Alistair - it really isn’t hard to understand: people feel betrayed by established political parties who don’t listen, who believe they occupy the moral and intellectual high ground whilst having absolutely NO understanding of what “ordinary “ people are thinking and using their power to feather their own nest. Simple
Just after Trump won Jessica Tarlov who does a podcast with Scott Galloway pointed out a an interview with someone who voted for Trump and they said something like "Yes we know Trump says crazy things, but crazy doesn't look down on me" and that goes straight to your point. Remember the scene when Obama chastised African American men for NOT supporting Kamala Harris - look how that worked out. As for Bill Clinton's remarks Just imagine if James Comey had kept quiet and Hilary had won. NOW IMAGINE how Trump and the GOP would have responded when the Russians released details of those emails. America would have been OVER by now.
That this is easy to say but put a dozen 'ordinary' people into the same room and they have a dozen different thoughts, all different from the established politicians but with no unity themselves. 'Feathering their own nest' is a problem but elected populist politicians are typically worse when they actually get into power.
"Populism is a term liberals use to describe the political blow back against the social disruption that their policies have created" - John Gray Inequality, Poverty, Crime, Aesthetics, Culture, Family. Inevitable
Well he would say that wouldn't he, being a self confessed Conservative Economist ! His statement is contentious at best, if not as glib as most of the populist soundbites!
Populists (left or right) are people who claim that only they can speak for all the people and that only they represent the people. In doing so, they stir up fears and prejudices. Populists pretend that there are always simple answers and solutions to even the most difficult problems.
As a police translator and occasionally a political interpreter, thank you so much for acknowledging interpreters! 🙂 It's an extremely hard and invisible job. Because you're employing so many neuron paths in your brain and switching between them very fast, your brain ends up feeling like it's boiling. And some people have the unfortunate habit of screaming at the interpreter instead of the person who is actually saying the nasty things, because it's the interpreter they're hearing the nasty things from. You're essentially doing customer service, psychology, theoretical linguistics, inter-cultural consulting, acting and official representation at the same time. For me, one of the hardest things is totally suppressing my personality. As to the vetting: I interpreted at a couple of embassy events and political meetings of region representatives. I wasn't vetted at all because there's like 2 or 3 of us in the country with that language combination, they were just glad to have found an interpreter 🙂
If you want to understand the rise of populism, you have to begin by acknowledging the role played by the application of neoliberal economic ideology to human life over the course of the last 40-plus years - an application that has been embraced by both sides of politics, and which is therefore not a question of "left" or "right", but of the totalizing impact which this application has had on people's lives. As Thomas Piketty and his colleagues have clearly demonstrated, under neoliberalism, the economic equalizing of the post-war Keynesian consensus has been catastrophically reversed, so that both income and wealth resources have been distributed away from the middle and working class and toward economic elites. At the same time, the middle and working class have been sold the false dream that if they work hard enough for long enough they will be able to secure their economic future - a dream that has proven demonstrably untrue as the middle class has been hollowed out and the working class have been plunged into poverty and marginalization. This despite the fact that productivity has increased exponentially from 1980 onwards. In other words, the middle and working classes have lived up to their side of the "bargain" imposed upon them by the political class and the corporatocracy; but instead of the promised matching of productivity to increases in incomes and living standards, they have been forced into insecure, fractured, low-paying part-time, casual, franchised and “gig economy” work characterized by a loss of control over hours, the availability of work, the safety of working conditions, the regularity of wages, the prospects for economic security and the increase in severity and intrusiveness of managerial control over their lives. At the same time, the corporatocracy - the owners of IT capital, the class of "super managers", and the inheritors of wealth - have seen vast inflows of income and wealth resources through dividend returns, tax loopholes, and only having to expose a tiny fraction of their wealth to the vagaries of the market in order to earn returns on investment higher than the overall rate of economic growth. Populism in the form of Le Pen, Farage, and Trump has thus arisen as consciousness of the betrayal that operates at the heart of neoliberal economic ideology has fueled widespread public anger and demands for change. A populist is therefore someone who reads this public mood and articulates its grievances - even if, like Trump and Farage, they are part of the privileged status quo and have no intention whatsoever of changing its fundamental characteristics. Instead, they redirect that anger toward "soft" targets like immigrants and welfare recipients, thereby disguising their duplicity and enabling the political class and commentariat to write off the supporters of Trump, Le Pen, Farage, etc as "rednecks" and "racists", instead of acknowledging the legitimate grievances that reside at the core of populist sentiment. Populism is thus the betrayal-in-waiting that has emerged from the betrayal-that-is we call neoliberal economic ideology and the devastating impact of its totalizing capture of human existence.
Totally agree. See also, the rapid rise of promotion of authoritarianism among billionaires, which is a consequence of the neoliberal establishment's own instinctive understanding that their economic illusion is no longer sustainable, thus they must co-opt the political system itself, in order to hold on to their position. Neoliberal economics is essentially feudal in nature, so we should not be surprised, that it's a system that ultimately produces tyrants.
They also have fair resentment against mass immigration particularly after they effectively voted against it in 2016 and then again in 2019 and then got the huge wave of third world migration since 2020 that even the most liberal economists have admitted has been terrible for the economy,
Sadly your view reads as conspiratorial nonsense that is somehow even more ignorant then Stewart and Campbell, I’d suggest try getting out of your liberal metropolitan bubble once in a while and talking to ‘populists’
I think it's quite simple: Populism is a response to elitism. Populists may not have the right answers. But they at least acknowledge the concerns of the electorate.
Enjoyed very much the discussion about interpreters and their very important role. In the early 2000’s in Dublin I had the pleasure of seeing Mikhail Gorbachev’s personal interpreter, the brilliant Pavel Palazhchenko, in action. At a later engagement during his visit, Gorbachev arrived at the hotel but Palazhchenko wasn’t with him. Our Minister was very keen to speak with Gorbachev, and I was called upon to ‘do the necessary’. I’m a fluent Russian speaker, but only then did I fully understand the immense skill and ability of professional interpreters. I managed to get through it, and in the process realised how important it is to differentiate between ‘intelligence’ and ‘wisdom’ - I caught it, but only just! Massive respect to all interpreters out there who will know these things.
As a translator and interpreter - thank you so much! Interpreters are supposed to be invisible, and so, we often are. And yet, a good interpreter can help create a dialogue so much. I interpreted at a meeting between representatives of two regions in different countries, and as they were able to speak both English and revert to their mother tongues with my help if necessary - and because I was cheeky enough to add a little smile or explanation here and there - totally unplanned brainstorming started to happen, and it looks like the children in my region will have much better and healthier school lunches! Very symbolic, too, as my niece was being born when the brainstorming was happening 🙂 As to the exhaustion: Totally confirm that, after a few hours you feel like your brain is boiling! You just come home, lie down and can't move because your brain isn't able to give commands to your legs.
@ Thank you very much for your comment. It’s really amazing how much the orator assumes - ah, yes, the interpreter will understand everything about everything! In order to do a good job the interpreter needs to be briefed as soon as possible in order to prepare for the job and check any specialist vocabulary that may be required. I’ve often seen interpreters intimidated by cultural differences who try and ‘soften’ what is said to avoid conflict and keep discussions going. For example: ‘Tell him if he doesn’t agree then I’m leaving the room immediately’ magically becomes ‘The Director hasn’t fully understood your position on this matter and respectfully asks you to clarify it.’ Really! 😆 But is the interpreter’s role to be a peacemaker? In any case, I take my hat off to all interpreters and translators who do vital and very sensitive work. My best wishes to you.
The intellectual left has always despised the working classes in reality, and idealised them in theory. I guess that’s because they’re mostly middle class.
But they're NOT the so - called ''left'' but instead ONLY overwhelmingly university educated & very well off white, middle class, illiberal liberals, who are COMPLETELY cossetted & protected from ALL the negative impacts of the likes of mass uncontrolled & mass unskilled immigration for example, & so yes of course, they COMPLETELY loathe & despise the mostly white working class who had the barefaced cheek & effrontery to vote that the UK left the EU & of course, not forgetting that the completely London centric Liebour Party with Granny Harmer Sausages Starmer at the helm, similarly COMPLETELY loathes & despises them & will he actually make it to July 2029 & the next General Election ?????????
Embery is a Strasserite who has a record of prioritising division by race and ethnicity over class solidarity and tackling inequality. We saw this when he teamed up with "the modern Left" (which he describes as economically liberal so by definition not left wing in any meaningful sense) types like Campbell and Stewart to viciously attack the only socialist Labour leader for half a century who actually stand against the billionaires and inequality, rather than being in their pockets. In my books he's a a grifter who teams up with the establishment when it suits him - whether that be billionaire-funded centrists as I described above, or billionaire-funded right wingers like Farage or Johnson when he wants to blame poverty-stricken immigrants for the problems we face.
Rory's insistence that Campbell has some instinct that could reach young men is thoroughly baseless. Campbell comes across as a snooty arsehole peering over his glasses while he expects respect for being relevant 30 years ago. He's completely detached from the lives of young men in the UK today.
17% of British youth (18-24) polled voted right-wing (Reform and Conservatives) in 2024. This is a decrease from 22% of 18-24 voting right-wing in 2019. This is a decrease from 35% of 18-24 voting right-wing (Conservatives and UKIP) in 2015. Greens and Lib Dems got 34% of British youth vote in 2024. Highest proportion of the youth vote ever.
@dgb916 Thanks - yes I heard that. The challenge is that an out of touch white middle class old fart attempts to understand why so many are attracted to what appear to be right wing ideological positions.
You, Alistair, don't understand the importance of immigration, and the way legal migration is conflated with 'the boats'. The issue is insane levels of migration, not a lack of compassion for people who NEED to be here. You just don't get it. English urban communities are changing at a rate people are uncomfortable with; we were already very diverse, but we're now full (or feeling 'full') of people not from here. In my east Sheffield estate, we have huge numbers of sub saharan African people. They aren't asylum seekers, they have legally migrated here, but we never agreed to such rapid and profound demographic change.
This is exactly what it is. 40% of the current population of London is foreign born. That is a staggering number. I could go on and on but it speaks for itself. What I am most frustrated over is how entitled those 40% feel that they should be there versus British working classes who have had ancestors living, working, fighting in world wars, and paying tax to this country for millennia, and are undermined by this moral agenda to appease immigrants incessantly.
@@fortynicks5576 How many of those 40% are working in the city, brought in from European countries and the US to service the financial or medical sector? Compared to the US we have very few Homeless, so the people you're complaining about are working and paying taxes, most likely on the social infrastructure: shop workers, baristas, bin men, nurses. Most 'traditional' Londoners who were unable to afford to buy housing have moved out, but people didn't seem upset when "gentrification" made those god-awful tower blocks attractive places to live. Affordable housing? How much of that is about despite it apparently being in the development contracts? Oh, and please, let's not pretend that disliking anyone different to you is a new thing in London. Battle of Brick Lane comes straight to mind, then some people hated Caribbean peoples coming here. But then they were all ok, so folks moved on to disliking people from the Indian subcontinent. I grew up in the London suburbs in a heavily bombed area among very much working class people. But you couldn't hope to afford to buy our old house. Houses like ours are half a million quid now.
Exactly the same thing has also happened in the US, Canada, New Zealand and no doubt other countries which I don't know as well. I'm referring to legal, deliberately "planned" immigration. Much of this is driven by perceived labour shortages due to rapidly declining birthrates, and economies which have more and more incorporated and depend on increasing inequality. Only immigration can keep down wages and provide the low skilled labour needed by the de-industrialising service economy and inverting demographic pyramid. I grew up in what was then perhaps the most egalitarian society in the world, New Zealand in the 1950's and '60's. There were very few restaurants and fast food outlets. Shops were closed on both Saturday and Sunday, and open after 5pm only on Fridays (to 8pm). Only a quarter of women worked outside the home... though psychiatric hospitals were bulging with suburban housewife patients. There was no homelessness, begging was outlawed. Poorer families lived in State houses on quarter-acre lots... There was some immigration, mainly of post-WWII DP's from Europe (like my family), but integration was natural. The present precarious economy, with Uber-this and i-that delivery guys zipping around all over the place, was unimaginable... it was a do-it-yourself society, with very active sports clubs and cultural activities. The point of my digression is that the desired more equal society has to be much more of a DIY society, with fewer and more expensive goods and far fewer non-essential services. A much greater degree of voluntary cooperation and getting together is required to make life meaningful... individuals with faces planted alone in screens won't do it. And now even the essential services become scarce for lack of hands, just as the need for them is exploding (medical, elder care, etc.)... the widespread move toward normalising "euthanasia" has a very dark side to it which is not discussed.
@@davebox588 28% are born in non-EU countries. 0.8% Americans if you were curious. 7.1% from Africa. 13% from Asia. 12% from Europe, within that a negligible 3.7% from Western Europe. Frankly it doesn’t make a difference to me if these people are working. I would rather we prioritise the British working class over migrants with no skin in the game. I’d prefer Americans & Western Europeans just over cultural similarity anyways. In any case it’s 3.5 million people. It’s too many.
@@fortynicks5576 I list further down 27 British MPs not born in the UK, one was PM and another chancellor. I'm sure that if you contacted their political offices they'll answer why they have "no skin in the game". Please, PLEASE can I sit in on the call when you tell Olukemi (Kemi) Badenoch that she should bugger off back to Nigeria. Her mother arrived from Nigeria shortly before Kemi's birth, then took her straight back to Nigeria where Kemi was raised. She didn't return to the UK until she was 16. During her parliamentary maiden speech Badenoch stated that she was "to all intents and purposes a first-generation immigrant". She has also said that she didn't realise she had a right to British citizenship until she was 14. Now, I disagree with her politics, but I have no doubt she's been through hardship, studied and worked hard, and contributes to this country. Just that she is yet another indication that your assertion that people coming here from abroad have "no skin in the game" is demonstrably false. So here you go. British MPs whom we can infer you don't approve of because they weren't born here: Boris Johnson Nadhim Zahawi Tobias Ellwood Greg Hands Rehman Chishti Afzal Khan Khalid Mahmood Yasmin Qureshi Deidre Brock Marcus Fysh Catherine West Crispin Blunt Mark Field Wera Hobhouse Peter Hain Stephen Lloyd Alok Sharma Virendra Sharma Keith Vaz Valerie Vaz Nia Griffith Paul Beresford Rushanara Ali Margaret Hodge Daniel Kawczynski Rory Stewart Shailesh Vara
Alastair saying he doesn't understand the appeal of Trump or Garage and Rory saying Badenoch will be a good leader just tells you how out of touch these two are.
