Showing posts with label populism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label populism. Show all posts

Sunday, November 4, 2018

Is Left-Wing Populism The Answer?



While I personally don't see anything on the horizon to resurrect the fortunes of the federal NDP, Avi Lewis thinks he has a winning strategy: embrace populism, something he thinks could galvanize Jagmeet Singh's leadership. The key, he says, is to keep things simple:
“Why go for something that you have to explain? What populism tells you is that there are simple truths about our economy that can be communicated with great power,” said Lewis, who co-authored the environmental and social democratic treatise, the Leap Manifesto, with his wife, author and activist Naomi Klein.
While populism today seems to be the purview of the extreme right, exemplified by Trump's presidency, it is important to remember that the left has had its own practitioners:
Jan-Werner Mueller, a politics professor at Princeton University, told the CBC last week that populists can come in different ideological shades, so long as they trade in a rhetoric of divisiveness that questions the legitimacy of those who don’t share their views. “It’s always about excluding others,” he said.

For that reason, Mueller considers Hugo Chavez, the late Venezuelan socialist strongman, a populist of the left. He doesn’t use the label for U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders and U.K. Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn — politicians who rail against inequalities perpetuated by unbridled capitalism, for instance, but who don’t necessarily vilify their opponents as illegitimate contenders for power.
According to David Laycock, a political science professor at Simon Fraser University, the essence of populism is the division it sees in society:
He said one of populism’s central tenets is an argument that the fundamental division in society is “between the people and some sinister elite.”

For right-wing leaders, that elite tends to be heavy-handed government bureaucrats, a media maligned as progressive and out of touch, or groups that benefit from the largesse of state handouts, Laycock said. On the left, it is the corporate elite or the wealthy few who abuse their power at the expense of the wider populace.

Laycock believes Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives are gently experimenting with populist messages, including recent statements about how the media is biased against their party. He said the NDP could do something similar with more aggressive arguments for distributing wealth or slashing subsidies to big corporations.
Michael Adams, president of the Environics Institute, questions the enthusiam wth which such an approach would be met, given how different we are from other countries:
Canadians are more likely to be union members than Americans, for instance, while people here have universal health care and more generous social programs than south of the border, he said. At a time of relatively robust economic growth and low unemployment, all this could dampen the prospects of a left populism about a corporate elite ripping off the general population.

Avi Lewis' idea is a provocative one, but I find myself made uneasy by the prospect of left-wing populism. While the right under Harper and Scheer have not been shy about 'dog-whistle politics,' all-too obvious attempts to manipulate and control their base, the suggestion that the same techniques can redound to the left's benefit suggests to me the adoption of the same kind of political cynicism that the other parties are all too happy to practise, a politics that, at its heart, sees the electorate, not as people to respect and lead, but rather to be exploited for the sole purpose of acquiring power.

We have surely had enough of that already.

Monday, October 1, 2018

Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Some Low-Hanging Fruit - UPDATED



Feeling singularly uninspired this morning, I offer a tidbit of the obvious: 'Ford Nation,' that much vaunted segment of the population that stands by their man no matter what, is under-educated and from lower-income backgrounds. Since I am not one of those that the Fords and their right-wing fellow travellers like to contemptuously characterize as 'the elites,' I will quickly add that those two facts do not in themselves qualify them for membership in the PSC (Profoundly Stupid Club). However, their unwavering support of the big boy and his brother, no matter what outrages they commit, no matter what levels of ridicule they invite upon the city of Toronto, perhaps does.

A story in this morning's Star reveals some interesting information about Ford Nation based on data from a poll conducted Nov. 7-11 by John Wright, senior vice president at Ipsos Public Affairs:

His first surprise was that Ford Nation — defined as those who will vote for Ford no matter what — for the most part don’t live in Etobicoke.

In fact, Ford only enjoys 16 per cent support in Etobicoke, the same level of backing he has downtown.

The mayor is most popular in York and East York, where 30 per cent of voters say they’d support him. Next comes Scarborough, with 27 per cent, and North York, with 22 per cent.

Perhaps the following facts speak for themselves:

- They are predominantly people with lower-income and lower education levels. Some 44 per cent of respondents who don’t have a high school diploma support Ford

- People who make less than $40,000 per year are twice as likely to be part of Ford Nation than those who make $100,000 or more

- Some 22 percent of respondents aged 18-34 still support Ford, as do 24 per cent of those over 55. Only 20 per cent of voters in the 35-44 age bracket support Ford.

The data clearly indicate that while support for Ford is not the exclusive domain of the young, the uneducated and the working poor, they do comprise the majority of his backers.

Draw what conclusions you will.

UPDATE: Jeffrey Simpson has an interesting piece in The Globe on the many contradictions inherent in Ford Nation's ongoing support of their idol.