Why do populists appeal to the working classes?

[Julie4]

[nightdrot]

Populists don't necessarily appeal to the working classes. It is well to recall that populism is not a coherent ideology or political philosophy. It is rather a manifestation of cultural envy and resentment given a political expression.

In periods of tumult, when the working class feels insecure and that its' views cannot be expressed to any policy effect, populist sentiments will tend to take hold. However, in periods of comparative stability and prosperity, those feelings will subside and populism will tend to fall back into certain categories of academia and certain elites - the latter of whom believe that they can exploit it to political advantage.

Thus, for example, in the United States in the 1950s and 1980s, eras of cultural stability and economic prosperity, the working class aspired to actually what Americans call conservatism. There was a respect for established institutions and - as a famous headline in the 1980s put it - patriotism was back in fashion.

In periods of economic transition, however, populism tends to get greater force. Thus as the economy transitioned from an agricultural/mercantile base in the 19th century to a manufacturing and financial base, Willian Jennings Bryan and his populism took hold. The old working class was being displaced. They had been on the top of the heap and suddenly the rules changed and they no longer carried the political and cultural weight they once had. Thus, "You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold."

In the 1960s, populism became the province of the academic and college educated. A way for them to express their cultural resentments.

The current populist wave is born of the fact that the working class - the factory worker and the like - is being displaced as the economy transitions from a manufacturing/extractions base to a service/tech base. Suddenly, having a blue collar job - once seen as secure and respectable - no longer affords respectability or security. The resentment that follows giving energy to the current wave of populism.

Note though that this is circumstantial. Populism was strongest in rural areas and farmers in the 19th century. Among factory workers in the 20th. Again, it is an expression of cultural resentment and tends to be VERY flexible about policies and methods.

So the appeal of populism is circumstantial. (It is also cultural too. It tending to carry more weight in the USA, for example, than in the UK where traditions of aristocracy and deference tend to have some mitigating effects.) Yes, it does appeal to the working class - except when it does not.

[Julie4]

I agree, I just want to note that I talked about the working class, because it's probably a mistake on my part, but in France the two main populist candidates (Mélenchon and Marine le Pen) have a majority of people who come from the working class, and from farmers. Although I would add that Mélenchon also attracts a lot of the so-called decolonials etc.

For the record, France had a new populist candidate in the last presidential elections (Eric Zemmour, who modeled himself on Mr. Trump). His main campaign topic was Islam and what is called here the great replacement

[nightdrot]

Well, right now populism does appeal to the working class. Again, changes in the economy are producing resentments that populist appeals help to satiate.

For my part, I used American examples because I am obviously more familiar with them and I did not want to speculate on France as I don't follow it as closely. That said, given that France is facing the same technological, economic and demographic pressures as the USA and much of the rest of the West, I am not surprised that it is experiencing a populist wave.

(Oh, and by the way, immigration is also a big issue in the USA. Though in France, for reasons of geography, Islamic immigration is more the focus whereas in the USA it is more Hispanic and Asian immigration. Even then, it is not that immigration is not a legitimate concern, simply that populists tend to focus on it as a source of grievance.)

Anyhow, we seem to be in agreement on this one. As I say, in my case though I focused on the history of populism in the USA as I am more familiar with the historical and cultural contexts in which it has flourished and is flourishing,

[WhiteSteve]

Well, I guess I’d say that, populism isn’t a kind of political policy, it’s simply rhetoric. Whether you think it’s valid or not or somewhere in between, it’s always just rhetoric with no real plan of action, seemingly. It’s just like “you’re being fucked by the powers that be, and we’re gonna stop it!” Ok, but like…. how? Nevertheless, it’s telling people what they want to hear, and that probably is more effective than any other strategy.

[FreyaRed]

Populus means the people, a populist should represent interest of people. There is left and right populism. Left populism doesn't exist since two decades because socialist serve solely capitalist elites. ( Marx, Engels, Lenin and R. Luxemburg should shout in their graves ). Right wing populists pretend to care for the people (working class, single mothers... everyone doesn't belong to privileged/protected classes) but no populist ever cared for their useful tools. Currently right wing populist attempt to use disappointed people to take over governments
Populism is easy. You tell everyone they want to hear as long as you're member of politician opposition. If you win election, you betray everyone who supported you and you become same people hating government like all political options before you. Maybe with different color of ties.

[RavVid]

A lot of ways to take this question. In a democracy winning parties/candidates have to be popular to win.

