About

We are currently building our platform so please come back in a few days for updated info. Thank You!

The terms “populist” and “populism” are commonly used for anti-elitist appeals in opposition to established interests and mainstream parties

The drive to create a new political party out of the movement arose from the belief that the two major parties Democrats and Republicans are controlled by bankers, landowners and elites hostile to the needs of the American working person.

called for the abolition of national banks, a graduated income taxdirect election of Senators, civil service reform, a working day of eight hours and Government control of all railroadstelegraphs, and telephones.

Populism has been viewed as a political ideologypolitical philosophy, or as a type of discourse. Generally, populists tend to claim that they side with “the people” against “the elites”. While for much of the twentieth century, populism was considered to be a political phenomenon mostly affecting Latin America, since the 1980s populist movements and parties have enjoyed degrees of success in established democracies such as the USA, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands and Scandinavian countries.

Daniele Albertazzi and Duncan McDonnell define populism as an ideology that “pits a virtuous and homogeneous people against a set of elites and dangerous ‘others’ who are together depicted as depriving (or attempting to deprive) the sovereign people of their rights, values, prosperity, identity, and voice”.[2]

the central tenet of populism that democracy should reflect the pure and undiluted will of the people, means it can sit easily with ideologies of both right and left. However, while leaders of populist movements in recent decades have claimed to be on either the left or the right of the political spectrum, there are also many populists who reject such classifications and claim to be neither “left wing”, “centrist” nor “right wing.”[7][8][9]

Some scholars argue that populist organizing for empowerment represents the return of older “Aristotelian” politics of horizontal interactions among equals who are different, for the sake of public problem solving

anti-corporate greed views

The  expressed the populist yearnings of middle–class constituents and at the same time advocated a strong and resolutely anti-Marxist mobilization….Against “unnaturally” divisive parties and querulous organized interest groups, National Socialists cast themselves as representatives of the commonwealth, of an allegedly betrayed and neglected the American public….[b]reaking social barriers of status and caste, and celebrating at least rhetorically the populist ideal of the people’s community

And, in fact, “socialist” changes in today’s Venezuela have mostly included the expenditure of oil revenue to benefit the working poor as a form of social welfare to help enable an eventual (and imprecise) socialist transformation. For some authors, as far as ideology is concerned, Chávez’s political blueprint is more of a “throwback” to traditional populist nationalism and redistributivism.

for the People” and have attempted to woo common people to vote for them by pitting them against the state government and the special interests that have influence in it.

In the most recent example of populist movements and the ongoing attempt to pit “the people” (the have-nots) against “the elite” (the haves), participants

 

The need for poor blacks and poor whites to set aside their racial differences in the name of shared economic self-interest.  Regardless of these rhetoric appeals, however, racism doesn’t not evade the Party

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s