of the elites. Like, the call is coming from inside the house! 😳
Is he an elite, tho? I mean he has $$ but what else? He can’t talk a good game… his “friends” are felons… well I guess mob mentality .. mobsters are elite.
Would love this to be required reading for every elected official! Our systems of democracy are not perfect, but the foundations they create are essential to our democracy.
I'm no fan of populism, and I believe we need competent experts in their fields to run government institutions. Also, at the root of populism is frustration with the out-of-touchness of those experts, which I understand. I work for an organization that is funded by the federal government and sometimes the rules handed down by our funding government institution are out of touch with the reality on the ground. I wish we at the bottom had more say. I also wish our institutions were a little more nimble. I don't need a messiah figure to beat the government into submission, and also, I wish people on the ground had a bit more say. How do we make our institutions better?
Been in that position where so called experts get overcome with their own perceived bureaucratic power and force stupid rules on others. There usually is a mediator to make it right. It is usually mostly younger folks with less experience who over step.
One other thing: I am not here to defend George Wallace, or Andrew Jackson, but I do understand the perspective of someone with their history, choosing populism as a way to get power and govern. Again, let me say: it doesn’t make it right, but I can understand it a tiny bit more. But I have absolutely no patience whatsoever for those who know better, and choose to still behave in such infantile ways PURELY for their own benefit. Because ultimately, what else will they do only for themselves at the expense of others?
I understand that the “elites” absolutely abuse power and it’s an issue that needs to be addressed (refer to the Supreme Court article from yesterday), but as Sharon always says: Principles Over Party. If you don’t stand for anything, how can you, an elected official, possibly represent the best interests of the constituents in your region? If you are only interested in tearing down and not trying to improve, you need to step out of the way for someone who will actually work to improve the lives of hardworking Americans- regardless of their “status.”
I think expecting them to step out of the way is very wishful thinking. We all, however, have the power to force them out of the way by voting in those who want to and will do the work required to improve things.
Oh I agree it’s wishful thinking. But while we do the work to try and elect better officials, we also then need to try and hold them accountable. Otherwise, once they are elected, there’s nothing stopping them from turning into the exact people we have in Congress right now.
I agree, except I wouldn’t paint everyone in the current Congress with the same broad brush. Many of the people in Congress right now were responsible for such major legislation as the $1 trillion American Rescue Plan, the $1 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPs and Science Act of 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act and the most significant gun safety legislation passed by Congress in more than three decades. Much of it was done in a bipartisan manner, which is how things are supposed to work.
The cycle I find some in is that while we can say you can't come in and just tear everything down because you don't believe in or trust in the institution, leaving it in the hands of one "savior". You are also unable to fix or reconstruct some aspect of government because the populists already have the distrust and distaste of those in leadership. So even if someone had truly virtuous motivation to make a government that is in touch with the people it serves, there is already this chasm of mistrust. If that person, or persons, or movement wanted to build something new, it's damned from the start. That chasm is a huge hurdle and makes a populist movement or idea self destructive. How do we overcome the chasm of mistrust? A nation is a large ship to turn and it will take several individuals and movements, from multiple schools of thought, in the direction of true democracy for the US to be on the right course. My worry is that, while history tells us (again and again), if the population has not experienced the pain and weight of that history, they will repeat it. I worry it will get worse before it gets better.
Yes yes yes!! Thank you!! I think there should be a reading list for all elected officials! Many of the books we are reading in the book club should be on that list. 📚
I agree that we want the best and brightest for our governance, but there are issues that the elite will never be aware of due to their experiences. How can they know how to address rural issues if they've never been in a rural community for more than an election speech? How can they regulate unemployment or immigration when they have no experience? How can they restrict legitimate medical procedures when many of them have zero potential of having a child? I am by no means pro-Trump, but I am in favor of more transparency and increased accountability, particularly where collusion and bribery are involved. All I'm saying is that our representatives are supposed to represent all of us. Sometimes I think that just doesn't happen.
