According to Merriam-Webster, a populist is someone who is, “a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people.” Historically, populist movements have gone beyond elevating the common man, and have condemned the institutions that make up the status quo. Today’s populists call themselves the Tea Party movement, and my gut tells me they are a different breed of populist.
The vast majority of Tea Party types are disaffected conservatives and libertarians. I know the Sarah Palins of the world want us all to believe there are as many frustrated Democrats and independents in the Tea Party crowd as there are angry Republicans and libertarian leaners. Nonsense. The Tea Party folks are for limited, constitutionally constrained government, minimal regulation, low taxes, and a minimum of bureaucracy. People who believe in that kind of stuff most likely have never met a Democrat.
But here is where it gets interesting. I don’t believe these people are anti-establishment, or anti-Ivy League education, or anti-bank, or anti-business. But they are against establishment types, Ivy League school graduates, bankers and businessmen who are able to stack the deck. Big businesses, big banks, and well-educated people are all fine and even virtuous, so long as they have to play by the same rules as the rest of us. Let the big bank, the big car company or the big brokerage house go down if it fails. Don’t allow Goldman Sachs to be a feeder system for the executive branch.
The 21st Century populist is not a Kansas farmer protecting agrarian interests, or a union member trying to “get his” from a Pittsburgh steel company. Today’s populist is simply saying that he/she wants a fair shot, and does not want to be taxed to pay off the moron who drove Bank of America into the ground. Seems reasonable to me.