I agree, as already mentioned by one of the readers - Rorys and A.C current reasonings could be off track on many things now, and they are both going to have to work seriously hard to recalibrate their thinkings to understand the title of this podcast
I think that he understands the appeal of Trump and Garage very well. It's why so many seemingly intelligent people are taken in by the rhetoric that he finds difficult.
The NeoLib apologists. They've never had to use a food bank, or had a student debt they couldn't handle. They're not in a flatshare in their thirties. They lead golden, privileged lives, and have nothing to add to the debate any more.
Thinking about populism, the visible lack of understanding by the current political leadership and metropolitan elite of populism's appeal only, to me anyway, underlines the seemingly increasingly disconnect between the elected and the electorate. If the electorate perceives it's needs and desires are being met on the whole there is simply no space, let alone appetite for what the populists are selling. Disparaging populists is attacking the symptom rather than addressing the root cause.
Caroline Lucas talked to them about that. Her book is all about going out and talking to people about why they voted for Brexit, and actually listening and learning from it. Very interesting.
Yes, I think what I am about to say fits with your assessment. On the surface ‘populism’ seems good and positive as according to a dictionary definition ‘it is grass roots democracy, working class activism, egalitarianism’. It is a reaction to the status quo where as you suggest the metropolitan elite are not interested on what the general populace is thinking. This would strike a chord with Alistair Campbell and his wish to speak to young men in particular about what and why they are thinking. I don’t think populists have anything to ‘sell’, it’s just that they do not agree with the current direction the country is moving in. Donald Trump wants to put tariffs on imported goods and bring back industry from Asia to the USA, which on the surface seems like to a good idea to improve employment in the USA, but as has been proved countless times this will have a negative effect as American industry may rely on a small part or service that is generated overseas. Also the tariff is passed in to the American consumer so it is counter-productive. However, the reasoning behind the imposition of tariffs has not gone away.
i disagree, the people who vote for farage and his ilk have been taught that their worst predjudices are allowed to be voiced in public now, after years of them being scared to do it as we slowly managed to teach how wrong those predjudices are and get rid of them. the tories playing up to more and more racist tropes as theirpopularity waned had this effect.
@@jamesratcliffe8470 which dictionary defines Populism like that, please? Most of the definitions I am finding are more along these lines: “a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.” Ernesto Laclau’s post-Marxist “force for emancipation” definition doesn’t apply to Nigel Farage, surely, however he would like to spin it? He is an opportunist. And he has plenty to sell… Himself mainly, and the chaos of discord. Because that’s where the money is to be made. Reform is a business, with Richard Tice the principal investor and Nigel Farage the majority share holder. Surely, just as Trump is, they are making personal fortunes by fomenting division, amplifying the message of “them” and “us”? “What we are hearing on the doorstep” are lots of things which grew from seeds they sowed. And then they pretty quickly duck beneath the parapet and abdicate or pass the buck for the violence they inspire. This type of Right wing Populism is effective because it amplifies people’s fears, and delivers them scapegoats. It’s in no way egalitarian, is not a “force for good” for anyone but themselves, and it emancipates no-one, except the people who run it - how are they not an “elite”, by this token? “Free speech”? Lee Anderson is the first to complain and threaten when someone says something he doesn’t like, delicate flower that he is. They don’t want people to be free to say whatever they want - they want to be free themselves to say whatever it takes to make people fight each other. There’s a difference between genuinely listening to people’s upset and differences and resolving to understand and help (Caroline Lucas), and legitimising bigotry. The Send Them Back Where They Came From brigade want us all to look at immigration while they quietly milk the system they profess to want to break for all it’s worth. And if anyone catches them at it, they justify it by saying “everyone in politics does it”. “Don’t look at me, look at THEM”. Understanding why people are afraid, why the discontent is there to be fomented in the first place, and addressing it, is vital. But so is challenging people who tell those who are genuinely suffering that the reason for all their woes is that some people live in much more dangerous places than here and are prepared to risk their lives to escape. Or that a newly elected government which hasn’t been able to enact its entire manifesto in the first six months is as useless and broken as the succession of ambitious, self-promoting, bickering and acquisitive disasters masquerading as governments which have preceded it for most of the previous decade. The weirdness of it is that being popular, of itself, is more important than what someone is popular FOR. Welcome to internet politics by shocks and clicks, and “likes” you can purchase, and thus encourage more exposure and more “likes” - “popularity” is very lucrative, however you procure it. At my kids’ schools, the last friendship group anyone with any self respect wants to be in is the “popular” one - it’s the one where all the vacuous bullies hang out, and they invariably all hate each other, often more than they hate everyone else although it’s a close run thing. Unfortunately it seems that, for the moment, the older bullies are on to something profitable. They are certainly enterprising, I’ll give them that.
All you need to understand populism is that it is fueled by anger. There were/are Pakistani Muslims rape gangs across the country which were covered up in the national dialogue but which local people experienced first hand. Indeed for a long time the phenomenon of people speaking out was treated as a 'moral panic'. This drives people mad. And there are many such examples. Start from there. But of course the hosts here, and most people in front of microphones, live in completely different realities and circles - I doubt they would be able to relate. And, actually, this podcast is interesting to me (and to others) exactly because of the high class/ cocktail class that the hosts are a part of. The casual references to holidays, to gardens, to attending plays, to meeting this or that important person, all the luxury beliefs. These are the reasons why we watch - but also why we know that they tend to be wrong and out of touch.
I agree that Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart have different backgrounds, lifestyles and expectations than most of us. But as far as I can tell, they truly are good people who try to do the best they can in their lives. I have followed Rory Stewart somewhat through the years, and I always got the impression of an exceedingly decent, intelligent, well-meaning, nerdy and hardworking human being. Someone also able to see and acknowledge his own shortcomings, which is rare among human beings. The kind of person that I would love to welcome as a friend and I would trust to handle my affairs and listen to me. Compare that to Donald Trump or Elon Musk, who have become tribunes of "the people". They are billionaires (and are far more removed from you or I than Alistair Campbell or Rory Stewart), clearly manipulative, eager to spread halftruths and lies, and happy to hurt other people. They are anti-Rory Stewarts. About the rape gangs, I don't believe for a moment that Elon Musk cares about the girls and women who were abused, even though he restarted the conversation. He simply wants to use them (abuse them) to further his own political desires. The reason why I believe this is simple: Musk helped Andrew Tate to get his new political party reinstated on X. And if anyone abuses women and treats them like dirt, it is Andrew Tate. Tate manipulated women into becoming sex workers and proclaims the gospel of seeing women like property. If you are with Andrew Tate, you do not respect girls and women. Nor does Donald Trump care about people like these girls and women. I base this on how he treats people in his own life. He has a long history of shafting suppliers, customers (Trump University), the tax authorities (Trump's charity was a vehicle for tax-dodging). He cheated on all his wives. He has a history of sexually abusing women. He literally abandoned his own VP when protesters were chanting "Hang Mike Pence!". This is the tragedy of so much of populism: there is the conceit, the lie, that populists care about you, cloaked in attractive language and gestures. There is a scene in the first Gladiator movie. Derek Jacobi plays a senator, one who sees the danger in the deeply disturbed Emperor Commodus and how Commodus uses populist tools to remain popular. In a conversation with a fellow senator he describes how he sees himself: "I do not pretend to be a man of the people. But I hope to be a man for the people." This is what I hope and look for in people who may lead: decency and sincerity. Not a man of the people, but a man for the people. In my book, Rory Stewart is such a man (and I think Alistair Campbell as well). Donald Trump and Elon Musk are not. There is one point in this discussion that shows the humanity in Rory Stewart very well. If you can, go to 28:20 and listen for about 35 seconds. This is Rory Stewart giving an example of why international aid is important and why MAGA's dreams of ending such international aid would be so lethal for countless people. Listen to what Rory Stewart says and then just try and imagine Donald Trump or Elon Musk being there where that aid was being distributed, seeing that dead baby, and talking about it like Rory Stewart does. Respect for your position and take. I do not proclaim to be all-knowing. But I did want to share my perspective with you. I hope you can appreciate it. All the best!
Alastair - I am glad you are going to focus your energies on understanding why people are feeling disenchanted and voting for popularism. Until the ‘establishment’ understands how people are feeling, things will only get worse. Labour and Conservatives are too far removed from reality and no one is putting forwards policies which the majority of people identify with, or will bring about the change people want. Politicians seem to think they are on the moral high ground and that ‘we’ are all wrong or uneducated or misinformed. Until this attitude changes, nothing will change and only get worse. Please do give your attention to this and get people to listen. Thank you
To understand populism or to understand why our establishment politicians have failed the people so much, the electorate no longer trusts them. But then politicians have never been good at understanding those they represent.
Rory, sorry to break this to you but the Conservative Party is finished. Alistair, Starmer didnt win the election, Rishi catastrophically lost the election.
Going to let myself go on an un apologetic rant here (to vent my own frustration at no one in particular, with no expectation anyone is listening) and at the same time have a go at the answer to "understanding the rise of populism" from a working class persons point of view. (TLDR; Inequality = anger = fuck the lot of you, burn it down) All the progress that has been made financially and technologically in the recent decades has been at the expense of massive externalisations (in the economic definition) These externalisations undermine our environments, our social cohesion, focus and attention, sense of meaning, whilst driving unchecked meaningless consumption. This fact has hardly been considered in government policy or taxation policy and does not show up in GDP or any other government metric (sub-text - economists should not make political policy) These externalisations have driven wealth in to the hands of a smaller and smaller of a percentage of people as i's been extracted (bled from) the general populace and the global commons. As a result people's quality of life (even if not quantity of life) has become vicerally worse, even if all the metrics in the world point to the opposite. This makes people "feel" worse, and this isn't something that can be articulated by everyone, they just know it because they feel it. And it IS REAL, not just something created by social media, populists or the press. The worse people feel, the less thinking they do and the more they'll be drawn to populist arguments which appeal to their anger. and even before this fact, most people just want to get on with their lives and not have to "think" about the world too much. They want to feel safe, secure, valued and connected. The belief that people just need convincing of nuanced arguments and they'll "see the light", or that they're just not smart enough to get it (a.k.a the explanation for Brexit) is more than short sighted, it's dangerously arrogant (a.k.a elitism) As for populism, post-modernism, again oversimplified, is right in sense that there is no "single narrative" but it doesn't take enough heed of the fact that people must organise around simple unifying narratives, whilst this might be inconvenient, it's largely inescapable. You NEED a simple, unifying narrative for the culture to be coherent (mitigated slightly only if you design in, from the ground up, a philosophical education from young age, rather than the shallow "progressive activism" which seems to be our preference) Poople feel bad > they get angry > angry people are attracted to narratives that reflect their anger. Progressive politics, I think, get's something fundamentally wrong, that being it's possible to "think and debate" all the way to a stable culture across time. The higher order and hidden consequences of policy decisions are beyond what a human brain realistically comprehend, culture is a coding of unarticulated (and potentially inarticulateble) wisdom gained over generations. You might be able to argue that people's lives are better on paper, but if they feel worse, it's meaningless. Conservatism, in it's simplest form imo is "things can be a whole lot worse, it's far from perfect just now, but don't imagine you can start tinkering with things trying to 'do good' and not fuck them up completely, AND you're not even going to see how you did because you did it 2 generations ago" This might be shortened to - we've become much more "intelligent" a population at the direct expense of wisdom and meaning. Here's something that might start putting us in the right direction regarding inequality....once that's fixed, we might have some emotional space to take the wisdom and meaning bit... I think Starmer (who I don't rate) had the correct instinct when he went with the "we're fucked, it's going to take some hard work" narrative - the problem, IMO, is that what needs to come after that statement is beyond what the political class could stomach. (talking to you Angela "Everyone-Does-it" Rainer) How about this for a premise for a political party, or a political system, one that would beat populism.... Make politicians remuneration (not just the headline figure, but their taxation and wealth creation capacity in general) directly linked to the median wealth of the populace they govern. Make the prosperity of the political class directly linked to the prosperity of the people. This will require every side of every debate to make long term decisions for the benefit of all across time. Not only that, it would force the spread of wealth across the country and not focus it on big financial centres like London, AND it would make people double down on helping everyone get a leg up because any section of the population falling into poverty would impact the meidan wealth creating a laser focus to bring them back up. Politicians are just like everyone else, they'll be guided by some combination of self-interest and social moral duty (with varying ratios) - leverage the self-interest to the hilt. I can imagine someone has though of this somewhere before of course, and there are obvious issues that would need to be worked out, but in principle, make "we're all in this together" actually true and not just empty rhetoric. Rant over, I feel better now...for maybe a few minutes at least.
That's not a rant....that's a short book. But I suspect you are correct in a lot of what you wrote. People feel that life is changing too fast - it's out of control - and they want to put the brakes on things or even reverse them. So we end up voting for liars who say they can fix things. A plague on all your houses!
I so agree! We need to rant, to get it out there and I agree wholeheartedly with what you say. I feel the same way about Climate Change…and I’ve had a shorter rant in the same chat :-) To return to your points; I knew something terrible was going wrong when Thatcher came to power, legitimising greed and denying society and deifying the individual. That was a tipping point and we are where we are, in the mess that we are, because of her. And here’s the thing: people like Thatcher, Johnson, Truss, Farage, Trump et all are stupid; they don’t understand the human condition, they don’t understand the relationship between our species and the planet….all they can comprehend is ‘what’s in it for me’. The last 14 years have been a classic example of this; hollowing out local authorities, the NHS, the public sector, Water Authorities, Energy Companies, Public transport, Schools, Universities…the list is endless. And what does Labour do when it comes to power but stand in Number 10’s garden and say the wealthy must carry the weight (as if that will ever happen) and then take away the pensioners winter fuel allowance and the waspi women’s compensation :-( People will bleat about how some pensioners don’t need it but that’s not the point…the point is that they’ve demonstrated they don’t care; they do not understand how most people live. I live in a Band A tiny house but I pay nearly double what the occupant of a million pound house pays in Westminster. I can afford it; I can afford to keep my little house warm but the old lady across the road is struggling to do both because her pension is slightly higher than £139 a week and she’s been turned down for Pension Credit…she’s facing increased energy costs now and even higher ones in Spring, not to mention Council Tax bills and Anglian Water bills jumping up.
As the great statesman Paul Keating once said "Always back a horse called self interest, at least you know it's trying". Paul has a way with words! All tip and no iceberg being a favourite. Good idea can't see the current politicians and the two part system going for it.
