By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 on 25 August 2013
Edit Thread
fighter said:
sc94597 said:
fighter said:

Not when the elites are in charge of Change, duh

 

Obvious answer is obvious.

Except even then it is a plead for change, in which there exists no pandering to an elite. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populist

  • A supporter of Populism, a political philosophy urging social and political system change that favors "the people" over "the elites", or favors the common people over the rich and wealthy business owners.
It is quite "obivious" that populism is a reactionary philosophy to elitism. Of course, it could make a spectrum of its own, possibly. 


you seem unable to grasp the concept - allow me to illustrate with a little example : Europe

 

So - the European Union is making changes, wether it's the Commissions, the Parliament, the European Council, or the Council of Europe, it is consider the centralized elite that promotes change. Not a populist one. Nor a conservative. But a progressist change.

All populisms in Europe are opposed to the European Union at the moment, wther left wing or right wing.

 

Again and for the last time, where did you get that crap ?

Yet populism doesn't exist without change. There's no such thing as a "traditional populist."  This is not to say that all change is populist, just as not all individualism is anarchism. Look at the graph closely. Populism is right where it belongs. It has tendencies for change from elite-rule to common-rule and it's collectivist in nature. I got it from here, https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=559440050785797&set=a.136475973082209.25390.100001594221961&type=1&theater .