The hour of the populist

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

A lot has been said in the wake of the Brexit vote. Many believe the time of populism is at hand in Europe. Indeed, if we just take a look at Europe and imagine what it would look like, and most of the world by extension, if France ends up with Le Pen for president, if the Freedom Party gets a Chancellor in Austria, and if Wilders and his people come to power in Holland, and if, on top of everything, Trump becomes US president, things would start looking rather alarming. And no one can guarantee at this point that such a scenario would not play out, if not completely, at least partially.

But like many have said these days, we shouldn't hasten to panic. The new elections in Spain may have brought some additional clarity on the issue, but the positions of the leftist populists were actually weakened. In other words, there are indications that the voters are not always susceptible to emotional manipulations.

On the other hand, there seems to be an ever expanding core of people who are prone to believing even the most blatant of lies, and follow absurd promises, as long as those slogans are directed against the so called establishment, the political elites, or, in Britain's case, against Europe in general. Why so, you may ask? Well, maybe because a lot of people in today's globalised world, with its globalised economy, feel disenfranchised, marginalised, slighted. And when such moods begin to be constantly voiced loudly, and articulated through slogans and talking points both on the Internet and in the media, they tend to ooze through the discourse, gain a mainstream status, and earn political significance. Political populism is also subject to the laws of the free market: the supply and demand for answers and solutions. And simple answers and simple solutions tend to be much easier to sell than complex ones. So we end up with the lowest common denominator defining the discourse and setting the new trends.

This hard core of desperate people should not be turned into a majority, however. Of course, this is easy to say but much harder to achieve. So what's next, then?

The politicians are expected to find a workable, and if possible - quick - solution to most problems. And because this is not always possible, due to the complexity of the world's problems, many people tend to lose faith with them too quickly. In other cases, the politicians themselves are either unwilling or incapable of walking that road. In any case, this is like a vicious cycle, but the fact of the matter is, there is no other way out of it than giving politics time and the opportunity to investigate the problems in their complex entirety, to openly discuss them, and work towards solutions. Not easy and simple ones. Because those seldom bring good long-term results.

While all of this may sound a bit abstract, and at a first sight it even looks too naive for a world where everyone communicates between themselves in real time, the alternative is not good. Actually this was an understatement. The long-term result of the proposed alternative is disastrous.

Comments

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Indeed.

Part of the problem is the shrinking middle-class and the rise of the precariat; and the fact that all policies that would change this require more taxes from folk, and a better distribution of income.

Mixed economy? We still have a mixed economy, but the balance has shifted too much one way. Shame, and all of that. But all the solutions available seem politically so objectionable as to be unattainable.

Tax takes really only go up in wartimes or other times of extreme emergency; but phoney wars lead to catastrophes, as has been proven time and time again. The latest example of this is the propaganda war led by Milord Rothermere, The Barclay Brothers, Nigel, Boris, et al. (Damn and blast the lot of them.)

Some small catastrophes are now upon us. Let us not make them worse than they need be. But try arguing for higher taxes and I think you'd need an emergency like war, aliens landing, the second coming, or the Donald winning the election to get that one past a majority.

[airiefairie.livejournal.com]

Higher taxes would not be needed for a fairer distribution of the public funds, if vast portions of those taxes didn't get squandered for meaningless activities like, just as a more obvious example, maintaining a juggernaut of a military machine. The new realities of global geopolitics and modern warfare do not justify the current military budgets.

Other parts of the budget could also be optimised in ways that may look rather drastic, but, upon closer scrutiny, are not that illogical. It is just that the political will to do these things is missing.

But the more important thing than allocating tax money into sectors is to create conditions for the recovery of the middle class. Without a healthy middle class there is no economic stability, and hence, no political stability. But of course the political landscape is already so heavily tilted in favour of the wealthy and powerful, even starting a conversation about these things results in almost instantaneous accusations of "class warfare".

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

The thing is, most of the folk I know who appear to be aware of these things are middle or upper class. (This is obviously self-selecting.) I will agree that there is a significant traditional working class appreciation of the situation, but, like all classes, any opposition to neoliberalism seems unfocussed, and now polarised between the left and right. And the 1% keep getting richer at everyone else's expense while rational opposition ebbs away under the twin onslaughts of righteous class envy, and an unpleasant nationalism which seems far removed from patriotism of the better kind.

If I were on a journey to fix it, I wouldn't start from here. But here is where we are.

Redistributing tax takes from the traditional MI complex results in job losses and reduced exports. Many of the middles classes are in the professions or higher management or are craftspersons of a kind. These are all paid for somehow, and when the jobs available no longer support a service middle class, rather than an entrepreneurial middle class, things look interesting. Cassandra says...get it sorted or bad things will happen.

Maybe Quantum Computing will get us to the singularity first, but somehow I doubt it.

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

I have a bit of a different take. Sure, there are some ignorant racists among the populists, there are also a lot of people who have seen their opportunities limited by both globalization and immigration. While both globalization and immigration are good for a country as a whole, in my opinion anyhow, and especially the highly educated, younger, and more urban elites, they aren't good for everyone. Mrs. Clinton has been as big of a supporter of free trade and immigration as both Mr. Obama and her husband before him. A rural, fiftysomething with a highschool education isn't helped by either. They wouldn't be helped much more by the GOP establishment either.

Populists are becoming popular as a backlash to some of the real differences caused by globalization. The solution isn't about ending emotional manipulations or explaining complex problems in a simpler way but rather that the dentally challenged can understand. The solution is to actually address the issues affecting those on the lower end of the workforce who are on the losing end when they are made to compete directly against their peers in China or Vietnam.

[dreamville-bg.livejournal.com]

Good point. Now the harder part: address these issues - how?

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Some better enforcement of immigration laws would be a good start, along with immigration reform that isn't based on how many more voters the party in power can gain or prevent their opponents from getting. Acknowledging that regulations have an impact on competitiveness an doing a review of regulations not to represent the view of urban elites but rural people who are the ones actually impacted by most environmental regulations would be another, although it certainly wouldn't be a silver bullet. China has engaged in abusive trade policies, it's time to start getting a bit tougher and demanding that they actually open their markets. The Western countries wrote those rules for our benefit, it's time we start enforcing them. We can't compete on the price of semi-skilled labor after all.

Add in some job and vocational training, some real training that will require higher taxes. Since the rich have benefited greatly from globalization, they should pay a bit more to mitigate the effects. Not because they "don't pay their fair share" but because we're all in this together.

Also, it'd be good to see that Mr. Trump is actually talking about some real problems rather than writing off his supporters as a bunch of racist, ignorant rednecks. Although he's certainly the candidate of racist, ignorant rednecks, this doesn't mean all of those who support him fit that description or that bad hair and an oddly tangerine skin tone are all there is to his candidacy. He's already upended the GOP, let's not let things go further.

[dreamville-bg.livejournal.com]

"immigration reform that isn't based on"...
"regulations not to represent the view of"...

I didn't ask what the laws should NOT look like, I asked what they SHOULD look like.

"Since the rich have benefited greatly from globalization, they should pay a bit more to mitigate the effects"

Good luck with making such a law pass.

If there's more to Trump's candidacy, then why wouldn't you want to let things go further? If he's more than just odd tangerine suntan and weird haircut, wouldn't you want him to actually become your president?

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

"If there's more to Trump's candidacy, then why wouldn't you want to let things go further?"

Just because he's hitting on some real issues doesn't mean that he's fit to be president. There is a big difference between being not completely devoid of merits and being a good idea.

[dreamville-bg.livejournal.com]

Well of course he's not a complete imbecile. Nobody is in the world of politics.