Bertand Russell said "most people would rather die than think, in fact they do". This is why people are attracted by the extremes, where populism resides with its one line slogans which do not require reflection or analysis. Populists rely on tapping into people's emotions and prejudices. The centre ground is where the analysis and need to inform oneself is to be found. Here issues have to be weighed and assessed. Much too complicated for the majority of voters whose information comes from social media !
I am a conference interpreter in Brussels, and it has become impossible to do the job properly: the speed reading of speeches, which not even native speakers would be able to follow, AND the degree of degradation of the English language when used by non fluent English speakers is devastating….
Good grief. Its the Housing Market. The buracratic class have many houses like rory and Alister. Many of us have no houses. Labour are here to protect their own ie Alister with many houses. Labour will not build the 3 million houses that are necessary because this would bring house prices to normal multiples and destroy their wealth. This has to change and we need to find someone who will change the system.
Building houses is literally one of the main things this government has been talking about e.g. planning reform. It is a hard thing to do because of a slow, bureaucratic, and NIMBY culture. Lack the workers to build them, the ownership of the land to build them on, etc. It's not a conspiracy. There's so many more examples of elites not doing things in order to protect their wealth.
@@jacktrute4580 Even if by some miracle they build the 3 million new homes, that's roughly 600k a year, with net migration running at over 700k in the last year we wouldn't even be keeping pace. The borders need closing ASAP
@@jacktrute4580 Even if by some miracle they build the 3 million new homes, that's roughly 600k a year, with net migration running at over 700k in the last year we wouldn't even be keeping pace. The borders need closing ASAP
Alistair and Rory, it's quite simple: the issue is inequality. Politicians need to address the economic and political injustices that the majority of politicians seem unwilling to confront, which is why so many often support populist leaders. People back these populists, even though they know they won’t deliver on their promises because they are incredibly frustrated with politicians who take no effective action. Many politicians prioritise their financiers and focus on enriching themselves instead. Of course, nothing will change. It will just get worse.
Aussie here. Albo is doing it hard because he has done NOTHING since becoming PM. Love the podcast and really like both you guys and Mooch and Katty K. I am glad you want to understand voters on the far right more because you guys ARE removed and insulated from the political change that is happening throughout the West because you don't really understand how the average person is feeling, and I say that as a lefty myself. People don't feel the technocratic centrist politicians who sprout their success via celebrating an 1.1% increase in GDP or a 0.5% decrease in unemployment or any useless statistic you can think of, genuinely actually care about the person on the ground and how they are financially going backwards. The West needs REFORM (not the Reform party!). It needs money out of politics, it needs the big corporates brought to heal and it needs tax and financial reform. Young people need housing affordability. The centre won't provide this, the left is stuck in identity politics (I have to admit) and so people want the right to come in and tear it all down, because it isn't working anyway.
As a fellow lefty of the centrist kind, I agree, but part of the problem is that any criticism of the left elicits the "well, you're a fascist, then" response. The left was once the home of debate of both the intellectual and the "working man" varieties, but now it's the home of cancellation - deviate one inch from orthodoxy and you're cancelled. That's why we see people who used to be darlings of the left or centre left, like Rowling, now being called "far right" by left purists. Dare I say, even Trump and Musk were both lefties once, until the left basically decided they weren't pure enough - RFK Jnr is another case in point. The left creates the demons it then fears. Sometimes it's better to keep the mavericks inside the tent.
Another Aussie here - Unfortunately Albo is caught surrounded by a MORONIC pack of economists. I'm an engineer and can easily rip the LNP's nuclear plan to shreds its so absurd I'd sack any engineer who backed it. It really is that bad. The problem is the ALPs renewable plan isn't much better. In its current guise it just can't work. Its not that we can't have a very high percentage of the nation on renewables but it can't be done how they are doing it. Chris Bowen needs to either get rid of his advisors or just resign and get out of the way. The real problem is NOBODY will give any of the engineers who can do something any time. Just last week there was yet another news story on energy and they had 3 experts on. 2 from Think Tanks and one from AEMO and all 3 are economists. I have been trying for 8 years to get through to some of these people on BOTH SIDES and EVERY DOOR is guarded by a squad of economists. Economists across the world have made an utter mess of energy, infrastructure in general, education and health care. That's why COVID hit parts of the world so hard and why things like Italian bridges collapse. They see everyone else as problems they have to manage but they have NO IDEA how to manage anything and even less knowledge in the things they try to manage. Everything they touch turns to crap. Energy is just the most obvious one here in Australia, but make not mistake we have insanely serious issues in water, other infrastructure and health care. ALL OF IT because of ECONOMISTS.
Jee Wizz this is all shite. You blokes have no idea. Rowling a leftist elite? Elon a leftist enlist what the hell are you smoking. Rowling is a snob despite being known as socially left because she was poor and on welfare she never was socially left. Harry Potter was a such whiney teenage boy by the 4th book the female characters so underutilized... She was clearly not a progressive then and she certainly isn't now. In my opinion capitalism does not factor in proper compensation for parenting and other forms of unpaid labour. Capitalism has undermined critical social structures: the village, the street for children to play. - most adults who do not have children don't interact with children. The church (yeah it needs a lot of the cobwebs swept out) the local sports team The west has been under stress for forty years because men haven't taken on unpaid caring. Children don't get the freedom to truely play. Women are still think we are actually human and equal to men when half the population devalues what we say or what we do (gender pay gap, credibility gap) Also we have absolutely absurd desires to have obscene wealth. Seriously no one should be allowed to have obscene wealth. The left should be winning hands down ... But the idiot box and social media has dumbed people down. Oh noes .... I am leftist ranting.
@@tonywilson4713Could not agree more. Economists are constantly acting like some sort of omniscient being, while barely understanding their own specialisation. We need maybe a quarter of the economists that we have , there should not be jobs available for these people to scrounge off.
Lots of people have commented pointing out push-factors towards populism, and to be honest these are pretty easy to understand. Terms like "elitist", "inequality", "dishonest" and "corrupt" have been applicable for a long time. The more interesting thing is that people using those terms often end up supporting populist politicians who are themselves more elitist (certainly richer and more out of touch with reality for ordinary people), have policies that increase inequality (e.g. tax cuts for the rich), have no problem with regularly being caught lying, and be much deeper in corruption than non-populist politicians. So for me the question is not "what is the appeal of populism"? The answer to this should be obvious to anyone. The question for me is "why do the push-factors from non-populist politicians not also push people away from populist politicians?" I mean, for the swing voters who end up voting for them, not for their base.
The answer is that people take facts from media. The direct bridge from politicians to people is much smaller than the other channels of political communication through media, word of mouth, and so on. The public have always distrusted politicians. The joke "How do you know if a politician is lying, his lips are moving" is a very old joke!
I don't think they are all out of touch but occasionally they overstep. Here's one of todays rippers. Alistair harped on about how much better it might have been if Hilary had one. UH UH. Just imagine if James Comey had kept quiet and Hilary had won. NOW IMAGINE how Trump and the GOP would have responded when the Russians released details of those emails. America would have been OVER by now.
Australian here, and whilst I’m grateful we don’t have the rise of populism here that other countries have, politicians like Dutton (and Morrison before him) despite claiming to be proud Australians blah blah blah, they trade in fear and divisiveness of the trump like rhetoric (albeit trump lite) and seek to divide our communities ☹️ On a positive, I just came back from Melbourne’s Pride 🏳️🌈 march, and my heart was happy seeing such broad support from individuals, services, universities, conservative business parties and business. And a place where the drag queens get some of the loudest cheers of support … this is a good society!!
Rory needs to get off the fence on Kemi. She isn't up to it and is deeply untalented in terms of the job requirements and he should say that rather than hedging his bets.
She's not "deeply untalented". She's not talented where it counts though. But that's the norm, and could have been (and was) said about Starmer. Nothing especially bad about Kemi.
Just as reporters often fail to tie specific natural disasters to the larger picture of climate change, they also love reporting on the antics of Elon Musk without talking about the long-standing and accelerating problem of money in politics.
Not sure what you mean by this. The mainstream parties have been vacillating since 2008 because the country is split between status quo and change. It is still split, and the relative rise of minority parties doesn’t change this, although it might change electoral outcomes
To me these two look like establishment commentators. If only they understood astrology, yes I said astrology, derided by mainstream. Pluto has just moved into Aquarius, expect disruption, why because there is a vacuum in politics, waiting to be filled by new media types, eg macho , garage. Trump ext
One of the problems with online papers is all the ads, pop ups etc make the articles unreadable. Reader view helps but I’d say most people just want to read an article without any faff so are being driven away by the very things which are trying to earn revenue to keep the sites free.
Exactly from the social justice radicals in universities, my truth is just my opinion, dressed up to sound like it has more import. No, it’s just opinion like everybody else and up for scrutiny. This is just another opinion podcast, nothing more & nothing less, but very pretentious leftists. You are just opinion makers. Talk facts not opinion. Climate change, green energy activists, clearly. It’s democracy when you vote for the left,lol and populists when you vote for the right to these guys, lol.
Yep, trying to understand why people voted for Trump, Boris, Nigel, Meloni, Millei, Lapen, Orban, the AfD could be quite helpful if you intend to continue with your political punditry. You could be really on to somehting.
Some people who I think do a very good job of this are _TL;DR News,_ the _New Statesman_ podcast, and Aaron Bastani of _Novara Media._ Even though they lean left themselves, they really seem to do their research and understand the concerns of the populist right. Also _The Young Turks_ are discovering some interesting overlap between the populist right and populist left.
It’s his resolution don’t worry, it’s literally his job as political commentator and yet he’s so warped in his own bubble he can’t even understand it. It’s simple common sense
As someone with a Physics background, the idea that people confuse Truth and Uncertainty really baffles me. It was literally the first experiment we had in that subject at school.
It's populism if the politician is offering a simple but fake (or ineffective) solutions to complex problems, while putting the blame for the problem on a group that has little or nothing to do with causing the problem.
17% of British youth (18-24) polled voted right-wing (Reform and Conservatives) in 2024. This is a decrease from 22% of 18-24 voting right-wing in 2019. This is a decrease from 35% of 18-24 voting right-wing (Conservatives and UKIP) in 2015. Greens and Lib Dems got 34% of British youth vote in 2024. Highest proportion of the youth vote ever.
Everyone turns into a conservative as they grow older because they gain the experience of life needed to see why it's right. Young people have zero life experience and so only have their principles to vote with, and that's why they vote left. But experience shows left wing policies do not work. They waste money, they divide, and they go against human nature. When people get older they realise this and become right wing. It happened to me and everyone I know.
A rather flippant account of an EU conference on Health & Safety - when the English translator sneezed my friend took out his handkerchief, lifted his headphone and wiped his ear. The English delegates erupted in laughter - everyone else had no idea why.
You almost touched on what might be a brilliant and very UK idea. Once a key politician, political leader leaves office they MUST accept a 2 season contract with the BBC as an actor in a popular sitcom. The endless possibilities one could imagine.
Alistair, you don’t understand because you don’t live in the world working class people live in. We’re all sick and tired of watching the country get flush down the drain and be told this is a good thing.
Who's saying it's a good thing? What would stop getting the country getting flushed down the drain? A lot of people are frustrated by what's going on, the only ones cheering are the ones making political capital out of it (Farage and the like). He was an utterly useless MEP, bailing out of meetings where he could've worked in Britain's interests because making EU membership work better would've gone against his personal interests. Now he's doing the same getting support on the back of UK's difficulties, but he'd be equally useless in addressing the problems if (God forbid) he ever gets real power.
As intelligent as you both are, your reasoning is off track on so many things now. To highlight just one big one, you both got it so wrong on the US elections, and I suspect you still don't really understand why the outcome was the way it was, you're going to have to work really hard to reset and recalibrate your thinking to understand the title of this podcast!
Note to Alistair and Rory, you are woefully ill-informed and ignorant about Canadian politics. The popularity of the Liberal party and Trudeau is now 17%, a 157 year low. The last two elections in Canada have resulted in hung parliaments. Trudeau and his Liberal Party only retained power via the support of the ultra left New Democratic Party, now that the NDP leader qualifies for a lifetime pension, the NDP are suddenly no longer willing to support the Liberals. In other words, the entitlements of one elite politician have withheld the wishes of 83% of the populace. No surprise why populism is popular in Canada.
I imagine Canadians are eagerly awaiting a Populist victory and the opportunity to enjoy the same benefits offered by United Healthcare to America. Certainly the American Treasury Secretary nominee, who is a hedge fund tycoon, is eager to make that possible.
@@VonL Not sure what your gripe is about the 83% of Canadians who want a regime change. Canadians want an adult government that can control it's borders and immigration so it matches both economic and social opportunities, including access to affordable housing and healthcare. For the last 10 years anyone who dared questioned this has been immediately labelled a racist by the Liberal government, social activists and a woke academia. What Al and Rory conveniently label a universal populism (and all the negative connotations) is, in Canada, the result of a failure by the above mentioned elite to deliver prosperity to all Canadians. Nothing more and nothing less.
you have to be a special type of incel to draw that as a conclusion . Politics is a brutal business Trudeau had been weakened to a point where he was not viable - so his working partner shived him - that is as predictable as the day is long . Trudeau should have resigned 1 1/2 - 2 years ago - he was always a lightweight - but he would have been fine during a less volatile world - but in the current one - he was not fit for task - . This conservative leader - PP- is serial killer creepy - has done nothing but hurled insults and spread misinformation . He has been opposition leader for around 5 years and will not submit to a background investigation - because he is severely compromised - he will not be in the picture by the time of the election
That delighted relief on the face of the Queen that we all saw as she welcomed Truss in Balmoral was a joy to see. It seems her Madge died happy in the knowledge that she had seen the back of Johnson, who she appeared not to like much.
You both commented recently about the difference between what you hope will happen and what will happen. I think Alistair’s exhibiting wishful thinking about a counter-climate movement. I see no evidence of this at all.
