Populism: definitions, characteristics, and contemporary movements

¶ … Populist Persuasion," Michael Kazin sees populism as a vehicle for the weak and disenfranchised common person to address and challenge the ruling elite. As such, Kazin views populism as an "impulse" that is at the very root of American democracy. Kazin's view of populism can be seen as an outgrowth of the democratic ideology of the American Revolution, as described by Wood. Kazin argues that populism has gradually moved from the political left to the right of the political spectrum. George W. Bush's current attempts at economic and moral populism give us a better understanding of Kazin's arguments. Finally, "All the King's Men" explores the relationship between populism and the corruption of the political system.

Kazin feels that populism is a more of an "impulse than an ideology," and that populism is the very language of democracy. He defines populism as a political language that regards "ordinary people as a noble assemblage" who are intent to remove wrongly appropriated power from the elite. He sees populism as "elastic and promiscuous," and rejects the idea that populism refers only to the mass movement that moved across the U.S. In the late 1800s. Further, Kazin rejects the definition of populism as anything that is popular, whether cultural or political (like Bruce Springsteen or the Rubik's Cube).

In "Radicalism of the American Revolution," Gordon Wood argues that the American Revolution was the force that unleashed social forces that transformed American Society between 1760 and 1820. Wood asserts that the American Revolution was "the most radical and far-reaching event in American history." He notes that the American Revolution was not a simple conservative movement to defend American rights in order to preserve the existing structure of society. Instead, Wood believes that the American Revolution was a radical change from the traditional order, to produce a society that was democratic and free, far beyond even in the insight or wishes of the founding fathers. Ultimately, he argues that he American Revolution sparked the politics of American liberal democracy, which are dominated by average individuals who pursue their own commercial interests.

Kazin's arguments are consistent with the idea that populism is an "impulse" that emerged from the Revolutionary period of U.S. history. When considered in the light of Wood's analysis that liberal democracy rose from the Revolution, it can easily be argued that Kazin's idea of an "elastic and promiscuous" populism grew from the same roots, and is in fact the same beast as Wood's conception of democracy. Certainly, if Kazin sees populism as a political impulse and language that frees the ordinary people form the tyranny of the elite, then it can be argued with some force that these democratic principles originated in the American Revolution as described by Wood.

Kazin argues that populism has moved from the left to the right in the American political spectrum since the time of the American Revolution. Kazin argues that this shift occurred around 1945, after the New Deal and World War II.

Kazin argues that moral concerns are at the root of this shift of the populist movement. Moral concerns have been an important part of the populist movement since its inception in the American Revolution. The Great Awakening, a major religious revival, brought new life American politics. During the American Revolution, religion justified opposition to the British, and allowing the common American to believe that revolution was justified by God. In the minds of many Americans at the time religion and patriotism were firmly connected (The Library of Congress).

Given the history of the moral basis of the populist movement, Kazin's assertion that moral concerns still drive the movement gains some credence. Kazin argues that during the New Great Depression populism became a more economic concern, as organized labor kept the economic basis of populism alive. However, after WWII Kazin argues that the right has espoused moral causes in order to build a majoritarian movement. This movement is strongly opposed to the secular elite, who they view as controlling the common person. As such, populism has shifted to the right in the American political spectrum.

In the light of Kazin's argument, President Bush can be seen as an embodiment of right-wing populism.

A major portion Bush's populist rhetoric seems to be rooted in economics rather than morality, in defiance of Kazin's assertion that morals underlie modern populism. Bush advocates understanding the economic market as a democracy that is opposed to the governmental control of taxes and regulations. In having a common enemy, the government, Bush's economic populism signals his sympathy to the common American.

Certainly, George W. Bush seems an unlikely person to espouse the populist agenda, as defined by Kazin. Bush was born a son of privilege, a man in many senses who was made as much by his father's status and reputation than by his own.

Given his privileged background, it is perhaps not surprising that Bush's populist economic rhetoric ultimately fails to be true populism, as defined by Kazin. Kazin sees "ordinary people as a noble assemblage" who fight against the elite. In contrast, Bush is the elite, and in fighting for the rights of a democratic and unhindered economy he in some ways defends the elite. It must be remembered that corporations most often do not have the best interests of the general public in mind. We only need to look at cases like Enron, the Nestle Infant Milk Formula case, and myriad examples of corporate damage to the environment and exploitation of workers as examples of the corporate world's disregard for the common individual.

However, Bush's populist rhetoric does include a persistent and overriding moral message, in agreement with Kazin's assertion that populism has moved to the right of the political spectrum. Bush and the Republican Party have spoken often and at length about moral issues, in an attempt to garner popular support. Bush has even moved this moral approach to the economic arena by taking a decidedly moral stance against the dubious accounting practices of companies like Enron. Bush has argued for greater accountability and a revision of the ethics that govern large companies. Clearly, this message is meant to garner popular support, and likely does reflect the views of the common people with regards to the recent financial and ethical misbehavior of large corporations in America.