These are great questions, and discussions we should have. In some ways, the entirety of the American experiment was built by people without experience in the specific thing they were building. This kind of democracy was a entirely new invention. But it really does beg the question, can people build important things if they did not experience the condition they are trying to fix firsthand? For example: should only formerly illiterate adults work on the issue of adult literacy? Should only the formerly incarcerated help to reform prisons? Should only undocumented immigrants be listened to when it comes to immigration?
And I fully agree that Americans are not being well represented by Congress.
I think this is why public education is so critical. The best & brightest should be able to ascend from all races, creeds & walks of life. Without an assemblage of difffering perspectives some citizens can remain without representation.
There is a lot of room for a populist movement in the US. It is in the ever increasing income gap and is fueled by foreign and domestic propaganda. It is also fueled by an ineffective democracy hamstrung by special interests and dependent on campaign donations. And as you said a population who is distracted by what is said and not what is done.
I would posit that there is two types of populism. There is authoritarian populism that you describe and there is another kind represented by people like the Roosevelt's Ted and Franklin and maybe a few others not based on resentment but on a recognition by an elite that the elites are only elite by luck and not any thing they did to deserve it.
Fascinating! It’s interesting, though, that TR advocated greatly expanding the power of the federal government on behalf of the little guy. What he hated were corrupt businesses, not the democratic institutions.
Interesting thoughts here. Would TR and FDR be considered populists? I hadn't thought about it that way before. They certainly appealed to the "common man."
I don't think they fit a traditional definition of populist, because they were about institution building, but they definitely had some populist rhetoric that appealed to the average American in ways that people like Woodrow Wilson could never capture.
I remember driving with my late father-in-law a few years back in eastern Colorado as he pointed out the infrastructure that was built by the Works Progress Administration. Programs like the WPA seemed to both expand the reach of the federal government while appealing to the working man.
Thank you, Sharon. I think a cult of personality is a problem in any organization and is on steroids in government. When we look to only one person as the fixer we lose the strength of the common good.; and if something happens to the fixer, chaos results
Paul Ryan was a huge proponent and pusher of the Tea Party, which was a right-wing populist movement amongst other things. The Tea Party politics led to the rise of a lot of the current populist views. Has he had a change of heart on what he pushed forward?
The ghost of Andrew Jackson needs some ghostbusters. Populism is the result of government not living up to its calling to moderate and protect all classes within a nation. So yeah, in some cases populists are understandable, when they've been the ignored, persecuted, or oppressed class. But today's populists are shortsighted and don't understand what they're asking for. Left or right, who wants a dictator?
I love that you got to include your favorite "least favorite" president! This was so well written. I am going to share it with some people who need to read it
Ok, I Googled Tom Watson and the first thing that came up was the golfer. I was like, "does this golfer have really messed up political views?" Nope -- well, I have no idea, really. I had to scroll down until I found Thomas E Watson. Yeah, that guy. He stinks.
The fascinating aspect of this current movement is that the person they are rallying around is someone of the elite class. Donald Trump doesn’t know what it is to be one of the little guys.
Yes, but for many in his base, he speaks as they do. Andrew Jackson didn't have the advantages of his elite forbearers, so he could very much lay claim to understanding the plight of the little guy. Trump has lived his whole life as an elite, but has a limited vocabulary. I think that's something that appeals to them . . . "Hey, here is this super rich guy, but he talks like me and uses words I understand and says all the things I haven't been allowed to say." It's empowering for them, especially if they have felt forgotten or not served by either party or presidents in previous years. He has no real use for them beyond needing their votes. He will not make their lives better and by the time they figure it out, it will be too late. And let's be clear, I said "many" not "all." I am not trying to be insulting here. I have family members among the "many." There are plenty of elite people trying to get Trump elected as we are well aware. I am pointing out one of the ways he is appealing to the little guys.
Lisa, your summary of Trump’s appeal is well-articulated, and, unfortunately, so true. I have a friend who has lived a very privileged life, never working outside the home, high school graduate, married at 20, lives in the same suburb where she was born, has millions of dollars, who feels oppressed! Trump speaks her language. She has no empathy for immigrants, the “have-nots”, single moms, people struggling just to get by. She feels if “those people” are supported, it is somehow taking something away from her. She has recently told me that she feels scared of what will happen to our country if Trump does not win. She is influenced by Fox “News” and believes she needs to be afraid all the time. There is no give and take in a conversation; just intractable emotion. The world is just a scary place for her.
