google.com, pub-6007374308804254, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
More

    One Way to Defend Populism


    There is a way and, I suggest, only one way to defend populism from a liberal viewpoint: it is to reject the populist concept of “the people.”

    Let the people be plural, that is, a collection of individuals. Let each individual be recognized as having a right to veto (at some contractual-constitutional level) any prohibition or mandate he (or she, of course) does not consent to. A fortiori, no subset of the people may use coercion against the individuals in another subset. It follows that the elite or the experts (“they”) or the politicians themselves may not legitimately boss people around. If populism is thus characterized, it is defendable from both a moral and an economic viewpoint as it would coincide with (classical) liberalism. Liberalism is about a negative veto right of each individual–at least as formalized by James Buchanan and Anthony de Jasay, but the paradigm runs deeper. Liberalism certainly and emphatically does not support an unrestricted positive right of some individuals, even a majority of them, to impose bans or mandates on individuals in the plural people.

    That is not how populism, in the standard meaning of the word, is defined and sold to the masses, that is, to a majority or a plurality of them. Populism requires the existence of “the people” singular (see, for example, Cass Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser, Populism: A Very Short Introduction [Oxford University Press, 2017] for the academically accepted definition, which is close to the one I assign to the populists). If “the people” (singular) does not exist as such, then populism is not possible; it is just a label that hides an interventionist, collectivist, and authoritarian ideology. (See my “The Impossibility of Populism,” The Independent Review, Summer 2021.)

    To be both internally consistent and compatible with liberalism, populism would have to take “the people” in the plural and liberal sense of “individuals,” with none more deserving of power over his fellows. It would not be “populism” anymore.

    ******************************

    The People in the populist sense, as an organism, by DALL-E



    Source link

    Recent Articles

    Ill-advised tax breaks are not healthy now or for the future

    Breadcrumb Trail LinksPersonal FinanceTaxesKim Moody: Proposed GST/HST holiday and the Working Canadians Rebate will have zero lingering benefitsPublished Nov 26, 2024  •  Last...

    How Republicans in Congress are trying to quietly privatize SNAP through the back door of disaster relief

    The country’s largest and most important government anti-hunger program faces a renewed threat as Congress returns from recess next week: privatization.   Congress needs...

    Home Insurance Dropped? Essential Steps to Reclaim Coverage

    Your home insurance can be dropped for a handful of reasons (and that list is getting longer and longer.) For homeowners, it’s a...

    Related Stories

    Leave A Reply

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here

    Stay on op - Ge the daily news in your inbox

    google.com, pub-6007374308804254, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0
    google.com, pub-6007374308804254, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0