Are Populists Made and Not Born? (also Kucinich vs Dean & faux populism)

[cryofan]

In this OpEdnews article, "Kucinich Supporters are Mad as hell and they won't take it anymore," Daniel Patrick Welch, a Kucinich backer answers a letter from a Dean backer; both writers use arguments familiar to most of us. The analysis of the Gore-Bush 2000 campaign dynamics are interesting. Here are some excerpts.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


At the time Gore was "out of money," as you say, he was something like 17 points behind Bush. The reason Gore won (both the popular vote and any legitimate florida recount) was because, as any observer can attest, he sharply changed his focus after the convention, running a populist, left-leaning campaign which steadily chipped away at Bush's lead--his lead and his bravado about a 300-electoral vote victory were not helped by his money--although his lawyers in Florida clearly were, where he outspent Gore 10-1 after the votes were cast. You have your own "pipe dream" (using your words): that a media driven candidate with one-quarter of Bush's money can win playing the same game. Pure fantasy.
....
Obviously I will have to beg to differ, again. Since you leapt immediately into the populist argument, I assume you concede my point that the last election was not won on money, but on a tough, progressive appeal. That being said, coattails are no more about money than the big picture--they had better not be. The longest coattails of all were FDRs, who, unless I am missing something, didn't appreciably outspend Hoover. The appeal you mention is genuine, but it is narrow. And your contention that Dean's candidacy is not media-driven is simply disingenuous. It must be nice, many of us have mused, to go door-to-door with a 100 mile an hour tailwind at your back. The anger is genuine, the solution comes second. The former can be tapped by any brave soul who dares to speak out: Gore, Kennedy, Byrd, and on and on.
....
The Democratic party in Vermont is in its current anemic state--squeezed between expanded Republicans and Greens--precisely because of this self-marginalizing focus Dean projects. The reason Clark is running up Dean's ass is because the "for the people" gag doesn't ring true on closer inspection (not, as the pundits might have you believe, because he's "too liberal.") real populists are stronger on NAFTA; those who really want to "pitch the corporate overlords" don't soft-pedal single payer health care. Candidates from a working class background understand that more poor kids get killed as the war drags on, and occupation is just as deadly.
.....
Reaching out to the untapped left electorate is our key to success, not the mushy middle the Republicans would trap us into. The last election was a center-left election, and there's potential that this one will be as well. Kucinich could easily be where Dean is now if misplaced fear didn't keep progressive activists clinging to his alleged 'coattails.' You have us mistaken as pie-eyed idealists and your own crowd as tough pragmatists. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's not that we refuse to suck it up and get on board with "someone who can win." We're sick of being bullied and patronized in that way. While you are entitled to your characterizations, we have our own. We think you are misreading history, misrepresenting Dean, and missing the greatest opportunity in a generation. We don't think Dean has a chance because he's running as something he's not-and enough people will see through it to skew the election. Shape-shifters play a dangerous game, and by definition have no coattails--where would you pin them?


more here:

http://www.opednews.com/welch0104_kucinich_supporters.htm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


What I find interesting about this article is whether the Gore surge after the convention had anything to do with his newly populist slant. As I recall, at the time the media played it up as faux populism, which I agreed with: Gore was never a populist (where was his plan for returning America to the days of true progressive taxation?). But if the columnist quoted above is right, and that even faux populism will win, and the people are ready for a populist--even a faux populist--where is our populist, faux, or otherwise?

The problem with 2004, as far as I am concerned, is that Kucinich is the only populist, and his campaign so far is totally hapless. He has allowed the media to successfully paint him as unelectable. Are any of the other candidates populists? No, I think it is clear they are not. So how did we get into this mess?

Here on DU, I have repeatedly used Dean's quotes from the past to show that he is clearly quite far from being a populist (see www.mylinuxisp.com/~cryofan/dean.html for proof). But the problem is, what are the other choices? Now that the race is probably headed for a near statistical tie between Dean, Gep, Clark, Kerry, and Edwards after Iowa, what are the populist choices? None?

Maybe by pushing Dean's anti-populist quotes from the past at him, we could force him to take a more populist stance, albeit a faux populist stance, especially on truly progressive taxation. Then if he gets elected, he might be a better president. And most interesting of all, if Dean is forced to adopt a more radical populist stance in order to counter his anti-populist quotes from the 90's, that might give him the win over Bush.

[Bread and Roses]

1. This is very interesting to me.

This says it all for me: "You have us mistaken as pie-eyed idealists and your own crowd as tough pragmatists. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's not that we refuse to suck it up and get on board with "someone who can win." We're sick of being bullied and patronized in that way. While you are entitled to your characterizations, we have our own. We think you are misreading history, misrepresenting Dean, and missing the greatest opportunity in a generation. We don't think Dean has a chance because he's running as something he's not-and enough people will see through it to skew the election."

{...say you want a revolution...how else?}

:yourock:

[blm]

2. Dean stepped all over Kucinich from the beginning.

He demagogued himself into the antiwar position when he was FOR use of force, robbing Kucinich of antiwar support and $$$$ that belonged to the REAL antiwar candidate, Kucinich.

