Populists like Farage promise voters a simpler life. In fact, they produce ever more hassle and chaos | Andy Beckett
IIn the middle of the elections or the early stages of the administration, popular policy can feel liberalized. It is not valid. Political rules are broken. Constitutional restrictions are glowing. Popular gatherings are noisy, and they seem unrestricted, as the enemies of the movement have harnessed or intimidated.
For many voters, and even some activists and politicians, traditional policy can be boring, through its exact rhetorical campaigns and campaigns that were expected to be designed, which are its complex and complex policies. Popularism is more brutal, with greater leaders of life and dramatic national goals: “Make America great again”, “restoring control”. Digital media, with its continuous hunger for briefing and direct narratives, is an ideal environment for the alleged populism that politics is in reality.
this week Local English elections Runkorn and Helsby BYCTION may become the latest demonstration that the era of simplistic policy has many years of running. After it was based on its campaign on the questionable claim that almost all Britain’s problems come from a lot of migration, Reform UK is expected to occupy hundreds of council seats from the conservatives, and it has an opportunity to win Runcorn and Helsby from the Labor Party, and it may also win one or more regional mayors. In the event of any of these things, insisting on Nigel Varage boasts that only his party is “broken Britain’s reform”, and the belief that reform can win in the upcoming general elections, will gain more momentum.
However, there are also more and more signs that the policy of simplicity, when applied by popular or affected governments into problems in the real world, actually turns into the opposite. Britain’s exit from the European Union has become a strange word for more border troubles and import papers. Meanwhile, the desire to control immigration morely is the creation of a new bureaucracy, law enforcement bodies, immigrant share, detention facilities and treatment around the world. In an attempt by a police nationality in a world that capitalism – and generations of former right -wing politicians – spent decades in making more flexible and interconnected, proved more complicated than expected for many populism and their supporters.
Even a stronger popular government, the Trump administration, barely in his post, has already become an increasing attempt to guide it to a wide and wide range of American institutions. Its message from April 11 Claiming “reforms” at Harvard University, for example, are five pages written long. Among many other things, the message requires the university to assign an external body, and the federal government agreed to, “to review the student body, faculty, employees, and leadership for the diversity of the point of view” – the government’s law to include conservatives – “so that each department or educational unit must be from an individual point of view.” These “every year” audits must occur, and the message continues, “at least until the end of 2028” – which falls near the end of Trump’s second term.
The measure and accuracy of the state’s intervention at a private university, which Harvard is trying to fight, is very disturbing to anyone who believes in academic freedom. However, the message also indicates that the Trump administration can become an enormous and impractical bureaucracy. It aims to reshape and then monitor an unspecified number of independent institutions, to impose “diversity” when it benefits conservatives, but spends it when anyone else benefits.
For some populist voters, seeing the elites that are challenged and a disease is satisfactory in itself, whether it leads to tangible change. But other people voted for Trump because they want a lower government, and for them, it may be a more interfering country, and it may be more ambitious and more expensive as a result of disappointment. Without supporting both groups, Republicans will find it difficult to maintain their superiority for a long time.
In the last century, extremist right -wing movements sometimes managed to combine the unpopular feelings of the popular policy, which was raised by an attractive leader, with strict social control. Suzan Sontag wrote in an article in 1975 on Nazi gatherings, “Fascist Aesthetics”, which appears to be “apparently opposite states, egomania and Dumbitde”. While populism across the Atlantic today is not fundamental, it also seeks to tame what it considers an unhealthy disorder and multiplicity of liberal society. The general Faraage personality may be harmful and hurt, but the reform site on the reform site is frankly “police carrying zero” for “all crime and anti -society behavior” and “no sexual interrogation, social transition or exchange in schools.” As with the Trump administration, it appears that the instinctive repair response to the modern world is an attempt to block things.
Is it possible to use the height behind the right -wing popular interface against the movement? In theory, the middle politicians who spent their professional lives in bargaining with different interests groups must be in order to preserve their position in the political middle ground, able to attack populism, to preserve that it is rigid and backward. The Spanish Socialist Prime Minister, supportive of immigration, Pedro SanchezHe did this, and he remained in power since 2018, which is an extraordinary long time for the left leader in the modern milieu. The support of the Spanish right -wing Popular Party has reached its climax three years ago, and it is now barely half of the level of reform.
However, in other countries, including Britain, many centers are still trying to overcome populism through the resonance of its policies and messages. It announced last week that it will be the first British government To spread nationalities Among the foreigners who make crimes here, with league tables in the violating countries that you likely to follow, may not be the best way to manage the Kiir Starmer to present itself as a positive alternative to the pessimistic reform of reform.
The right -wing populists are right that many people find the modern and frightening world. But conservative populism focuses on struggles of straight and white men and the working class, and greatly ignores many other victims in modernity. This narrow view makes the social vision of the movement, no matter how attractive in terms of electoral aspect, as long as nostalgia, in essence a frightening and strong plan to return to the fifties.
The anti -popular politicians need to remind voters that this hierarchical world has disappeared, while admitting that the most free world that replaced, for many people, was almost not free. In order for the center, socialism, or governorate to provide a good life for more, the fake abundance of popularity will attract the crowds.