@@PMMagro that’s because the so called ‘experts’ often turn out to be clueless, incompetent or handpicked by the government to give gravitas and authority to pre-decided policies. Covid was a perfect example of this
Climate tipping point: WE PASSED IT TWO SUMMERS AGO. That polar sea-ice graph, the bizarre, otherworldly oven in temperate places: that was the planet saying "I'll take it from here, thanks." We're just putting human-scale spin on the ball now, but that's nothing compared with what the planet can do. The sick-making news in the last year or so has been the "thermohaline current slowing" discussion, because when I'd written about that years ago the man whose idea it was originally was very careful to say "this may not be real but how about let's not FAFO." So there was some hope, you know, and yet somehow you over there, who've got most to lose from this, don't seem to be paying attention at all. Good lord, what sort of screen have you got between what's in front of you and your brains? Do you understand, btw, what this means for agriculture? When things change very fast? Agriculture relies on things staying the same for a very long time. Farmers don't know how to cope with significant change every few years. You think newspapers collapsed fast, I really don't know what to tell you about this. You're also crashingly naive about people's views of catastrophe. I was talking a few weeks ago to a woman in North Carolina, farmer, trying to help with emergency services, and I was like what the hell with this "nobody could've known" business, we've been waving our arms like lunatics for decades saying THIS IS COMING, and she just looked sadly at me and said that people were already forgetting. They were still mid-catastrophe and they didn't want to hear about climate anymore. Didn't care. Let's all hold hands and pray and thank the lord for these good people coming in diesel trucks to deliver industrial diapers and bottled water and whatnot.
Question regarding Fuse. In one of the puffs for Fuse, either Rory or Alastair said they produce all the energy they sell. Is that correct? If so how do they guarantee renewable energy to all their customers? Normally, when you contract for “renewables only”, it works because your retailer ensures there’s an at least matching inflow of renewables into the grid. The specific electrons you use exist as a result of the entire mix (green plus non-green) BUT your order ensures the share of green ones goes up. And however many customers order GREEN, the demand can be met because there are more than enough producers connected to the grid to meet the UK’s demand (be they local, regional or international - there are interconnects in under the channel/North Sea!) But if you say you’re only selling your electricity (ie, the electricity you produce on, for example, your solar and wind farms), then there’s a finite supply. If FUSE have an amazing success rate acquiring new customers, the demand will at some point exceed supply. So, Rory/Alastair, can you ask them please if it’s true they produce all the electricity they sell.
Big fan of the channel, but I think there's a revealing irony in trying to educate people on populism by referencing books and Yale lectures. They may help listeners understand populism, but they also illustrate the divide that populists capitalise on. The majority of the people who fall for populist rhetoric will not be reading books on political theory or studying in ivory towers. In fact, they probably perceive academic pursuits as intellectual elitism, activities of the same political elite they believe has abandoned them and looks down on them. Hell, my phrasing makes it sound like I'm looking down on them! That is what anyone who is trying to combat populism needs to think about: their own disposition, and whether they appear as an external elite. To craft a strong anti-populist message, you need to forget traditional political nuances, and talk straight. You need to remove associations from perceived elites or otherwise change the perception. I know the intention with this video was not to educate populists but to educate others on populism, but it is still ironic that the channel recommends books and lectures -- not because they are ineffective (they may not be) but because it would reaffirm a populist voter's misconception that the channel is elite and does not understand them. The anti-populist message must also be simple. Both Reform UK and the Trump campaign are adept at simple messaging (Britain Needs Reform, Make America Great Again), which they tellingly refer to as "common sense." They prove that people who vote for populists do not really have the energy to inspect detailed policy, so simple messages appeal to them. They do not want to hear complex theory or to be lectured; they want to hear something that makes sense without requiring extra explanation. Take immigration as an example. It makes simple, logical sense that when more people come into a country, and there aren't enough houses, house prices will go up. That is a point often made by Reform UK candidates, and widely accepted by their voters. But if you were to argue against that by introducing more complex reasoning, like house price policy or the increasing figure of bedrooms-per-person, you would quickly lose interest and could easily appear patronising -- which makes it difficult to counter populist rhetoric. It really is very simple -- get it? ... In any case I think someone like Alastair is perfect for combatting populism, perhaps because he is quick and clever without sounding elitist. I'll be interested to see what he comes up with!
"They do not want to hear complex theory or to be lectured; they want to hear something that makes sense without requiring extra explanation. ". Yet this is the problem. No extra explanation allows populists to tell popular lies. Trump and Johnson are prime examples of this. Johnson - 'There will be no border down the Irish Sea'".
People want politicians to solve the issues. Its not a big ask. So to use your example - immigration - you could stop waving 1 million legal immigrants through every year. Or you could (like the major parties) not bother and instead make up excuses as to why "its difficult" or " bad for the economy". The bottom line is the public want less immigration and the political elite don't. That will resolve itself eventually and the elite will not be happy with the results because they cannot bring themselves to do the smart thing and actually do what their electorate want.
@@virtualal 17% of British youth (18-24) polled voted right-wing (Reform and Conservatives) in 2024. This is a decrease from 22% of 18-24 voting right-wing in 2019. This is a decrease from 35% of 18-24 voting right-wing (Conservatives and UKIP) in 2015. Greens and Lib Dems got 34% of British youth vote in 2024. Highest proportion of the youth vote ever.
Everything is elitist once it gets to power. The question is what kind of elitism do you want? If you think you can eliminate 'elitism' you are in cuckooland. For example you can have: intellectual elitism, money elitism, left elitism, right elitism, science elitism, stupid elitism, religious elitism etc etc etc
That is the point of the definition is they pretend to meet the will of the people when they don’t, they pretend there is unity of opinion when there isn’t and never will be
Populism (as discussed here, rather than popularism) would be politicians using genuine concerns by using them (often only pretending to care about them), then pointing fingers to blame some part of the society (immigrants, 'elites', any other minority group etc.) for those problems, regardless of the actual causes of the problem. Populism is about offering simple (but fake) solutions to genuine, complex problems.
The appeal is that they look like they will listen to the people that vote for them and will try to achieve what their supporters actually want a government to do. It’s really that simple!
@ that’s true but successive Tory and Labour governments have lied through their teeth and done the opposite of what they had promised. That’s why populism gets an in.
That's not what they're actually doing though. They're projecting issues onto the general population and then 'listening' to their pre-prepared 'solutions' to them.
@ because there have been no solutions this century by successive governments.. can’t you see the lies the voters have been told by the tories and now by Labour? The solutions are easy if there is a will to implement them.
If you are the type of person who would go asking for what "Books" to read in order to get a grasp of populism, I can almost guarantee that you are never going to get anywhere near understanding it.
My husband's father was a preacher in Zimbabwe. While he could speak Ndebele if there were English speaking people in the congregation he would use an interpreter. One interpreter would tell the group what Dad said and then be would say "now what he actually meant is....."
Hi Alistair, I thought the interview given by Michael Sandel on Amanpour and Co TV was a really good explanation of Trump's victory and populism's appeal. Happy New Year to you both!
Neoliberal economics have given populism a real leg up. Many people feel their politicians are detached from their day to day existence. We need to rethink economics and take big money out of politics.
The loss of local newspapers is also the loss of accountability for local politicians. The only big publication I know of that covers local politics in a meaningful way is Private Eye.
Alastair's story about the Facebook meme of Trump with the Italian prime minister isn't quite right. Trump's quote from prepared notes was "The United States and Italy are bound together by a shared cultural and political heritage dating back thousands of years to Ancient Rome. Over the centuries, the Italian people have blessed our civilization with magnificent works of art, science, philosophy, architecture, and music."
Security threats have been on the radar of many for quite some time, but there seems to be limited open honest discussion. I would be interested to hear more from Rory on the perceived threat and mitigating actions leadership should be considering.
The appeal of Trump, Farage and Johnson is that they said they had simple solutions to complex issues, backed with a pomposity that if they fail it is due to the State, not them.
These guys know why populism is rising. Thats why they won't get someone capable of critical thinking on here to explain it. They are more concerned with their egotistical agenda than solving any real-world problems.
My prediction of 2025 is that these two finally realise the irrelevance that they are, and at the same time reveal the fact that they are not really friendly when the cameras are off.
Could you trace the history of how Britain made bad decisions? 26 years ago when I came here, one could avail of unsecured loans and in fact, banks persuaded us to take loans. It was the Blair Brown government. Then Osborne came in and said uk should reduce its defence and Hague said UK had to stop thinking of itself as Empire. No money…
Thanks for your suggestions on where populism get its appeal from. "The Road to Somewhere" by David Goodhart, "Democracy's discontents" by Michael Sandel and various books on the failure of "meritocracy" surely deserve to be mentioned too? Greetings from Alistair's former Devon constituency.
meta is by far the greatest advertising tool available to almost any type of business on the planet. you don’t just put money in and inshallah it works lol. there is extreme methods to facilitating high performing campaigns & creatives when it comes to media buying & meta is the best at providing this to advertisers.
Truth…big subjects like immigration and its consequences in such large numbers is exhausting for those communities that are forced to take the majority without being consulted. Gang r gangs case in point. Britain has its own homegrown problem and adding to it without an equal policing or judicial system will force those communities to push back… rise in populism…
Alistair, as somebody who loves German writers.. did you read the World of Yesterday by Stefan Zweig? a very moving account of his ( successful but bad ending) as a jew in Austria. his account what happened in pre war Europe is very interesting, evocative and moving and scary how it resembles recent politics!! so I can really recommend it!
I think that after the rise of the far right all over the world, it's time to call things by their names. Calling them populists just make them look cooler than calling them nationalism, extreme right or fascism. And these are the real names of the major political problem of our times.
@Lux-lc8cx Never. And now in the name of free speech Elon Musk managed to change the algorithms of twitter and elect Trump. At the same time he keeps banning anyone against him.
@@akiskarorimakis741 Trump also got elected before Musk owned twitter. Putting too much emphasis on Musk and social media avoids the Democrats from having to actually engage with it's own governance, messaging and campaign failures.
There used to be a story that when Columbus sailed to America, the native Americans were literally unable to see the ships because they didnt believe they could exist. I always assumed it was nonsense - even if they didn't know what they were seeing, they could surely see *something*. But then I hear Alistair Campbell talk about populism and think that maybe the story was true after all.
Think many Labor voters are disappointed in Albanese, but doubt that Dutton will replace him when there are so many intelligent independents who could contribute to a left-centrist hung parliament after the next election
Genuinely out of touch. I don’t know how you can be so imbedded in political life and at the same time be so far away from understanding why these things are occurring.
In the American History taught to high schoolers in the U.S., populism is treated quite sympathetically. The late 19th c. populists are seen as responding to a distorted and oligarchic economy that had left farmers and working people behind and gave huge corporations near-monopolies over key sectors. Robert La Follette, William Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt, etc. these guys are generally treated as heroes in the history narrative. Farther back, Jacksonian populism is also generally treated sympathetically as expanding the franchise and moving away from the original elitist conception of votes only for the wealthy. Nathaniel Bacon is also seen rather sympathetically despite the violence and shabbiness of some of his aims. Much farther back in the classical civic tradition the Gracii are also seen generally as heroes/martyrs addressed problems the oligarchic system wasn’t addressing. But today and on this podcast, you use the term “populist” as a pejorative. Obviously some of today’s populist leaders are demagogues. But is populism itself inherently bad? Especially if the problems they address are real and undressed by the normal system? Will history also remember the populism of our era sympathetically?
Alistair - it really isn’t hard to understand: people feel betrayed by established political parties who don’t listen, who believe they occupy the moral and intellectual high ground whilst having absolutely NO understanding of what “ordinary “ people are thinking and using their power to feather their own nest. Simple
Just after Trump won Jessica Tarlov who does a podcast with Scott Galloway pointed out a an interview with someone who voted for Trump and they said something like "Yes we know Trump says crazy things, but crazy doesn't look down on me" and that goes straight to your point.
Remember the scene when Obama chastised African American men for NOT supporting Kamala Harris - look how that worked out.
As for Bill Clinton's remarks
Just imagine if James Comey had kept quiet and Hilary had won.
NOW IMAGINE how Trump and the GOP would have responded when the Russians released details of those emails.
America would have been OVER by now.
Except that right-wing populists are even more representative of the corrupt & powerful they claim to be challenging.
That this is easy to say but put a dozen 'ordinary' people into the same room and they have a dozen different thoughts, all different from the established politicians but with no unity themselves. 'Feathering their own nest' is a problem but elected populist politicians are typically worse when they actually get into power.
Yeah just like Farage.
Have you considered how the young African American men in Iowa will vote????
"Populism is a term liberals use to describe the political blow back against the social disruption that their policies have created" - John Gray
Inequality, Poverty, Crime, Aesthetics, Culture, Family.
Inevitable
beautiful
Lovely quote
Nothing like investing in a family gambling syndicate to improve inequality
Well he would say that wouldn't he, being a self confessed Conservative Economist ! His statement is contentious at best, if not as glib as most of the populist soundbites!
Populists (left or right) are people who claim that only they can speak for all the people and that only they represent the people. In doing so, they stir up fears and prejudices. Populists pretend that there are always simple answers and solutions to even the most difficult problems.
As a police translator and occasionally a political interpreter, thank you so much for acknowledging interpreters! 🙂
It's an extremely hard and invisible job. Because you're employing so many neuron paths in your brain and switching between them very fast, your brain ends up feeling like it's boiling.
And some people have the unfortunate habit of screaming at the interpreter instead of the person who is actually saying the nasty things, because it's the interpreter they're hearing the nasty things from. You're essentially doing customer service, psychology, theoretical linguistics, inter-cultural consulting, acting and official representation at the same time. For me, one of the hardest things is totally suppressing my personality.