I was literally just about to type the very same comment. It's absolutely baffling how they can think he's anti-elite when he is one of the elites. Like, the call is coming from inside the house! 😳
Is he an elite, tho? I mean he has $$ but what else? He can’t talk a good game… his “friends” are felons… well I guess mob mentality .. mobsters are elite.
Yes! I think all the time "he has a gold toilet in his Manhattan penthouse, he is not one of you!".
But he will use the little guys to achieve his goal of “world domination”. INMHO
Absolutely.
Would love this to be required reading for every elected official! Our systems of democracy are not perfect, but the foundations they create are essential to our democracy.
I love this.
Was it fun or painful to write that much about AJ? 😆
I thought about this too! 😂
I'm no fan of populism, and I believe we need competent experts in their fields to run government institutions. Also, at the root of populism is frustration with the out-of-touchness of those experts, which I understand. I work for an organization that is funded by the federal government and sometimes the rules handed down by our funding government institution are out of touch with the reality on the ground. I wish we at the bottom had more say. I also wish our institutions were a little more nimble. I don't need a messiah figure to beat the government into submission, and also, I wish people on the ground had a bit more say. How do we make our institutions better?
You’re not alone or wrong for thinking this way. And I agree, the bureaucracy can be improved.
I believe it’s the elected officials who are out of touch. Many unelected civil servants know all too well the plight of the underpaid & overworked.
Been in that position where so called experts get overcome with their own perceived bureaucratic power and force stupid rules on others. There usually is a mediator to make it right. It is usually mostly younger folks with less experience who over step.
I’m loving this newsletter—current events, news, and education all in one place. From America’s government teacher. So good.
One other thing: I am not here to defend George Wallace, or Andrew Jackson, but I do understand the perspective of someone with their history, choosing populism as a way to get power and govern. Again, let me say: it doesn’t make it right, but I can understand it a tiny bit more. But I have absolutely no patience whatsoever for those who know better, and choose to still behave in such infantile ways PURELY for their own benefit. Because ultimately, what else will they do only for themselves at the expense of others?
I understand that the “elites” absolutely abuse power and it’s an issue that needs to be addressed (refer to the Supreme Court article from yesterday), but as Sharon always says: Principles Over Party. If you don’t stand for anything, how can you, an elected official, possibly represent the best interests of the constituents in your region? If you are only interested in tearing down and not trying to improve, you need to step out of the way for someone who will actually work to improve the lives of hardworking Americans- regardless of their “status.”
I think expecting them to step out of the way is very wishful thinking. We all, however, have the power to force them out of the way by voting in those who want to and will do the work required to improve things.
Oh I agree it’s wishful thinking. But while we do the work to try and elect better officials, we also then need to try and hold them accountable. Otherwise, once they are elected, there’s nothing stopping them from turning into the exact people we have in Congress right now.
I agree, except I wouldn’t paint everyone in the current Congress with the same broad brush. Many of the people in Congress right now were responsible for such major legislation as the $1 trillion American Rescue Plan, the $1 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPs and Science Act of 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act and the most significant gun safety legislation passed by Congress in more than three decades. Much of it was done in a bipartisan manner, which is how things are supposed to work.
I agree, I was using a general “they,” not an all inclusive “they.”
The cycle I find some in is that while we can say you can't come in and just tear everything down because you don't believe in or trust in the institution, leaving it in the hands of one "savior". You are also unable to fix or reconstruct some aspect of government because the populists already have the distrust and distaste of those in leadership. So even if someone had truly virtuous motivation to make a government that is in touch with the people it serves, there is already this chasm of mistrust. If that person, or persons, or movement wanted to build something new, it's damned from the start. That chasm is a huge hurdle and makes a populist movement or idea self destructive. How do we overcome the chasm of mistrust? A nation is a large ship to turn and it will take several individuals and movements, from multiple schools of thought, in the direction of true democracy for the US to be on the right course. My worry is that, while history tells us (again and again), if the population has not experienced the pain and weight of that history, they will repeat it. I worry it will get worse before it gets better.
