Philosophical Vegan Forum

What do you guys here think about populism? I sort of have mixed feelings about it. There seems to be a lot of truth in what Keynes said that sensible economic policies are unlikely to be followed in a democratic society. People tend to vote for bad policies such as the minimum wage or rent ceilings because such policies are easy to understand, although they are very flawed. On the other hand, populism seems to be less of the two evils. People voting for leaders they can fully understand is still a lot better than people voting for leaders which they do not understand, which would, for example, ban dihydrogen monoxide. @Red seems to be strongly against populism, describing Donald Trump as a populist. I was wondering what others here thought about it.

From the definition I don't see anything inherently wrong with it

a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.

Trump and Bernie Sanders were both regarded as populists, but only Trump's form of populism was damaging, because half the things coming out of his mouth were inflammatory lies and the policies he advocated for were awful.

Avskum wrote: ↑Tue Nov 01, 2022 3:44 am From the definition I don't see anything inherently wrong with it

a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.

Trump and Bernie Sanders were both regarded as populists, but only Trump's form of populism was damaging, because half the things coming out of his mouth were inflammatory lies and the policies he advocated for were awful.

Populism, as far as I understand it, essentially means advocating policies which an average person can understand. Policies which make sense to an average person, not necessarily to the experts. Donald Trump banning Huawei and Zyxel basically only because they are Chinese perhaps makes sense to an average person, even though it makes no sense to a security researcher. And that can be quite damaging. But what makes you think Bernie Sanders'es policies will be less damaging? Bernie Sanders is advocating rent ceilings and minimum wage laws. If anything, that's more damaging than what Trump does.

Skimming the wiki on populism, it seems there are many different definitions, and some researchers seem to dislike the term because it can mean almost anything. It might just be useless

But what makes you think Bernie Sanders'es policies will be less damaging?

Because Trump's presidency was a disaster on every imaginable metric
-1 million dead from his awful COVID response. Almost 3 times as many deaths per capita compared to my country
-tax cuts to billionaires
-worsening race relations
-reversal of climate change efforts
-constantly feeding conspiracy theories and lies, leading to a radicalized fanbase and attempted overthrow of democracy
-lowest approval rating of any president since recording began

There's virtually zero chance Bernie would have done worse. He's basically advocating for policies that are already mainstream in (parts of) Europe and have shown to have good outcomes. He only looks radical from a U.S. point of view because their Overton window is shifted so far right. It's also pretty clear he's a good person who actually cares about others. Unlike Trump, who is a giant narcissistic asshole. This might not matter in theory, but in practice he has not been able to keep his horrible personality seperate from his job as president whatsoever.

Bernie Sanders is advocating rent ceilings and minimum wage laws

Yeah, and? Employers and landlords will suck as much blood as they possibly can get away with. The U.S. federal minimum wage is significantly lower than other developed countries, and they also have a Gini coefficient (associated with all sorts of bad things) about 50% higher. When only 3-4 companies own every sector, there's not necessarily competition that will keep worker productivity and wages more in line. Raising the minimum wage also has popular support, so let them run the experiment and see if employers will either reluctantly choose to pay more or move to China (they won't)

Avskum wrote:Skimming the wiki on populism, it seems there are many different definitions, and some researchers seem to dislike the term because it can mean almost anything.

OK, let's define it here as policies which make sense to an average person, regardless of whether they make sense to the experts. You know, like minimum wage or rent ceilings or banning Huawei in the name of security.

Avskum wrote:1 million dead from his awful COVID response. Almost 3 times as many deaths per capita compared to my country

You know, USA did not do so bad with COVID compared to other countries. I mean, it had 11% excess mortality in 2020. Compared to my country, that is Croatia, Croatia had 17% excess mortality in 2020. And that's in spite of the fact that the USA has significantly more commorbidities (meat consumption is significantly higher in the USA).
I am not sure what would be a good COVID response. If anything is obvious from the data, it's obvious that what governments do has little or no effect on the virus. That could be because what governments order has little effect on what people do. I mean, shutting down most businesses does not appear to result in people staying home. Despite of all the lockdowns and business shutdowns, the number of people who died in traffic accidents increased in 2020, rather than having decreased (as almost anybody would expect).
What does appear to help significantly with COVID is having a good health-care system. Sweden is known for having a good health-care system and it had only 2% excess mortality in 2020. A huge difference from Croatia (17% excess mortality in 2020) or the USA (11% excess mortality in 2020). And that's in spite of the fact (or maybe even partly because of the fact) of Sweden having no lockdown. Other Nordic countries are also known for having a good health-care system and they had negative excess mortality in 2020. And they also were rather liberal in their COVID response.

Avskum wrote:tax cuts to billionaires

Which are probably a good thing. No rich people means no jobs. Banks get the money from people who already have money, and with no rich people there would be no rich banks from which entreprenours can take the loans.

Avskum wrote:worsening race relations

I don't know what you are talking about.

Avskum wrote:reversal of climate change efforts

If you are talking about Paris Accord, that was basically an agreement to do nothing. Getting the US out of it makes no difference to climate. It's a scam to make people think world leaders care about climate. Denouncing it is probably a good thing.

Avskum wrote:constantly feeding conspiracy theories and lies

Well, that's unfortunate. But Bernie Sanders is also constantly lying about Norway being socialist. It's hard to tell what is more damaging.

Avskum wrote:lowest approval rating of any president since recording began

I don't know what you are talking about.

Avskum wrote:There's virtually zero chance Bernie would have done worse.

I have no idea what Bernie might have done had he were the president at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. My guess is that civil liberties would be even more damaged for little or no decrease in mortality, but, once again, it's hard to tell.

Avskum wrote:He's basically advocating for policies that are already mainstream in (parts of) Europe and have shown to have good outcomes.

Just... no.

Avskum wrote:It's also pretty clear he's a good person who actually cares about others.

I also think he has good intentions. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Avskum wrote:Unlike Trump, who is a giant narcissistic asshole.

I agree that Trump is probably mentally ill.

Avskum wrote: Employers and landlords will suck as much blood as they possibly can get away with.

I think basically all economists agree that rent ceilings are a bad policy. Now, about a minimum wage, it's slightly more complicated. Some economists think that job market is an oligopsony and that a small minimum wage can increase employment. But I think that basically no economist would agree that nation-wide 20$ minimum wage would be a good thing.