Why Populism is Really Statism

Conservative Review ^ | 03/17/2016 | Mark Levin

[MLL]

On Thursday night, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin took on the rising tide of "populist nationalism" with a history lesson.

Populism, Levin explained, is really just progressivism. The populist movement in America was the forerunner of the progressive movement, and both populism and progressivism share the same disdain for constitutionalism that conservatives reject.

[nathanbedford]

What makes you think that he would be set on destroying the Bill of Rights?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3410272/posts?page=144#144

[WhoisAlanGreenspan?]

Bump for morning recap

[Poison Pill]

But according to your definition that makes Washington and Hamilton “marxists”. Adam Smith must have been too

Applying a late 19th century term to 18th century men isn't very usefull considering the the industrial revolution was a generation and a half removed from Washington, Hamilton and Smith.

Yes, tariffs funded the early government. In a mercantilist system that's really the only bullet you have.

[amihow]

The absolute fantasy world of the anti populists is amazing

Yes Progressivism took some populist ideas and bastardized them into big government and statism which populism rejects.

The idea that populism is mob rule is another bastardization of populist ideas such as consent of the governed.

Populism rejects the idea of welfare rather promoting self determination and hard work, grabbing power away from the rich and powerful and giving it to the people.

The cockroaches are showing their shine these days. When supposed Conservatives like Levin start this type of revisiontist propaganda color him corporatist.

[Mensius]

Patriotism is for the ignorant mob.

Really? I'm a patriot, make no mistake about that.

Read your earlier posts, you're either drunk or stupid.

[TTFlyer]

/s means “sarcasm.” It’s the lowest from of wit. But its even lower to miss it.

[DesertRhino]

“but no one is saying what the specific text of the existing deals is that’s caused what problem. I’m all ears if you want to explain it.”

In TPP the provisions that Congress may not pass a law that conflicts with the treaty, that’s one. That foreign companies can sue the US or State government if a law or policy has the effect of harming their profit. And that can be nearly anything.

[Zionist Conspirator]

“No wonder some of them support out-and-out Communist “nationalist” groups such as the Irish republican groups”

Said the Zionist. Ever hear of a kibbutz?

And you have made my point. Some "conservatives" think socialism is only bad when practiced or advocated by "inherently leftist" groups like Jews. If fine, upstanding white people want a Communist state for their own benefit, why, it's no one else's business!

PS: You must not have been here very long, or you would know that I am opposed to any secular form of government for Israel. I prefer a restoration of the original Biblical Theocracy.

[map]

“Trade protectionism is marxism, yes.”

Therefore the US was Marxist for most of its history, including the half century before the manifesto was published.

[Duchess47]

Just a guess, I think the first hundred years or so of this country, our government was pretty conservative. The government which was financed almost completely by tariffs.

[Pelham]

“That’s the issue for me. Levin is an idealogue, not a patriot. “

He seems to have become an ideologue. I was for Cruz before Trump appeared on the scene so I know why people like Cruz as their candidate. I’d still take him for my second choice, something I can’t say about any of the other Republicans who ran. But Mark is full-goose crazy in his animosity to Trump.

[Poison Pill]

Are you being sarcastic?

no

Karl Marx called for free trade.

Addressed the twice. Guess third times the charm... As a thoretical means to and end only. Which by the way did not work to bring about revolution. That was only accomplished by force. And after the Revolution do you think there is any free trade? Hell no!

[lonestar67]

Levin has a love affair with conservatism.

Say what you will— his love affair with conservatism has been of a greater length than Donald Trump’s.

Levin has all of his credibility.

we are still waiting for Trump and his supporters to prove theirs.

The values of Free Republic are clear.

how does Trump advance the values of Free Republic?

[DesertRhino]

No white people, and no Trump voters which are of many racial backgrounds, are pushing for Marxism.....Or equally evil theocracy.

[Zionist Conspirator]

“a central bank which most “populists” regard as part of a “Judaeo-Masonic-Communist conspiracy”

How nice of you to pigeonhole populists as conspiracy cranks. Did you poll them, or is this data of the Wild Assed Guess sort?

Okay. I went too far. But there are conspiracy cranks out there who call themselves "populists." I also realize that the word "populism" basically means the same thing as "democracy," which most anti-conspiracy people worship like an idol.

But you missed my point: if the Populists agree with Washington and Hamilton on the protective tariff, they disagree with them on everything else. And I don't think the original Populists were protectionists anyway.

[Poison Pill]

Were the Founding Fathers marxists

Is an apple an orange?

[nathanbedford]

You are absolutely correct, black robed tyranny is tyranny no less because it is erudite. There is nothing in the Constitution which says the Supreme Court shall pass on the constitutionality of these matters nor is there anything in the Constitution which makes the Supreme Court the sole arbiter of these social issues. To the contrary, as your reply points out, the power is within the People's House of Representatives in combination with the Senate to restrict the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and keep it away from these issues.

The fact is the political parties have not been able to overcome the inertia, the aura of rectitude to which the American people have been acculturated to defer. But I system is designed to act to correct error, rarely to avoided, and to correct error only when it reaches the threshold of the intolerable.

All of this mindless support for Donald Trump is part of the reaction to the elites, on the court and elsewhere, pushing us past that threshold. There are other, better ways to rectify a system that has lost its balance than with the imposition of a mountebank in charge of article 2.

[DesertRhino]

“I prefer a restoration of the original Biblical Theocracy”

Like King David? Get you killed so he can pork your wife?

[Mensius]

Which part of the deals is bad?

The part where they can (and do) impose tariffs upon incoming goods and we do not. It's not free.

The DC crowd has bought into the narrative that the USA is the "lucky" beneficiary instead of hard work and capitalism, a way of life, that has landed us as the voice of the free world. Lest we used to be.

And Yes, China fluctuates their currency to gain advantage. Who wouldn't.

Fire bad! Asshat

[wiley]

I will vote for Trump in the general. But there’s no doubt he’s a demagogue. Just a more tolerable one than Hitlery.