As to the vetting: I interpreted at a couple of embassy events and political meetings of region representatives. I wasn't vetted at all because there's like 2 or 3 of us in the country with that language combination, they were just glad to have found an interpreter 🙂
If you want to understand the rise of populism, you have to begin by acknowledging the role played by the application of neoliberal economic ideology to human life over the course of the last 40-plus years - an application that has been embraced by both sides of politics, and which is therefore not a question of "left" or "right", but of the totalizing impact which this application has had on people's lives. As Thomas Piketty and his colleagues have clearly demonstrated, under neoliberalism, the economic equalizing of the post-war Keynesian consensus has been catastrophically reversed, so that both income and wealth resources have been distributed away from the middle and working class and toward economic elites. At the same time, the middle and working class have been sold the false dream that if they work hard enough for long enough they will be able to secure their economic future - a dream that has proven demonstrably untrue as the middle class has been hollowed out and the working class have been plunged into poverty and marginalization. This despite the fact that productivity has increased exponentially from 1980 onwards. In other words, the middle and working classes have lived up to their side of the "bargain" imposed upon them by the political class and the corporatocracy; but instead of the promised matching of productivity to increases in incomes and living standards, they have been forced into insecure, fractured, low-paying part-time, casual, franchised and “gig economy” work characterized by a loss of control over hours, the availability of work, the safety of working conditions, the regularity of wages, the prospects for economic security and the increase in severity and intrusiveness of managerial control over their lives. At the same time, the corporatocracy - the owners of IT capital, the class of "super managers", and the inheritors of wealth - have seen vast inflows of income and wealth resources through dividend returns, tax loopholes, and only having to expose a tiny fraction of their wealth to the vagaries of the market in order to earn returns on investment higher than the overall rate of economic growth. Populism in the form of Le Pen, Farage, and Trump has thus arisen as consciousness of the betrayal that operates at the heart of neoliberal economic ideology has fueled widespread public anger and demands for change. A populist is therefore someone who reads this public mood and articulates its grievances - even if, like Trump and Farage, they are part of the privileged status quo and have no intention whatsoever of changing its fundamental characteristics. Instead, they redirect that anger toward "soft" targets like immigrants and welfare recipients, thereby disguising their duplicity and enabling the political class and commentariat to write off the supporters of Trump, Le Pen, Farage, etc as "rednecks" and "racists", instead of acknowledging the legitimate grievances that reside at the core of populist sentiment. Populism is thus the betrayal-in-waiting that has emerged from the betrayal-that-is we call neoliberal economic ideology and the devastating impact of its totalizing capture of human existence.
Totally agree. See also, the rapid rise of promotion of authoritarianism among billionaires, which is a consequence of the neoliberal establishment's own instinctive understanding that their economic illusion is no longer sustainable, thus they must co-opt the political system itself, in order to hold on to their position. Neoliberal economics is essentially feudal in nature, so we should not be surprised, that it's a system that ultimately produces tyrants.
Thank you, trying to think of a better comment but can't - best I've ever read, I hope you are in a position of influence in the public domain.
💯.
They also have fair resentment against mass immigration particularly after they effectively voted against it in 2016 and then again in 2019 and then got the huge wave of third world migration since 2020 that even the most liberal economists have admitted has been terrible for the economy,
Sadly your view reads as conspiratorial nonsense that is somehow even more ignorant then Stewart and Campbell, I’d suggest try getting out of your liberal metropolitan bubble once in a while and talking to ‘populists’
I think it's quite simple: Populism is a response to elitism. Populists may not have the right answers. But they at least acknowledge the concerns of the electorate.
No they don't though. They exploit exactly that claim, and lie, grift, and con the very people they claim to represent.
the funny thing is: populism leaders are buddies of the elites. Trump, Elon, Farage, you name it.
Perfectly put
Or manufacture those concerns. UKIP billboards were no different from radio soap adverts or home alarm sales: the "problem-solution" strategy.
What happens when the subject of populism like BOZO and Fartage are also part of the elite machine.
Enjoyed very much the discussion about interpreters and their very important role. In the early 2000’s in Dublin I had the pleasure of seeing Mikhail Gorbachev’s personal interpreter, the brilliant Pavel Palazhchenko, in action. At a later engagement during his visit, Gorbachev arrived at the hotel but Palazhchenko wasn’t with him. Our Minister was very keen to speak with Gorbachev, and I was called upon to ‘do the necessary’. I’m a fluent Russian speaker, but only then did I fully understand the immense skill and ability of professional interpreters. I managed to get through it, and in the process realised how important it is to differentiate between ‘intelligence’ and ‘wisdom’ - I caught it, but only just! Massive respect to all interpreters out there who will know these things.
brilliant... cheers...
As a translator and interpreter - thank you so much! Interpreters are supposed to be invisible, and so, we often are. And yet, a good interpreter can help create a dialogue so much.
I interpreted at a meeting between representatives of two regions in different countries, and as they were able to speak both English and revert to their mother tongues with my help if necessary - and because I was cheeky enough to add a little smile or explanation here and there - totally unplanned brainstorming started to happen, and it looks like the children in my region will have much better and healthier school lunches!
Very symbolic, too, as my niece was being born when the brainstorming was happening 🙂
As to the exhaustion: Totally confirm that, after a few hours you feel like your brain is boiling! You just come home, lie down and can't move because your brain isn't able to give commands to your legs.
@ Thank you very much for your comment. It’s really amazing how much the orator assumes - ah, yes, the interpreter will understand everything about everything! In order to do a good job the interpreter needs to be briefed as soon as possible in order to prepare for the job and check any specialist vocabulary that may be required. I’ve often seen interpreters intimidated by cultural differences who try and ‘soften’ what is said to avoid conflict and keep discussions going. For example: ‘Tell him if he doesn’t agree then I’m leaving the room immediately’ magically becomes ‘The Director hasn’t fully understood your position on this matter and respectfully asks you to clarify it.’ Really! 😆 But is the interpreter’s role to be a peacemaker? In any case, I take my hat off to all interpreters and translators who do vital and very sensitive work. My best wishes to you.
Despised, Why the modern left loathes the working class, By Paul Embery
The intellectual left has always despised the working classes in reality, and idealised them in theory.
I guess that’s because they’re mostly middle class.
But they're NOT the so - called ''left'' but instead ONLY overwhelmingly university educated & very well off white, middle class, illiberal liberals, who are COMPLETELY cossetted & protected from ALL the negative impacts of the likes of mass uncontrolled & mass unskilled immigration for example, & so yes of course, they COMPLETELY loathe & despise the mostly white working class who had the barefaced cheek & effrontery to vote that the UK left the EU & of course, not forgetting that the completely London centric Liebour Party with Granny Harmer Sausages Starmer at the helm, similarly COMPLETELY loathes & despises them & will he actually make it to July 2029 & the next General Election ?????????
Paul Embery of GB News?
Okay.
Question: Aren't minorities a part of the working class? Or is this just the lame excuse for overt r c sm in the UK?
Embery is a Strasserite who has a record of prioritising division by race and ethnicity over class solidarity and tackling inequality.
We saw this when he teamed up with "the modern Left" (which he describes as economically liberal so by definition not left wing in any meaningful sense) types like Campbell and Stewart to viciously attack the only socialist Labour leader for half a century who actually stand against the billionaires and inequality, rather than being in their pockets.
In my books he's a a grifter who teams up with the establishment when it suits him - whether that be billionaire-funded centrists as I described above, or billionaire-funded right wingers like Farage or Johnson when he wants to blame poverty-stricken immigrants for the problems we face.
Rory's insistence that Campbell has some instinct that could reach young men is thoroughly baseless. Campbell comes across as a snooty arsehole peering over his glasses while he expects respect for being relevant 30 years ago. He's completely detached from the lives of young men in the UK today.
That is the whole point of the challenge. Otherwise it wouldn't be a challenge. I'm not sure how you missed that?
17% of British youth (18-24) polled voted right-wing (Reform and Conservatives) in 2024.
This is a decrease from 22% of 18-24 voting right-wing in 2019.
This is a decrease from 35% of 18-24 voting right-wing (Conservatives and UKIP) in 2015.
Greens and Lib Dems got 34% of British youth vote in 2024. Highest proportion of the youth vote ever.
Accurate
@@jeremymanson1781 you may need to clean your ears out before you watch it back. Rory challenged Campbell to engage more with young men.
@dgb916 Thanks - yes I heard that. The challenge is that an out of touch white middle class old fart attempts to understand why so many are attracted to what appear to be right wing ideological positions.
You, Alistair, don't understand the importance of immigration, and the way legal migration is conflated with 'the boats'. The issue is insane levels of migration, not a lack of compassion for people who NEED to be here. You just don't get it. English urban communities are changing at a rate people are uncomfortable with; we were already very diverse, but we're now full (or feeling 'full') of people not from here. In my east Sheffield estate, we have huge numbers of sub saharan African people. They aren't asylum seekers, they have legally migrated here, but we never agreed to such rapid and profound demographic change.
This is exactly what it is. 40% of the current population of London is foreign born. That is a staggering number. I could go on and on but it speaks for itself.
What I am most frustrated over is how entitled those 40% feel that they should be there versus British working classes who have had ancestors living, working, fighting in world wars, and paying tax to this country for millennia, and are undermined by this moral agenda to appease immigrants incessantly.
@@fortynicks5576 How many of those 40% are working in the city, brought in from European countries and the US to service the financial or medical sector? Compared to the US we have very few Homeless, so the people you're complaining about are working and paying taxes, most likely on the social infrastructure: shop workers, baristas, bin men, nurses.
Most 'traditional' Londoners who were unable to afford to buy housing have moved out, but people didn't seem upset when "gentrification" made those god-awful tower blocks attractive places to live. Affordable housing? How much of that is about despite it apparently being in the development contracts?
Oh, and please, let's not pretend that disliking anyone different to you is a new thing in London. Battle of Brick Lane comes straight to mind, then some people hated Caribbean peoples coming here. But then they were all ok, so folks moved on to disliking people from the Indian subcontinent.
I grew up in the London suburbs in a heavily bombed area among very much working class people. But you couldn't hope to afford to buy our old house. Houses like ours are half a million quid now.
Exactly the same thing has also happened in the US, Canada, New Zealand and no doubt other countries which I don't know as well. I'm referring to legal, deliberately "planned" immigration. Much of this is driven by perceived labour shortages due to rapidly declining birthrates, and economies which have more and more incorporated and depend on increasing inequality. Only immigration can keep down wages and provide the low skilled labour needed by the de-industrialising service economy and inverting demographic pyramid.
I grew up in what was then perhaps the most egalitarian society in the world, New Zealand in the 1950's and '60's. There were very few restaurants and fast food outlets. Shops were closed on both Saturday and Sunday, and open after 5pm only on Fridays (to 8pm). Only a quarter of women worked outside the home... though psychiatric hospitals were bulging with suburban housewife patients. There was no homelessness, begging was outlawed. Poorer families lived in State houses on quarter-acre lots... There was some immigration, mainly of post-WWII DP's from Europe (like my family), but integration was natural. The present precarious economy, with Uber-this and i-that delivery guys zipping around all over the place, was unimaginable... it was a do-it-yourself society, with very active sports clubs and cultural activities.
The point of my digression is that the desired more equal society has to be much more of a DIY society, with fewer and more expensive goods and far fewer non-essential services. A much greater degree of voluntary cooperation and getting together is required to make life meaningful... individuals with faces planted alone in screens won't do it. And now even the essential services become scarce for lack of hands, just as the need for them is exploding (medical, elder care, etc.)... the widespread move toward normalising "euthanasia" has a very dark side to it which is not discussed.
@@davebox588 28% are born in non-EU countries.
0.8% Americans if you were curious. 7.1% from Africa. 13% from Asia. 12% from Europe, within that a negligible 3.7% from Western Europe.
Frankly it doesn’t make a difference to me if these people are working. I would rather we prioritise the British working class over migrants with no skin in the game. I’d prefer Americans & Western Europeans just over cultural similarity anyways.
In any case it’s 3.5 million people. It’s too many.
@@fortynicks5576 I list further down 27 British MPs not born in the UK, one was PM and another chancellor. I'm sure that if you contacted their political offices they'll answer why they have "no skin in the game".
Please, PLEASE can I sit in on the call when you tell Olukemi (Kemi) Badenoch that she should bugger off back to Nigeria. Her mother arrived from Nigeria shortly before Kemi's birth, then took her straight back to Nigeria where Kemi was raised. She didn't return to the UK until she was 16.
During her parliamentary maiden speech Badenoch stated that she was "to all intents and purposes a first-generation immigrant". She has also said that she didn't realise she had a right to British citizenship until she was 14.
Now, I disagree with her politics, but I have no doubt she's been through hardship, studied and worked hard, and contributes to this country. Just that she is yet another indication that your assertion that people coming here from abroad have "no skin in the game" is demonstrably false.
So here you go. British MPs whom we can infer you don't approve of because they weren't born here:
Boris Johnson
Nadhim Zahawi
Tobias Ellwood
Greg Hands
Rehman Chishti
Afzal Khan
Khalid Mahmood
Yasmin Qureshi
Deidre Brock
Marcus Fysh
Catherine West
Crispin Blunt
Mark Field
Wera Hobhouse
Peter Hain
Stephen Lloyd
Alok Sharma
Virendra Sharma
Keith Vaz
Valerie Vaz
Nia Griffith
Paul Beresford
Rushanara Ali
Margaret Hodge
Daniel Kawczynski
Rory Stewart
Shailesh Vara
Alastair saying he doesn't understand the appeal of Trump or Garage and Rory saying Badenoch will be a good leader just tells you how out of touch these two are.
I agree, as already mentioned by one of the readers - Rorys and A.C current reasonings could be off track on many things now, and they are both going to have to work seriously hard to recalibrate their thinkings to understand the title of this podcast
I think that he understands the appeal of Trump and Garage very well. It's why so many seemingly intelligent people are taken in by the rhetoric that he finds difficult.
I don’t think Rory thinks Badenoch is a good leader, rather, people may be seduced by her right wing stance. A right wingers faux de mieux.
The NeoLib apologists. They've never had to use a food bank, or had a student debt they couldn't handle. They're not in a flatshare in their thirties. They lead golden, privileged lives, and have nothing to add to the debate any more.
Fair point @@John-qq8he
Thinking about populism, the visible lack of understanding by the current political leadership and metropolitan elite of populism's appeal only, to me anyway, underlines the seemingly increasingly disconnect between the elected and the electorate. If the electorate perceives it's needs and desires are being met on the whole there is simply no space, let alone appetite for what the populists are selling. Disparaging populists is attacking the symptom rather than addressing the root cause.
Caroline Lucas talked to them about that. Her book is all about going out and talking to people about why they voted for Brexit, and actually listening and learning from it. Very interesting.
You have to do both things at once. We don't forego painkillers just because they aren't curing the illness.
Yes, I think what I am about to say fits with your assessment. On the surface ‘populism’ seems good and positive as according to a dictionary definition ‘it is grass roots democracy, working class activism, egalitarianism’. It is a reaction to the status quo where as you suggest the metropolitan elite are not interested on what the general populace is thinking. This would strike a chord with Alistair Campbell and his wish to speak to young men in particular about what and why they are thinking. I don’t think populists have anything to ‘sell’, it’s just that they do not agree with the current direction the country is moving in. Donald Trump wants to put tariffs on imported goods and bring back industry from Asia to the USA, which on the surface seems like to a good idea to improve employment in the USA, but as has been proved countless times this will have a negative effect as American industry may rely on a small part or service that is generated overseas. Also the tariff is passed in to the American consumer so it is counter-productive. However, the reasoning behind the imposition of tariffs has not gone away.
i disagree, the people who vote for farage and his ilk have been taught that their worst predjudices are allowed to be voiced in public now, after years of them being scared to do it as we slowly managed to teach how wrong those predjudices are and get rid of them. the tories playing up to more and more racist tropes as theirpopularity waned had this effect.