Great point.
Yes yes yes!! Thank you!! I think there should be a reading list for all elected officials! Many of the books we are reading in the book club should be on that list. 📚
I agree that we want the best and brightest for our governance, but there are issues that the elite will never be aware of due to their experiences. How can they know how to address rural issues if they've never been in a rural community for more than an election speech? How can they regulate unemployment or immigration when they have no experience? How can they restrict legitimate medical procedures when many of them have zero potential of having a child? I am by no means pro-Trump, but I am in favor of more transparency and increased accountability, particularly where collusion and bribery are involved. All I'm saying is that our representatives are supposed to represent all of us. Sometimes I think that just doesn't happen.
These are great questions, and discussions we should have. In some ways, the entirety of the American experiment was built by people without experience in the specific thing they were building. This kind of democracy was a entirely new invention. But it really does beg the question, can people build important things if they did not experience the condition they are trying to fix firsthand? For example: should only formerly illiterate adults work on the issue of adult literacy? Should only the formerly incarcerated help to reform prisons? Should only undocumented immigrants be listened to when it comes to immigration?
And I fully agree that Americans are not being well represented by Congress.
I think this is why public education is so critical. The best & brightest should be able to ascend from all races, creeds & walks of life. Without an assemblage of difffering perspectives some citizens can remain without representation.
There is a lot of room for a populist movement in the US. It is in the ever increasing income gap and is fueled by foreign and domestic propaganda. It is also fueled by an ineffective democracy hamstrung by special interests and dependent on campaign donations. And as you said a population who is distracted by what is said and not what is done.
I would posit that there is two types of populism. There is authoritarian populism that you describe and there is another kind represented by people like the Roosevelt's Ted and Franklin and maybe a few others not based on resentment but on a recognition by an elite that the elites are only elite by luck and not any thing they did to deserve it.
Fascinating! It’s interesting, though, that TR advocated greatly expanding the power of the federal government on behalf of the little guy. What he hated were corrupt businesses, not the democratic institutions.
Interesting thoughts here. Would TR and FDR be considered populists? I hadn't thought about it that way before. They certainly appealed to the "common man."
I don't think they fit a traditional definition of populist, because they were about institution building, but they definitely had some populist rhetoric that appealed to the average American in ways that people like Woodrow Wilson could never capture.
Aha, that makes sense.
I remember driving with my late father-in-law a few years back in eastern Colorado as he pointed out the infrastructure that was built by the Works Progress Administration. Programs like the WPA seemed to both expand the reach of the federal government while appealing to the working man.
Thank you, Sharon. I think a cult of personality is a problem in any organization and is on steroids in government. When we look to only one person as the fixer we lose the strength of the common good.; and if something happens to the fixer, chaos results
Exactly. No one person of any stripe can save us. It’s “we the people,” not “him or her the leader.”
Paul Ryan was a huge proponent and pusher of the Tea Party, which was a right-wing populist movement amongst other things. The Tea Party politics led to the rise of a lot of the current populist views. Has he had a change of heart on what he pushed forward?
That would be a great example of an official who wanted to upset the apple cart and then objected when the horse got away.
The ghost of Andrew Jackson needs some ghostbusters. Populism is the result of government not living up to its calling to moderate and protect all classes within a nation. So yeah, in some cases populists are understandable, when they've been the ignored, persecuted, or oppressed class. But today's populists are shortsighted and don't understand what they're asking for. Left or right, who wants a dictator?
I love that you got to include your favorite "least favorite" president! This was so well written. I am going to share it with some people who need to read it
As a former Georgia Studies teacher, I immediately think of Tom Watson and cringe. Populism seems to bring out the worst in people.
Tom Watson 🤢🤢🤢
Ok, I Googled Tom Watson and the first thing that came up was the golfer. I was like, "does this golfer have really messed up political views?" Nope -- well, I have no idea, really. I had to scroll down until I found Thomas E Watson. Yeah, that guy. He stinks.
I should have been more clear! 🤣