But of course we are talking about a style of politics that is often tailored to the wotking classes. It is not surprising that if working class people see job competition from immigrants, they might wish to restrict immigration. Immigration might be quite beneficial to higher levels as gardeners, bay sitters etc,

During an Australian election with a populist party contending, I asked as many people I could if they thought there their vote mattered/counted.

Anyone who worked in an office thought their vote mattered/ counted.

Anyone who did not work in an off was quite sure there vote did not count/matter and were bitter about it.

When some one comes along that does reflect their views every body acts surprised.

[richardcory]

Lots of votes in the working classes. Also while working class people can be intelligent, they tend to be less educated and are less likely to see the same old tricks played on them again. Its easy to convince them that either socialism or unregulated free market are good ideas, because thy haven't seen how they failed in the past

[RyanEC]

That to me does seem the best course to change whatever political situation you wish to change.


I remember you said you don’t like populist figures in your country because they the democrats to simplify the problem and make other problems.


What do you believe the alternative should be?

[Julie4]

Let me give you an example, there are certain denunciation of problem that denounces for example Éric Zemmour which are true, for example on the immigration, count me among the people who wants a policy of immigration control and assimilationist, only the problem is that to accuse the immigrants of all the problem does not make a policy and honestly a policy of intelligent immigration can be a good thing for the society.

Another thing is that they tend to relay absurd conspiracy theories, and often in their criticism of the EU they are bad, because they are in the exaggeration and without nuance

Their foreign policies don't seem to me very good either, they are often pro Russian and of a primary anti American (that doesn't mean that all the critics are bad)

[RyanEC]

Do you mean the conspiracy theory about “the great replacement” because that to me seems to be a real problem. I think immigration needs to be stopped and people should be sent back to preserve the culture.

It does seem the situation with the Russo Ukraine war hurt Zemmour in the election.

I know American gets blame often.
I did notice while watching Thaïs D’Escufon’s videos that she often blames America for spreading woke ideologically in France, but then I answered a question about aligning with conservative Americans and she answered and said she considered that a proper course of action.

So it seems there is anti modern American culture but not necessarily anti America.

[Julie4]

Blaming America for societal problems in other countries is too simplistic and ignores the complexities of each country's unique history and culture. While it is true that American cultural exports can be influential in other countries, it is ultimately up to each society to decide how to interpret and embrace these influences. Regrettably Wokism has a lot of influence in newspapers etc.

For immigration, a controlled and assimilationist immigration is the solution. At least for France. I think it is a special case in the US

Moreover, believe me, many populists in France consider the USA as being responsible for a lot of misfortune in the world, etc. Of course they ignore the complexity of history. Of course they ignore the complexity of history. But I have to admit that some things like the extraterritoriality of the American law annoy me deeply but at the same time the USA like all nations defend their interests

[RyanEC]

I understand what you’re saying but I would understand blaming our political and media elites.

I know there is a lot of negative cultural influence from my country that ends up in your country and every other western nation.
I know mass protests happened in Paris in reaction to the George Floyd event in 2020.

And Hollywood pushes a lot of bad stuff as well.

I wish there populist figures in your country would make it clear they don’t like the American elite and not Americans as a whole.

[EpicSnail]

Because the more technocratic, pragmatic, serious, and well-meaning parties tend to be made up of people who are not working class, so they have lost touch.

Gotta love the way "conservatives" did a 180 and started trashing their own legacy of voting against the working class. Except they didn't own their past deeds, they pretended it was "neoliberals" who did it.

[Dargil]

Populists value their individual rights and interests before outsiders. We don't care about Coastal Elites or Illegals flooding across the southern border. Should we?

[Cubus]

Not really anymore.

Populist emerged as a left-wing movement that was to help working class. Nowadays left wing doesn't care about working class, instead focusing on big city intellectuals.

[DextroShade]

They are appealing because globohomo elites in parties like the Democrats have destroyed the livelihoods of working people and called them privileged bigots when they complained about it. Also, most of them don't want their kids transed.

[EpicSnail]

Who told you that shit? Unfathomably wealthy heir Tucker Carlson? What a joke.

[Guanfei]

Because workers are the first victims of the globalist ideologies. Mass immigration, erasure of nations and cultures, competing with other countries who haven't the same working standards and costs as theirs.

[Sargentcaptain]

Because they need the working class' votes.

[AngryCarl2]

Because the "working class" are dumb enough to fall for their bs.

[Astarlessnightsky]

Lots of people = lots of votes