@@jamesratcliffe8470 which dictionary defines Populism like that, please? Most of the definitions I am finding are more along these lines:
“a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.”
Ernesto Laclau’s post-Marxist “force for emancipation” definition doesn’t apply to Nigel Farage, surely, however he would like to spin it?
He is an opportunist. And he has plenty to sell… Himself mainly, and the chaos of discord. Because that’s where the money is to be made. Reform is a business, with Richard Tice the principal investor and Nigel Farage the majority share holder.
Surely, just as Trump is, they are making personal fortunes by fomenting division, amplifying the message of “them” and “us”? “What we are hearing on the doorstep” are lots of things which grew from seeds they sowed. And then they pretty quickly duck beneath the parapet and abdicate or pass the buck for the violence they inspire.
This type of Right wing Populism is effective because it amplifies people’s fears, and delivers them scapegoats. It’s in no way egalitarian, is not a “force for good” for anyone but themselves, and it emancipates no-one, except the people who run it - how are they not an “elite”, by this token? “Free speech”? Lee Anderson is the first to complain and threaten when someone says something he doesn’t like, delicate flower that he is. They don’t want people to be free to say whatever they want - they want to be free themselves to say whatever it takes to make people fight each other.
There’s a difference between genuinely listening to people’s upset and differences and resolving to understand and help (Caroline Lucas), and legitimising bigotry. The Send Them Back Where They Came From brigade want us all to look at immigration while they quietly milk the system they profess to want to break for all it’s worth. And if anyone catches them at it, they justify it by saying “everyone in politics does it”. “Don’t look at me, look at THEM”.
Understanding why people are afraid, why the discontent is there to be fomented in the first place, and addressing it, is vital. But so is challenging people who tell those who are genuinely suffering that the reason for all their woes is that some people live in much more dangerous places than here and are prepared to risk their lives to escape. Or that a newly elected government which hasn’t been able to enact its entire manifesto in the first six months is as useless and broken as the succession of ambitious, self-promoting, bickering and acquisitive disasters masquerading as governments which have preceded it for most of the previous decade.
The weirdness of it is that being popular, of itself, is more important than what someone is popular FOR. Welcome to internet politics by shocks and clicks, and “likes” you can purchase, and thus encourage more exposure and more “likes” - “popularity” is very lucrative, however you procure it.
At my kids’ schools, the last friendship group anyone with any self respect wants to be in is the “popular” one - it’s the one where all the vacuous bullies hang out, and they invariably all hate each other, often more than they hate everyone else although it’s a close run thing. Unfortunately it seems that, for the moment, the older bullies are on to something profitable. They are certainly enterprising, I’ll give them that.
All you need to understand populism is that it is fueled by anger. There were/are Pakistani Muslims rape gangs across the country which were covered up in the national dialogue but which local people experienced first hand. Indeed for a long time the phenomenon of people speaking out was treated as a 'moral panic'. This drives people mad. And there are many such examples. Start from there. But of course the hosts here, and most people in front of microphones, live in completely different realities and circles - I doubt they would be able to relate. And, actually, this podcast is interesting to me (and to others) exactly because of the high class/ cocktail class that the hosts are a part of. The casual references to holidays, to gardens, to attending plays, to meeting this or that important person, all the luxury beliefs. These are the reasons why we watch - but also why we know that they tend to be wrong and out of touch.
the only group overrepresented in child sexual assault cases is white british men
Spot on and eloquently put.
I agree that Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart have different backgrounds, lifestyles and expectations than most of us. But as far as I can tell, they truly are good people who try to do the best they can in their lives. I have followed Rory Stewart somewhat through the years, and I always got the impression of an exceedingly decent, intelligent, well-meaning, nerdy and hardworking human being. Someone also able to see and acknowledge his own shortcomings, which is rare among human beings. The kind of person that I would love to welcome as a friend and I would trust to handle my affairs and listen to me.
Compare that to Donald Trump or Elon Musk, who have become tribunes of "the people". They are billionaires (and are far more removed from you or I than Alistair Campbell or Rory Stewart), clearly manipulative, eager to spread halftruths and lies, and happy to hurt other people. They are anti-Rory Stewarts.
About the rape gangs, I don't believe for a moment that Elon Musk cares about the girls and women who were abused, even though he restarted the conversation. He simply wants to use them (abuse them) to further his own political desires. The reason why I believe this is simple: Musk helped Andrew Tate to get his new political party reinstated on X. And if anyone abuses women and treats them like dirt, it is Andrew Tate. Tate manipulated women into becoming sex workers and proclaims the gospel of seeing women like property. If you are with Andrew Tate, you do not respect girls and women.
Nor does Donald Trump care about people like these girls and women. I base this on how he treats people in his own life. He has a long history of shafting suppliers, customers (Trump University), the tax authorities (Trump's charity was a vehicle for tax-dodging). He cheated on all his wives. He has a history of sexually abusing women. He literally abandoned his own VP when protesters were chanting "Hang Mike Pence!". This is the tragedy of so much of populism: there is the conceit, the lie, that populists care about you, cloaked in attractive language and gestures.
There is a scene in the first Gladiator movie. Derek Jacobi plays a senator, one who sees the danger in the deeply disturbed Emperor Commodus and how Commodus uses populist tools to remain popular. In a conversation with a fellow senator he describes how he sees himself: "I do not pretend to be a man of the people. But I hope to be a man for the people."
This is what I hope and look for in people who may lead: decency and sincerity. Not a man of the people, but a man for the people. In my book, Rory Stewart is such a man (and I think Alistair Campbell as well). Donald Trump and Elon Musk are not.
There is one point in this discussion that shows the humanity in Rory Stewart very well. If you can, go to 28:20 and listen for about 35 seconds. This is Rory Stewart giving an example of why international aid is important and why MAGA's dreams of ending such international aid would be so lethal for countless people. Listen to what Rory Stewart says and then just try and imagine Donald Trump or Elon Musk being there where that aid was being distributed, seeing that dead baby, and talking about it like Rory Stewart does.
Respect for your position and take. I do not proclaim to be all-knowing. But I did want to share my perspective with you. I hope you can appreciate it. All the best!
Alastair - I am glad you are going to focus your energies on understanding why people are feeling disenchanted and voting for popularism. Until the ‘establishment’ understands how people are feeling, things will only get worse. Labour and Conservatives are too far removed from reality and no one is putting forwards policies which the majority of people identify with, or will bring about the change people want. Politicians seem to think they are on the moral high ground and that ‘we’ are all wrong or uneducated or misinformed. Until this attitude changes, nothing will change and only get worse. Please do give your attention to this and get people to listen. Thank you
I recommend everyone to find the book titled The Elite Society's Money Manifestation, It changed my life.
To understand populism or to understand why our establishment politicians have failed the people so much, the electorate no longer trusts them.
But then politicians have never been good at understanding those they represent.
I think having all the power in London does not help with that, we need more regional powers
Rory, sorry to break this to you but the Conservative Party is finished. Alistair, Starmer didnt win the election, Rishi catastrophically lost the election.
Going to let myself go on an un apologetic rant here (to vent my own frustration at no one in particular, with no expectation anyone is listening) and at the same time have a go at the answer to "understanding the rise of populism" from a working class persons point of view. (TLDR; Inequality = anger = fuck the lot of you, burn it down)
All the progress that has been made financially and technologically in the recent decades has been at the expense of massive externalisations (in the economic definition) These externalisations undermine our environments, our social cohesion, focus and attention, sense of meaning, whilst driving unchecked meaningless consumption. This fact has hardly been considered in government policy or taxation policy and does not show up in GDP or any other government metric (sub-text - economists should not make political policy) These externalisations have driven wealth in to the hands of a smaller and smaller of a percentage of people as i's been extracted (bled from) the general populace and the global commons. As a result people's quality of life (even if not quantity of life) has become vicerally worse, even if all the metrics in the world point to the opposite. This makes people "feel" worse, and this isn't something that can be articulated by everyone, they just know it because they feel it. And it IS REAL, not just something created by social media, populists or the press.
The worse people feel, the less thinking they do and the more they'll be drawn to populist arguments which appeal to their anger. and even before this fact, most people just want to get on with their lives and not have to "think" about the world too much. They want to feel safe, secure, valued and connected. The belief that people just need convincing of nuanced arguments and they'll "see the light", or that they're just not smart enough to get it (a.k.a the explanation for Brexit) is more than short sighted, it's dangerously arrogant (a.k.a elitism)
As for populism, post-modernism, again oversimplified, is right in sense that there is no "single narrative" but it doesn't take enough heed of the fact that people must organise around simple unifying narratives, whilst this might be inconvenient, it's largely inescapable. You NEED a simple, unifying narrative for the culture to be coherent (mitigated slightly only if you design in, from the ground up, a philosophical education from young age, rather than the shallow "progressive activism" which seems to be our preference) Poople feel bad > they get angry > angry people are attracted to narratives that reflect their anger.
Progressive politics, I think, get's something fundamentally wrong, that being it's possible to "think and debate" all the way to a stable culture across time. The higher order and hidden consequences of policy decisions are beyond what a human brain realistically comprehend, culture is a coding of unarticulated (and potentially inarticulateble) wisdom gained over generations. You might be able to argue that people's lives are better on paper, but if they feel worse, it's meaningless. Conservatism, in it's simplest form imo is "things can be a whole lot worse, it's far from perfect just now, but don't imagine you can start tinkering with things trying to 'do good' and not fuck them up completely, AND you're not even going to see how you did because you did it 2 generations ago" This might be shortened to - we've become much more "intelligent" a population at the direct expense of wisdom and meaning.
Here's something that might start putting us in the right direction regarding inequality....once that's fixed, we might have some emotional space to take the wisdom and meaning bit...
I think Starmer (who I don't rate) had the correct instinct when he went with the "we're fucked, it's going to take some hard work" narrative - the problem, IMO, is that what needs to come after that statement is beyond what the political class could stomach. (talking to you Angela "Everyone-Does-it" Rainer) How about this for a premise for a political party, or a political system, one that would beat populism....
Make politicians remuneration (not just the headline figure, but their taxation and wealth creation capacity in general) directly linked to the median wealth of the populace they govern. Make the prosperity of the political class directly linked to the prosperity of the people. This will require every side of every debate to make long term decisions for the benefit of all across time. Not only that, it would force the spread of wealth across the country and not focus it on big financial centres like London, AND it would make people double down on helping everyone get a leg up because any section of the population falling into poverty would impact the meidan wealth creating a laser focus to bring them back up. Politicians are just like everyone else, they'll be guided by some combination of self-interest and social moral duty (with varying ratios) - leverage the self-interest to the hilt.
I can imagine someone has though of this somewhere before of course, and there are obvious issues that would need to be worked out, but in principle, make "we're all in this together" actually true and not just empty rhetoric. Rant over, I feel better now...for maybe a few minutes at least.
Brilliant analysis- I’d listen to your podcast if you set one up. At least you are addressing real issues in the UK with insight and thought
That's not a rant....that's a short book. But I suspect you are correct in a lot of what you wrote. People feel that life is changing too fast - it's out of control - and they want to put the brakes on things or even reverse them. So we end up voting for liars who say they can fix things. A plague on all your houses!
Correct Analysis.
I so agree!
We need to rant, to get it out there and I agree wholeheartedly with what you say.
I feel the same way about Climate Change…and I’ve had a shorter rant in the same chat :-)
To return to your points;
I knew something terrible was going wrong when Thatcher came to power, legitimising greed and denying society and deifying the individual.
That was a tipping point and we are where we are, in the mess that we are, because of her. And here’s the thing: people like Thatcher, Johnson, Truss, Farage, Trump et all are stupid; they don’t understand the human condition, they don’t understand the relationship between our species and the planet….all they can comprehend is ‘what’s in it for me’. The last 14 years have been a classic example of this; hollowing out local authorities, the NHS, the public sector, Water Authorities, Energy Companies, Public transport, Schools, Universities…the list is endless.
And what does Labour do when it comes to power but stand in Number 10’s garden and say the wealthy must carry the weight (as if that will ever happen) and then take away the pensioners winter fuel allowance and the waspi women’s compensation :-(
People will bleat about how some pensioners don’t need it but that’s not the point…the point is that they’ve demonstrated they don’t care; they do not understand how most people live. I live in a Band A tiny house but I pay nearly double what the occupant of a million pound house pays in Westminster. I can afford it; I can afford to keep my little house warm but the old lady across the road is struggling to do both because her pension is slightly higher than £139 a week and she’s been turned down for Pension Credit…she’s facing increased energy costs now and even higher ones in Spring, not to mention Council Tax bills and Anglian Water bills jumping up.
As the great statesman Paul Keating once said "Always back a horse called self interest, at least you know it's trying". Paul has a way with words! All tip and no iceberg being a favourite.
Good idea can't see the current politicians and the two part system going for it.
Love this channel, always interesting and on point but discussed in such a calm and none confrontational manner. Thanks to you both 😊
Bertand Russell said "most people would rather die than think, in fact they do". This is why people are attracted by the extremes, where populism resides with its one line slogans which do not require reflection or analysis. Populists rely on tapping into people's emotions and prejudices. The centre ground is where the analysis and need to inform oneself is to be found. Here issues have to be weighed and assessed. Much too complicated for the majority of voters whose information comes from social media !
I switched to you for information going back to LBC with james O brien.
Alistair has instincts in what young men think....righto Rory. Thats why he thought Kamala would win.
Rory and Campbell. Two of the biggest stumps on any screen. Trying to sell the image that they have a clue!
Populism explained by two people who apparently dont know what populism is.
Rory doesn't know what fascism is either, as evidenced by his repeatedly labeling of Elon Musk as a fascist.
Well said! Couldn’t agree more!
Honestly, you pair are the best advertisement for alternative populism & you'll never understand why
I am a conference interpreter in Brussels, and it has become impossible to do the job properly: the speed reading of speeches, which not even native speakers would be able to follow, AND the degree of degradation of the English language when used by non fluent English speakers is devastating….
Irony of them looking like they are both freezing their nads off during the fuse energy ad.
😂😂😂
Perhaps Fuse Energy only provide power to your home, when the wind is blowing.
