Has “populism” arrived, again?
Has “populism” Arrived, Again?
When it comes to “populism” in our Sonoran Desert, I find myself with a political “twitch” when I have to consider, not the Sonoran Desert version, but the national version. And in this national version, “populism” has become the Conventional Wisdom by America’s elite and which reside in our national capitol. In this regard, two writers for the Washington Post, lay’s out this national version, and of course, fail to lay the foot prints for this behavior at the door steps of the Center for American Progress.
As such, here’s the ‘tag line, and as espoused by the writers, Philip Rucker and Dan Balz, with their article and titled, “Both parties agree: Economic mobility will be a defining theme in the 2016 election.” Further, the sub-headline reads as follows: “On the right and left, a search for a credible populist message.” And as such, my heart burn starts.
“You talk to any pollster, on the Democratic side or the Republican side, they’re in complete agreement on the idea that there has to be an economic populist message,” said Matthew Dowd, a top strategist for former president George W. Bush’s 2000 and 2004 campaigns. “Then it comes down to ‘Are there credible solutions and is there a credible candidate?’?”
“About 45 million Americans live at or below the poverty line, according to last fall’s census estimates, while the median household income in the United States in 2013 was just under $52,000. Adjusted for inflation, the median is 8 percent lower than it was in 2007, the last full year before the recession, and 11 percent below what it was in 2000.”
Now, much can be said regarding the definition of “populism” from the perspective currently held by the Right, and the same can be said by the Progressive on the Left, and yet, addressing the economic and financial stagnation experienced by the working age Middle Class, and where an approximate one-third of our Middle Class has disappeared since 2000, demonstrates that both the Republicans and Democrats are facing their political survivability, and the propagandistic rhetoric for “populism” isn’t going to empower Change, of any sort, and equally important, ‘fixing’ government agencies and bureaus, is not on anyone’s political agenda, since this ‘fixing’ will require greater expenditures, and if so, this means having to increase the dollar numbers into either the deficit or onto the national debt.
And that’s it in a nutshell.
Consequently, should Hillary Clinton mount a national campaign, and which seems quite likely, her populism and as created for her by the Center for American Progress, may prove to be helpful, but the end result, is that for our “long game” to continue, our Sonoran Desert “populism” begins within an approximate 10 years, and premised on our ongoing demographics and where today’s traditional “populism” will be quite different in both scope and size and further, where political violence will be neither tolerated nor condoned. And as such, we continue to practice our Self-Restraint.
In closing Rucker and Balz have cast Clinton for being on the Left, and yet our reality intrudes. To wit, we, the “racial and ethnics” and for being the majority of the Progressive Ameerica, are not going to define or designate Hillary Clinton for the Art of Becoming, or for being a Progressive. In short, she’s a conservative Democrat, writ large and small.
Note: Originally posted on the web site for the Chicano Veterans Organization