LOL Sure

[Content Note: Class warfare; bigotry.]

This is an actual headline in the Wall Street Journal today:


Just for the record, here is how populism is defined:

Populism is a doctrine that appeals to the interests and conceptions (such as hopes and fears) of the general population, especially when contrasting any new collective consciousness push against the prevailing status quo interests of any predominant political sector. Populism is commonly defined as: "the political doctrine that supports the rights and powers of the common people in their struggle with the privileged elite."

Sure, populist rhetoric is "on the rise" among GOP candidates—see, for example, "We must take our government back!"—but that doesn't mean actual populism is.

To the absolute contrary, the GOP candidates are the loyal servants of the political elite. They are anything but advocates for "the rights and powers of the common people in their struggle with the privileged elite."

Cool Orwell impression, Wall Street Journal.

And, the thing is, even if any or all of the Republican candidates really did have some legitimate sympathy for the empowerment of the "common people," it would be a very select and limited subset of the common people. You don't get to claim to be a populist while despising and marginalizing more than half the population as a centerpiece of your platform.

Which is moot anyway. This is a lie. The GOP's entire raison d'être is to uphold privilege. That is the opposite of populism.

What a superfun election this is!