Good grief. Its the Housing Market. The buracratic class have many houses like rory and Alister. Many of us have no houses. Labour are here to protect their own ie Alister with many houses. Labour will not build the 3 million houses that are necessary because this would bring house prices to normal multiples and destroy their wealth. This has to change and we need to find someone who will change the system.
Building houses is literally one of the main things this government has been talking about e.g. planning reform. It is a hard thing to do because of a slow, bureaucratic, and NIMBY culture. Lack the workers to build them, the ownership of the land to build them on, etc. It's not a conspiracy. There's so many more examples of elites not doing things in order to protect their wealth.
@@jacktrute4580 Even if by some miracle they build the 3 million new homes, that's roughly 600k a year, with net migration running at over 700k in the last year we wouldn't even be keeping pace. The borders need closing ASAP
@@jacktrute4580 Even if by some miracle they build the 3 million new homes, that's roughly 600k a year, with net migration running at over 700k in the last year we wouldn't even be keeping pace. The borders need closing ASAP
Alistair and Rory, it's quite simple: the issue is inequality.
Politicians need to address the economic and political injustices that the majority of politicians seem unwilling to confront, which is why so many often support populist leaders. People back these populists, even though they know they won’t deliver on their promises because they are incredibly frustrated with politicians who take no effective action. Many politicians prioritise their financiers and focus on enriching themselves instead. Of course, nothing will change. It will just get worse.
Aussie here. Albo is doing it hard because he has done NOTHING since becoming PM.
Love the podcast and really like both you guys and Mooch and Katty K. I am glad you want to understand voters on the far right more because you guys ARE removed and insulated from the political change that is happening throughout the West because you don't really understand how the average person is feeling, and I say that as a lefty myself. People don't feel the technocratic centrist politicians who sprout their success via celebrating an 1.1% increase in GDP or a 0.5% decrease in unemployment or any useless statistic you can think of, genuinely actually care about the person on the ground and how they are financially going backwards.
The West needs REFORM (not the Reform party!). It needs money out of politics, it needs the big corporates brought to heal and it needs tax and financial reform. Young people need housing affordability. The centre won't provide this, the left is stuck in identity politics (I have to admit) and so people want the right to come in and tear it all down, because it isn't working anyway.
Sounds like tried and tested and failed socialism
As a fellow lefty of the centrist kind, I agree, but part of the problem is that any criticism of the left elicits the "well, you're a fascist, then" response. The left was once the home of debate of both the intellectual and the "working man" varieties, but now it's the home of cancellation - deviate one inch from orthodoxy and you're cancelled. That's why we see people who used to be darlings of the left or centre left, like Rowling, now being called "far right" by left purists. Dare I say, even Trump and Musk were both lefties once, until the left basically decided they weren't pure enough - RFK Jnr is another case in point. The left creates the demons it then fears. Sometimes it's better to keep the mavericks inside the tent.
Another Aussie here - Unfortunately Albo is caught surrounded by a MORONIC pack of economists.
I'm an engineer and can easily rip the LNP's nuclear plan to shreds its so absurd I'd sack any engineer who backed it. It really is that bad.
The problem is the ALPs renewable plan isn't much better. In its current guise it just can't work. Its not that we can't have a very high percentage of the nation on renewables but it can't be done how they are doing it.
Chris Bowen needs to either get rid of his advisors or just resign and get out of the way.
The real problem is NOBODY will give any of the engineers who can do something any time. Just last week there was yet another news story on energy and they had 3 experts on. 2 from Think Tanks and one from AEMO and all 3 are economists. I have been trying for 8 years to get through to some of these people on BOTH SIDES and EVERY DOOR is guarded by a squad of economists.
Economists across the world have made an utter mess of energy, infrastructure in general, education and health care. That's why COVID hit parts of the world so hard and why things like Italian bridges collapse. They see everyone else as problems they have to manage but they have NO IDEA how to manage anything and even less knowledge in the things they try to manage. Everything they touch turns to crap. Energy is just the most obvious one here in Australia, but make not mistake we have insanely serious issues in water, other infrastructure and health care.
ALL OF IT because of ECONOMISTS.
Jee Wizz this is all shite. You blokes have no idea. Rowling a leftist elite? Elon a leftist enlist what the hell are you smoking. Rowling is a snob despite being known as socially left because she was poor and on welfare she never was socially left. Harry Potter was a such whiney teenage boy by the 4th book the female characters so underutilized... She was clearly not a progressive then and she certainly isn't now.
In my opinion capitalism does not factor in proper compensation for parenting and other forms of unpaid labour. Capitalism has undermined critical social structures: the village, the street for children to play. - most adults who do not have children don't interact with children. The church (yeah it needs a lot of the cobwebs swept out) the local sports team
The west has been under stress for forty years because men haven't taken on unpaid caring. Children don't get the freedom to truely play. Women are still think we are actually human and equal to men when half the population devalues what we say or what we do (gender pay gap, credibility gap)
Also we have absolutely absurd desires to have obscene wealth. Seriously no one should be allowed to have obscene wealth.
The left should be winning hands down ... But the idiot box and social media has dumbed people down.
Oh noes .... I am leftist ranting.
@@tonywilson4713Could not agree more. Economists are constantly acting like some sort of omniscient being, while barely understanding their own specialisation. We need maybe a quarter of the economists that we have , there should not be jobs available for these people to scrounge off.
Lots of people have commented pointing out push-factors towards populism, and to be honest these are pretty easy to understand. Terms like "elitist", "inequality", "dishonest" and "corrupt" have been applicable for a long time. The more interesting thing is that people using those terms often end up supporting populist politicians who are themselves more elitist (certainly richer and more out of touch with reality for ordinary people), have policies that increase inequality (e.g. tax cuts for the rich), have no problem with regularly being caught lying, and be much deeper in corruption than non-populist politicians.
So for me the question is not "what is the appeal of populism"? The answer to this should be obvious to anyone. The question for me is "why do the push-factors from non-populist politicians not also push people away from populist politicians?" I mean, for the swing voters who end up voting for them, not for their base.
@@kicorse any port in a storm.
The answer is that people take facts from media. The direct bridge from politicians to people is much smaller than the other channels of political communication through media, word of mouth, and so on. The public have always distrusted politicians. The joke "How do you know if a politician is lying, his lips are moving" is a very old joke!
Another incredibly out of touch podcast lads! Not sure how you do it - well done x
I don't think they are all out of touch but occasionally they overstep.
Here's one of todays rippers.
Alistair harped on about how much better it might have been if Hilary had one. UH UH.
Just imagine if James Comey had kept quiet and Hilary had won.
NOW IMAGINE how Trump and the GOP would have responded when the Russians released details of those emails.
America would have been OVER by now.
The fact that they're both ex-politicians shows you exactly why the establishment is so out of touch.
@@1adamuk None of the politicians anywhere really get it.
They all think they did a great job. It was the other person who screwed up.
@@joostengelsman4755 Campbell was not a politician.
@@jacktrute4580 Alright, he worked in politics and was Blair's spokesman and campaign director. Point still stands though.
So fond of both of you. Such a fabby podcast.
How long did Alistair last before he started banging on about Tony Blair?
Australian here, and whilst I’m grateful we don’t have the rise of populism here that other countries have, politicians like Dutton (and Morrison before him) despite claiming to be proud Australians blah blah blah, they trade in fear and divisiveness of the trump like rhetoric (albeit trump lite) and seek to divide our communities ☹️
On a positive, I just came back from Melbourne’s Pride 🏳️🌈 march, and my heart was happy seeing such broad support from individuals, services, universities, conservative business parties and business. And a place where the drag queens get some of the loudest cheers of support … this is a good society!!
Rory needs to get off the fence on Kemi. She isn't up to it and is deeply untalented in terms of the job requirements and he should say that rather than hedging his bets.
She's not "deeply untalented". She's not talented where it counts though. But that's the norm, and could have been (and was) said about Starmer. Nothing especially bad about Kemi.
Just as reporters often fail to tie specific natural disasters to the larger picture of climate change, they also love reporting on the antics of Elon Musk without talking about the long-standing and accelerating problem of money in politics.
Democracy is making a comeback because people are tired of Labour and the Tories doing nothing useful despite having decades to do so.
Not sure what you mean by this. The mainstream parties have been vacillating since 2008 because the country is split between status quo and change. It is still split, and the relative rise of minority parties doesn’t change this, although it might change electoral outcomes
To me these two look like establishment commentators.
If only they understood astrology, yes I said astrology, derided by mainstream.
Pluto has just moved into Aquarius, expect disruption, why because there is a vacuum in politics, waiting to be filled by new media types, eg macho , garage. Trump ext
One of the problems with online papers is all the ads, pop ups etc make the articles unreadable. Reader view helps but I’d say most people just want to read an article without any faff so are being driven away by the very things which are trying to earn revenue to keep the sites free.
POPULISM is the replacement of Rational Thinking with "EMOTIONALISM".
You just be Harvard educated
Look up where the phrase 'my truth' came from. It's not from populism it's from the universities
Exactly from the social justice radicals in universities, my truth is just my opinion, dressed up to sound like it has more import. No, it’s just opinion like everybody else and up for scrutiny. This is just another opinion podcast, nothing more & nothing less, but very pretentious leftists. You are just opinion makers. Talk facts not opinion. Climate change, green energy activists, clearly. It’s democracy when you vote for the left,lol and populists when you vote for the right to these guys, lol.
Thank you!
@@gailfg2211 For what? some rando on the internet telling you "my truth"
@@davidr2802 sorry can't converse with you our 'lived experiences' are too different
Yes, _Standpoint Theory_ if I recall correctly.
Yep, trying to understand why people voted for Trump, Boris, Nigel, Meloni, Millei, Lapen, Orban, the AfD could be quite helpful if you intend to continue with your political punditry. You could be really on to somehting.
You missed Starmer out.👍
Some people who I think do a very good job of this are _TL;DR News,_ the _New Statesman_ podcast, and Aaron Bastani of _Novara Media._ Even though they lean left themselves, they really seem to do their research and understand the concerns of the populist right. Also _The Young Turks_ are discovering some interesting overlap between the populist right and populist left.
@@tghffghf 9 million people of working age refuse to work. Are these the ‘working classes’?
What are [some of] the working class saying? @@tghffghf
It’s his resolution don’t worry, it’s literally his job as political commentator and yet he’s so warped in his own bubble he can’t even understand it. It’s simple common sense
Brilliant! Happy NEw Year guys!
As someone with a Physics background, the idea that people confuse Truth and Uncertainty really baffles me. It was literally the first experiment we had in that subject at school.
If the people vote for who you feel they should it’s democracy in action if they vote for someone you don’t like it’s populism.
It's populism if the politician is offering a simple but fake (or ineffective) solutions to complex problems, while putting the blame for the problem on a group that has little or nothing to do with causing the problem.
Very good prez. It's very rare that I encounter Brits who have any idea about U.S. politics. These 2 guys do.
@@jonb5493 yes, Rory thought Kamala was a shoo in fur President … all his friends in DC and NYC said si 😹
17% of British youth (18-24) polled voted right-wing (Reform and Conservatives) in 2024.
This is a decrease from 22% of 18-24 voting right-wing in 2019.
This is a decrease from 35% of 18-24 voting right-wing (Conservatives and UKIP) in 2015.
Greens and Lib Dems got 34% of British youth vote in 2024. Highest proportion of the youth vote ever.
Everyone turns into a conservative as they grow older because they gain the experience of life needed to see why it's right. Young people have zero life experience and so only have their principles to vote with, and that's why they vote left. But experience shows left wing policies do not work. They waste money, they divide, and they go against human nature. When people get older they realise this and become right wing. It happened to me and everyone I know.
A rather flippant account of an EU conference on Health & Safety - when the English translator sneezed my friend took out his handkerchief, lifted his headphone and wiped his ear. The English delegates erupted in laughter - everyone else had no idea why.
Fuse Energy and get your in-studio winter coats like Alastair and Rory wear at discount.
You almost touched on what might be a brilliant and very UK idea. Once a key politician, political leader leaves office they MUST accept a 2 season contract with the BBC as an actor in a popular sitcom. The endless possibilities one could imagine.
Nice to watch your interview with the Australian ABC tonight Alastair. Lots of coinciding stories.
Caesar always wins when democracy becomes oligarchical
Alistair, you don’t understand because you don’t live in the world working class people live in. We’re all sick and tired of watching the country get flush down the drain and be told this is a good thing.
Who's saying it's a good thing? What would stop getting the country getting flushed down the drain? A lot of people are frustrated by what's going on, the only ones cheering are the ones making political capital out of it (Farage and the like). He was an utterly useless MEP, bailing out of meetings where he could've worked in Britain's interests because making EU membership work better would've gone against his personal interests. Now he's doing the same getting support on the back of UK's difficulties, but he'd be equally useless in addressing the problems if (God forbid) he ever gets real power.
As intelligent as you both are, your reasoning is off track on so many things now. To highlight just one big one, you both got it so wrong on the US elections, and I suspect you still don't really understand why the outcome was the way it was, you're going to have to work really hard to reset and recalibrate your thinking to understand the title of this podcast!
Note to Alistair and Rory, you are woefully ill-informed and ignorant about Canadian politics. The popularity of the Liberal party and Trudeau is now 17%, a 157 year low. The last two elections in Canada have resulted in hung parliaments. Trudeau and his Liberal Party only retained power via the support of the ultra left New Democratic Party, now that the NDP leader qualifies for a lifetime pension, the NDP are suddenly no longer willing to support the Liberals. In other words, the entitlements of one elite politician have withheld the wishes of 83% of the populace. No surprise why populism is popular in Canada.
I imagine Canadians are eagerly awaiting a Populist victory and the opportunity to enjoy the same benefits offered by United Healthcare to America. Certainly the American Treasury Secretary nominee, who is a hedge fund tycoon, is eager to make that possible.
@@VonL Not sure what your gripe is about the 83% of Canadians who want a regime change. Canadians want an adult government that can control it's borders and immigration so it matches both economic and social opportunities, including access to affordable housing and healthcare. For the last 10 years anyone who dared questioned this has been immediately labelled a racist by the Liberal government, social activists and a woke academia. What Al and Rory conveniently label a universal populism (and all the negative connotations) is, in Canada, the result of a failure by the above mentioned elite to deliver prosperity to all Canadians. Nothing more and nothing less.
you have to be a special type of incel to draw that as a conclusion . Politics is a brutal business Trudeau had been weakened to a point where he was not viable - so his working partner shived him - that is as predictable as the day is long . Trudeau should have resigned 1 1/2 - 2 years ago - he was always a lightweight - but he would have been fine during a less volatile world - but in the current one - he was not fit for task - . This conservative leader - PP- is serial killer creepy - has done nothing but hurled insults and spread misinformation . He has been opposition leader for around 5 years and will not submit to a background investigation - because he is severely compromised - he will not be in the picture by the time of the election
That delighted relief on the face of the Queen that we all saw as she welcomed Truss in Balmoral was a joy to see. It seems her Madge died happy in the knowledge that she had seen the back of Johnson, who she appeared not to like much.
