General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bernie nails it again [View all]Hortensis
(58,785 posts)That should be repeated a lot. We saw it played out blatantly, in can't-miss actions by both sides in 2016, many of them the same tactics of course.
Those who try to define populism as an ideology usually seem to be trying to give whatever organized negative energy they're talking about a kind of validity and moral standing that don't exist. As you say, it's a method for gaining power -- employed by leaders of almost all ideologies, to create almost any type of replacement power structure by inflaming and directing the signature antagonistic negativism of those they draw -- and specifically aggressive anti-establishment resentments. Populist passions are proven to be loosely related to ideology at best, witness those Sanders "socialists" who switched to tRump's white nationalist authoritarian movement. True that most of the switching may be one way, but not entirely -- and any movement can shift trajectory.
I am grateful to Sanders at least for joining the Democrats to fight the RW takeover after 2020. He of course knew that it would cause many among the dominant populist energizers of his movement to reject his leadership. His aligning with a despised Biden would also at least lessen his LW authoritarian appeal to some of his strongest loyalists.
So true that he couldn't continue forever to appeal to both those committed to democracy and to antiestablishment populists, but no replacement LW populist leader has appeared. And let's face it, many who support him don't understand that populist passions are inimical to our democracy. Many don't realize what they are or that they're involved with them. He also draws idealists who see him only as a leader who will strive for "more" than (he tells them) Democrats will. And of course they don't worry that what they don't see could slip his, and their, control altogether.