[Bread and Roses]

6. I know it.

In case my 1st post wasn't clear, I apologize: I agree completely with you!

[LWolf]

3. Count on DPW to hold his own in that debate.

He has a couple of DU articles about Kucinich as well:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/07/07_fire.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/08/16_kucinich.html

(And a recent article about * :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/01/24_lose.html

[Iverson]

4. questions

"Maybe by pushing Dean's counter-populist quotes from the past at him, we could force him to take a more populist stance, especially on truly progressive taxation."

Why do this when, as your thread indicates, there's Kucinich?

"...Kucinich is the only populist, and his campaign so far is totally
hapless. He has allowed the media to successfully paint him as unelectable."

How can anyone stop the media from doing so? To say "allowed" suggests that Kucinich had some control over how the corporate media represents him, yet their hostility is public knowledge.

If we yearn for left wing populism but believe that we can't have it until mass media treats it sympathetically, won't we wait forever? 

[pop goes the weasel]

5. Good point

"If we yearn for left wing populism but believe that we can't have it until mass media treats it sympathetically, won't we wait forever?"

I think that is so true. I would love to see real progressives, especially Kucinich, be more aggressive in getting the word out. Waiting politely won't help.

There is an abandoned small slaughter house in my area. Obviously, it once handled local demand. How I would love to see Kucinich stand there and call for a return to local slaughter--a boost for local small ranchers and for meat-eaters concerned about where their meat comes from. What a surprise that would be to the media, who won't expect that from a vegan, even though it is part of his farm platform already. It would sure get the attention of the Independent Cattlemen, and in a positive way.

Creative campaigning will capture the attention of voters. That is one thing that Dean's candidacy has demonstrated. It has been as successful as it has been creative. All the candidates can learn by it--even Dean! I hold my breath hoping that Democrats across the country will resist the tendency to run a politics-as-usual middle-of-the-road campaign.

[snoochie]

8. Yes

"If we yearn for left wing populism but believe that we can't have it until mass media treats it sympathetically, won't we wait forever?"

Yes, we'll die knowing we've left our children to fight the battle we should have.

We cannot expect the media to suddenly cover Kucinich fairly. The opposite is true. If his support continues to increase, they will start attacking him with equal enthusiasm as they mock him with now.

If he gets the nomination, we will see savagery as we have never seen it before. The corporatocracy will behave just like the cornered beast it will have become, and I for one would pay for ringside seats to that deathmatch. :)

The Movement to elect Kucinich will not be televised. This will only happen door-to-door and person-to-person. But it's happening, just the same.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

7. this paragraph says it *all*

The Democratic party in Vermont is in its current anemic state--squeezed between expanded Republicans and Greens--precisely because of this self-marginalizing focus Dean projects. The reason Clark is running up Dean's ass is because the "for the people" gag doesn't ring true on closer inspection (not, as the pundits might have you believe, because he's "too liberal.") real populists are stronger on NAFTA; those who really want to "pitch the corporate overlords" don't soft-pedal single payer health care. Candidates from a working class background understand that more poor kids get killed as the war drags on, and occupation is just as deadly.

[Maddy McCall]

9. Dean is no populist. The last real populist movement in the US happened

in the late 19th century.

Read historian Lawrence Goodwin's books on populism. Dean is no populist.

[cryofan]

10. Yes, but could we force him to adopt populist language in hopes that...

...he would get elected because of it. and that he would be forced to govern in at least a somewhat populist manner?

[Maddy McCall]

11. No, the Republicans successfully coopted populist language in the 1970s

Here's what historian (liberal historian, by the way :-) ) Patricia Limerick says about it:

Quoting Kazan: "Populism is a language whose speakers conceive of ordinary people as a noble assemblage, not bonded narrowly by class, speakers who view their elite opponents as self-serving and undemocratic, speakers who seek to mobilize the people against the elite."

Now, claiming to speak for the vast majority of Americans, who work hard and love their country, is obviously an act of ventriloquism. Speaking for the American people is questionable since no one knows what the American people actually want to have said on their behalf, and it seems possible to me, probable to me, that the endless polls of our times may actually have made this even harder to figure out.

So, there’s a paradox: the people, many of those people who have spoken the language of populism, have been a fairly select group of public figures. Those who have spoken for the people could even be called, in some circumstances, maybe particularly the last forty years or so, by some definitions, an elite. Just an elite claiming to have a particular validating, legitimizing connection to the people themselves, and that is a paradox we’ll return to.

But, how surprisingly easy it is in American politics to denounce elites while being an elite; to denounce elites in order to lobby for elite interest.

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

http://www.cc.colorado.edu/academics/anniversary/Transcripts/LimerickTXT.htm

[DjTj]

12. Edwards...

...is at least using a lot of populist rhetoric...

Tax "wealth" not "work"

"Two Americas ... one for the wealthy and one for the rest of us."

"I need your help. YOU and I can change America."

[snoochie]

13. I've noticed that as well

It's good to hear, too. :)