You both commented recently about the difference between what you hope will happen and what will happen. I think Alistair’s exhibiting wishful thinking about a counter-climate movement. I see no evidence of this at all.
The your truth/my truth thing isnt a right wing populist thing, it comes very much from the Left.
It is a common theme, do not trust in experts and authorities believe in... gurus.
@@PMMagro that’s because the so called ‘experts’ often turn out to be clueless, incompetent or handpicked by the government to give gravitas and authority to pre-decided policies. Covid was a perfect example of this
Rooted in postmodern relativism popular with the Left.
Happy New Year gentlemen!
Climate tipping point: WE PASSED IT TWO SUMMERS AGO. That polar sea-ice graph, the bizarre, otherworldly oven in temperate places: that was the planet saying "I'll take it from here, thanks." We're just putting human-scale spin on the ball now, but that's nothing compared with what the planet can do. The sick-making news in the last year or so has been the "thermohaline current slowing" discussion, because when I'd written about that years ago the man whose idea it was originally was very careful to say "this may not be real but how about let's not FAFO." So there was some hope, you know, and yet somehow you over there, who've got most to lose from this, don't seem to be paying attention at all.
Good lord, what sort of screen have you got between what's in front of you and your brains?
Do you understand, btw, what this means for agriculture? When things change very fast? Agriculture relies on things staying the same for a very long time. Farmers don't know how to cope with significant change every few years. You think newspapers collapsed fast, I really don't know what to tell you about this.
You're also crashingly naive about people's views of catastrophe. I was talking a few weeks ago to a woman in North Carolina, farmer, trying to help with emergency services, and I was like what the hell with this "nobody could've known" business, we've been waving our arms like lunatics for decades saying THIS IS COMING, and she just looked sadly at me and said that people were already forgetting. They were still mid-catastrophe and they didn't want to hear about climate anymore. Didn't care. Let's all hold hands and pray and thank the lord for these good people coming in diesel trucks to deliver industrial diapers and bottled water and whatnot.
If the country today is the result of governments not bring populist then perhaps it time for something different
Question regarding Fuse. In one of the puffs for Fuse, either Rory or Alastair said they produce all the energy they sell. Is that correct?
If so how do they guarantee renewable energy to all their customers?
Normally, when you contract for “renewables only”, it works because your retailer ensures there’s an at least matching inflow of renewables into the grid. The specific electrons you use exist as a result of the entire mix (green plus non-green) BUT your order ensures the share of green ones goes up. And however many customers order GREEN, the demand can be met because there are more than enough producers connected to the grid to meet the UK’s demand (be they local, regional or international - there are interconnects in under the channel/North Sea!)
But if you say you’re only selling your electricity (ie, the electricity you produce on, for example, your solar and wind farms), then there’s a finite supply. If FUSE have an amazing success rate acquiring new customers, the demand will at some point exceed supply.
So, Rory/Alastair, can you ask them please if it’s true they produce all the electricity they sell.
Big fan of the channel, but I think there's a revealing irony in trying to educate people on populism by referencing books and Yale lectures. They may help listeners understand populism, but they also illustrate the divide that populists capitalise on.
The majority of the people who fall for populist rhetoric will not be reading books on political theory or studying in ivory towers. In fact, they probably perceive academic pursuits as intellectual elitism, activities of the same political elite they believe has abandoned them and looks down on them.
Hell, my phrasing makes it sound like I'm looking down on them!
That is what anyone who is trying to combat populism needs to think about: their own disposition, and whether they appear as an external elite. To craft a strong anti-populist message, you need to forget traditional political nuances, and talk straight. You need to remove associations from perceived elites or otherwise change the perception. I know the intention with this video was not to educate populists but to educate others on populism, but it is still ironic that the channel recommends books and lectures -- not because they are ineffective (they may not be) but because it would reaffirm a populist voter's misconception that the channel is elite and does not understand them.
The anti-populist message must also be simple. Both Reform UK and the Trump campaign are adept at simple messaging (Britain Needs Reform, Make America Great Again), which they tellingly refer to as "common sense." They prove that people who vote for populists do not really have the energy to inspect detailed policy, so simple messages appeal to them. They do not want to hear complex theory or to be lectured; they want to hear something that makes sense without requiring extra explanation.
Take immigration as an example. It makes simple, logical sense that when more people come into a country, and there aren't enough houses, house prices will go up. That is a point often made by Reform UK candidates, and widely accepted by their voters. But if you were to argue against that by introducing more complex reasoning, like house price policy or the increasing figure of bedrooms-per-person, you would quickly lose interest and could easily appear patronising -- which makes it difficult to counter populist rhetoric. It really is very simple -- get it? ...
In any case I think someone like Alastair is perfect for combatting populism, perhaps because he is quick and clever without sounding elitist. I'll be interested to see what he comes up with!
"They do not want to hear complex theory or to be lectured; they want to hear something that makes sense without requiring extra explanation. ". Yet this is the problem. No extra explanation allows populists to tell popular lies. Trump and Johnson are prime examples of this. Johnson - 'There will be no border down the Irish Sea'".
People want politicians to solve the issues. Its not a big ask. So to use your example - immigration - you could stop waving 1 million legal immigrants through every year. Or you could (like the major parties) not bother and instead make up excuses as to why "its difficult" or " bad for the economy". The bottom line is the public want less immigration and the political elite don't. That will resolve itself eventually and the elite will not be happy with the results because they cannot bring themselves to do the smart thing and actually do what their electorate want.
@@virtualal 17% of British youth (18-24) polled voted right-wing (Reform and Conservatives) in 2024.
This is a decrease from 22% of 18-24 voting right-wing in 2019.
This is a decrease from 35% of 18-24 voting right-wing (Conservatives and UKIP) in 2015.
Greens and Lib Dems got 34% of British youth vote in 2024. Highest proportion of the youth vote ever.
@@jasonhaven7170 in which case I am sure it will all work out lovely for you🤣🤣
@@virtualal Fortunately, our youth aren't insane like the ones in Europe and USA
How is politician's reaction to the will of the people different from popularism.?
Is popularism just an elitest code word?
Everything is elitist once it gets to power. The question is what kind of elitism do you want? If you think you can eliminate 'elitism' you are in cuckooland. For example you can have: intellectual elitism, money elitism, left elitism, right elitism, science elitism, stupid elitism, religious elitism etc etc etc
That is the point of the definition is they pretend to meet the will of the people when they don’t, they pretend there is unity of opinion when there isn’t and never will be
Populism (as discussed here, rather than popularism) would be politicians using genuine concerns by using them (often only pretending to care about them), then pointing fingers to blame some part of the society (immigrants, 'elites', any other minority group etc.) for those problems, regardless of the actual causes of the problem. Populism is about offering simple (but fake) solutions to genuine, complex problems.
I disagree with most of Alistair and Rory’s politics , but can still enjoy the conversation. Happy new year.
The appeal is that they look like they will listen to the people that vote for them and will try to achieve what their supporters actually want a government to do. It’s really that simple!
They say they will do what their supporters want. Time will tell if they deliver though
@ that’s true but successive Tory and Labour governments have lied through their teeth and done the opposite of what they had promised. That’s why populism gets an in.
That's not what they're actually doing though. They're projecting issues onto the general population and then 'listening' to their pre-prepared 'solutions' to them.
@ because there have been no solutions this century by successive governments.. can’t you see the lies the voters have been told by the tories and now by Labour? The solutions are easy if there is a will to implement them.
If you are the type of person who would go asking for what "Books" to read in order to get a grasp of populism, I can almost guarantee that you are never going to get anywhere near understanding it.
My husband's father was a preacher in Zimbabwe. While he could speak Ndebele if there were English speaking people in the congregation he would use an interpreter. One interpreter would tell the group what Dad said and then be would say "now what he actually meant is....."
TRUTH IS TRUTH, DAMN IT! It may be relative, but it's not "personal choice".
Hi Alistair, I thought the interview given by Michael Sandel on Amanpour and Co TV was a really good explanation of Trump's victory and populism's appeal. Happy New Year to you both!
Neoliberal economics have given populism a real leg up. Many people feel their politicians are detached from their day to day existence. We need to rethink economics and take big money out of politics.
I bit concerned about Rory's maths - if for decades the Artic ice cap has decreased by 13% each year, there might only be an ice cube left...🙃
He didnt say that - he said 13% a decade -i.e. every 10 years
@@museumgirrl1406 Oops my hearing is going!
The loss of local newspapers is also the loss of accountability for local politicians. The only big publication I know of that covers local politics in a meaningful way is Private Eye.
Alastair's story about the Facebook meme of Trump with the Italian prime minister isn't quite right.
Trump's quote from prepared notes was "The United States and Italy are bound together by a shared cultural and political heritage dating back thousands of years to Ancient Rome. Over the centuries, the Italian people have blessed our civilization with magnificent works of art, science, philosophy, architecture, and music."
Campbell is probably aware but happy to lie to attack trump
Really enjoyed the story about translating the general to the villagers., ".... but do not worry, he doesn't either."
Security threats have been on the radar of many for quite some time, but there seems to be limited open honest discussion. I would be interested to hear more from Rory on the perceived threat and mitigating actions leadership should be considering.
The future of democracy will be decided in Africa over the next 10 to 20 years.
The appeal of Trump, Farage and Johnson is that they said they had simple solutions to complex issues, backed with a pomposity that if they fail it is due to the State, not them.
I'm glad to know more about the wonderful translator in your Merkel interview (and professional translation and interpretation in general), thank you.
These guys know why populism is rising. Thats why they won't get someone capable of critical thinking on here to explain it. They are more concerned with their egotistical agenda than solving any real-world problems.
My prediction of 2025 is that these two finally realise the irrelevance that they are, and at the same time reveal the fact that they are not really friendly when the cameras are off.
Rory, its you! You are the person who every young person I know admires you.
Especially his dentist
I am guessing you don't know many young people 😉
Really need to drill down on what Musk is doing.
Could you trace the history of how Britain made bad decisions? 26 years ago when I came here, one could avail of unsecured loans and in fact, banks persuaded us to take loans. It was the Blair Brown government. Then Osborne came in and said uk should reduce its defence and Hague said UK had to stop thinking of itself as Empire. No money…
Thanks for your suggestions on where populism get its appeal from. "The Road to Somewhere" by David Goodhart, "Democracy's discontents" by Michael Sandel and various books on the failure of "meritocracy" surely deserve to be mentioned too? Greetings from Alistair's former Devon constituency.
Google and FB do not target that tightly. You have a monthly budget and they will spend it for you. Or charge more per click.
meta is by far the greatest advertising tool available to almost any type of business on the planet. you don’t just put money in and inshallah it works lol. there is extreme methods to facilitating high performing campaigns & creatives when it comes to media buying & meta is the best at providing this to advertisers.
Australian here. Populism is rife in Australia.
Truth…big subjects like immigration and its consequences in such large numbers is exhausting for those communities that are forced to take the majority without being consulted. Gang r gangs case in point. Britain has its own homegrown problem and adding to it without an equal policing or judicial system will force those communities to push back… rise in populism…
Alistair, as somebody who loves German writers.. did you read the World of Yesterday by Stefan Zweig? a very moving account of his ( successful but bad ending) as a jew in Austria. his account what happened in pre war Europe is very interesting, evocative and moving and scary how it resembles recent politics!! so I can really recommend it!
I think that after the rise of the far right all over the world, it's time to call things by their names. Calling them populists just make them look cooler than calling them nationalism, extreme right or fascism. And these are the real names of the major political problem of our times.
Since when was fascism for free speech?
@Lux-lc8cx Never. And now in the name of free speech Elon Musk managed to change the algorithms of twitter and elect Trump. At the same time he keeps banning anyone against him.
@@akiskarorimakis741 Trump also got elected before Musk owned twitter. Putting too much emphasis on Musk and social media avoids the Democrats from having to actually engage with it's own governance, messaging and campaign failures.
Populism is the antidote to elitism!
There used to be a story that when Columbus sailed to America, the native Americans were literally unable to see the ships because they didnt believe they could exist.
I always assumed it was nonsense - even if they didn't know what they were seeing, they could surely see *something*.
But then I hear Alistair Campbell talk about populism and think that maybe the story was true after all.
Blair and Campbell did populism in a big way. So they started it in the modern era.
I like the idea that populism is caused by what Rory seems to pointing at as mistranslation or mistaken meanings.
Nice to hear some of your history
The economy beats populism because reality does kick in. However once a nation has had an era of populism it is likely to repeat the mess of it.
Populist, Patriot and Proud.
the truths depend on the details that are over looked, missed out , forgotten or not known.
May I suggest that you both get hold of copies of James Gleick's book 'Chaos' to better understand climate.
Think many Labor voters are disappointed in Albanese, but doubt that Dutton will replace him when there are so many intelligent independents who could contribute to a left-centrist hung parliament after the next election
Populism = what the masses want. What’s wrong with that? I would say elitism is a bigger problem.
Genuinely out of touch. I don’t know how you can be so imbedded in political life and at the same time be so far away from understanding why these things are occurring.
In the American History taught to high schoolers in the U.S., populism is treated quite sympathetically. The late 19th c. populists are seen as responding to a distorted and oligarchic economy that had left farmers and working people behind and gave huge corporations near-monopolies over key sectors. Robert La Follette, William Jennings Bryan, Theodore Roosevelt, etc. these guys are generally treated as heroes in the history narrative. Farther back, Jacksonian populism is also generally treated sympathetically as expanding the franchise and moving away from the original elitist conception of votes only for the wealthy. Nathaniel Bacon is also seen rather sympathetically despite the violence and shabbiness of some of his aims. Much farther back in the classical civic tradition the Gracii are also seen generally as heroes/martyrs addressed problems the oligarchic system wasn’t addressing. But today and on this podcast, you use the term “populist” as a pejorative. Obviously some of today’s populist leaders are demagogues. But is populism itself inherently bad? Especially if the problems they address are real and undressed by the normal system? Will history also remember the populism of our era sympathetically?