Post by jabinkhatun907 on Jan 11, 2024 11:40:12 GMT 1
Is to eliminate, or attempt to eliminate, a range of mediations consistent with the tradition of our representative democracy. In this tradition we see political parties as having the function of mediating within and outside the state. In this sense they are necessary to maintain the realm of separation between state and society. This separation is never complete precisely because the parties themselves operate both within and outside the institution. body. They interact with civil society while developing representation within state institutions. There are other transcendent institutions in our idea of representation unions universities social movements media themselves. Because because they allow us to participate in political life. But if we pay attention we will find that this participation is always mediated and if it is mediated that is.
It's because there is a separation of realms. If our representative democracy has this separation it is because it assumes that we do not have an absolute process of identification with our Philippines WhatsApp Number Data as opposed to that as a plural society we are not equal to them. If representative democracy is based on this separation then populism is based on the idea of representation as identity. Populism eliminates mediation and separation because it wants to unite the outside and the inside in the sense that it believes that the people can become one by identifying with the leader. Diversity and complexity through leaders dissipate people into a whole. To achieve the expression of the people as a whole leaders unite very different demands by confronting them, sometimes weaker and sometimes stronger. This confrontation can take the form of people.
Target wealthy immigrants diversity movement women or the establishment. But populist leaders necessarily need a unifying point to form a unified people. Uniting people requires confrontation. And by unifying it becomes homogeneous. In short it abolishes diversity within a people in the name of unity based on antagonism. It is for this reason that populists' use of the people category lacks diversity. There is one people and only one which is naturally good and there are some enemies of the people who logically suck. Based on your analysis of why the emergence of populism corresponds to the rise of neoliberalism and what makes them paired, it is not surprising that populist politics emerged strongly in the neoliberal era. In fact it is very logical and the two complement each other.
It's because there is a separation of realms. If our representative democracy has this separation it is because it assumes that we do not have an absolute process of identification with our Philippines WhatsApp Number Data as opposed to that as a plural society we are not equal to them. If representative democracy is based on this separation then populism is based on the idea of representation as identity. Populism eliminates mediation and separation because it wants to unite the outside and the inside in the sense that it believes that the people can become one by identifying with the leader. Diversity and complexity through leaders dissipate people into a whole. To achieve the expression of the people as a whole leaders unite very different demands by confronting them, sometimes weaker and sometimes stronger. This confrontation can take the form of people.
Target wealthy immigrants diversity movement women or the establishment. But populist leaders necessarily need a unifying point to form a unified people. Uniting people requires confrontation. And by unifying it becomes homogeneous. In short it abolishes diversity within a people in the name of unity based on antagonism. It is for this reason that populists' use of the people category lacks diversity. There is one people and only one which is naturally good and there are some enemies of the people who logically suck. Based on your analysis of why the emergence of populism corresponds to the rise of neoliberalism and what makes them paired, it is not surprising that populist politics emerged strongly in the neoliberal era. In fact it is very logical and the two complement each other.