STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
Foreign Affairs: Fight Populism With Even Bigger Government
By Daily Bell Staff - October 19, 2016

Populism on the March Why the West Is in Trouble … Trump is part of a broad populist upsurge running through the Western world. It can be seen in countries of widely varying circumstances, from prosperous Sweden to crisis-ridden Greece. In most, populism remains an opposition movement, although one that is growing in strength; in others, such as Hungary, it is now the reigning ideology. But almost everywhere, populism has captured the public’s attention.  What is populism? It means different things to different groups, but all versions share a suspicion of and hostility toward elites, mainstream politics, and established institutions.  -Foreign Affairs

The “populism versus globalism” meme is gradually yielding the predictable result:  “Enlightened” government needs to take an active role in alleviating the “frustration” felt by those attracted to “populism.”

The next phase of this meme can be seen, among other places, in this extensive article in Foreign Affairs magazine entitled, “Populism on the March.”

Foreign Affairs is the mouthpiece publication for the the Council on Foreign Relations that provides globalist instructions and legislation for industrial and political leadership.

Since DB’s focus is on elite memes,  we follow the larger one on a regular basis and have predicted that “populism vs. globalism” constitutes serious propaganda. It may even rise to the level of “global warming” aka “climate change.”

Elite memes are not necessarily false in their entirety but they are at least partially fake. Populism, for instance, in both Europe and America, has more to do with cultural self-protection than the mindless “me first” approach the nomenclature suggests.

Populism is really an outgrowth of greater awareness of how elites have targeted middle classes in order to destroy them  as part of globalism’s implantation.

Elite, mainstream media won’t explain the reality of what’s going on. Instead, the mainstream takes the rightful anger created by elite targeting and characterizes it as a political movement.

Additionally, the explanation for this anger is that certain segments of Western populations are being “left out” of rising world-wide prosperity.

More:

Immigration is the final frontier of globalization. It is the most intrusive and disruptive because as a result of it, people are dealing not with objects or abstractions; instead, they come face-to-face with other human beings, ones who look, sound, and feel different.

And this can give rise to fear, racism, and xenophobia. But not all the reaction is noxious. It must be recognized that the pace of change can move too fast for society to digest.

The ideas of disruption and creative destruction have been celebrated so much that it is easy to forget that they look very different to the people being disrupted.

Western societies will have to focus directly on the dangers of too rapid cultural change. That might involve some limits on the rate of immigration and on the kinds of immigrants who are permitted to enter.

It should involve much greater efforts and resources devoted to integration and assimilation, as well as better safety nets. Most Western countries need much stronger retraining programs for displaced workers, ones more on the scale of the GI Bill: easily available to all, with government, the private sector, and educational institutions all participating.

We can see here a tired litany of government responses to the initial false premise. So-called middle classes in the US barely have $1,000 in savings and perhaps $100,000 or more in debt. The same forces that have virtually bankrupted Western middle classes are now somehow supposed to rectify the ruin.

The article even states that in addition to government activism, an effort must be made to “highlight realities of immigration so that the public is dealing with facts and not phobias.”

How is this to be done? Via”enlightened leadership … that “appeals to their better angels.  Eventually, we will cross this frontier as well.”

We’ve already called “populism versus globalism” a “textbook meme” and indicated that it provides ample opportunity for the kind of directed history that we can see suggested in this article.

The next step will surely involve legislation to implement these suggestions. We are already seeing this with “extremists” as reported by The Washington Post:

The White House announced a plan Wednesday to help prevent Americans from falling prey to violent ideologies of the sort that drove mass killings in New York, San Bernardino, Calif., Chattanooga, Tenn., and Orlando in the past year. The effort … seeks to mobilize teams of teachers, mental health professionals and community leaders to deal with a problem that offers few easy solutions.

Conclusion: The “populism versus globalism” meme has a long way to travel but implemented fully it has a chance to broadly affect a variety of Western institutions and behaviors. It provides justification for a broad array of authoritarian intrusions and justifies this action on numerous levels.

Tagged with:
Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
  • Demonocracy

    And you don’t think it possible that there could be an agenda of white genocide in this? Flood a country with turd worlders that don’t believe in birth control in the first place and they openly admit that they want to outbreed the white population and thereby displace/replace them, and there’s no agenda?

    Pay close attention @8:50
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mm4fMYCI9g

  • Bruce C.

    I’m pretty sure that the DB would prefer Trump to win the Presidency, but what’s ironic is Trump would actually be the preferred President if this “populism vs globalism” theme is to play out. A Clinton Presidency would not be “populist” at all, so that would foil that particular dialectic.

    As I’ve said, the “elites” may have outsmarted themselves. Too many conflicting opinions from warring narcissists. We shall see.

  • apberusdisvet

    I have no problem with immigration per se as long as it is well planned and implemented. After all, many of us are the grandchildren and great- grandchildren of the great immigrant waves of the late 19th Century and early 20th Century. And with few exceptions the immigrant children assimilated without any of the entitlement, or special language education benefits available today. And this fact is probably the largest generator of the populist feeling in America today. Local school budgets are being decimated and property taxes are going through the roof. Together with Obamacare, this hastens the decline of the middle class which is fast disappearing as the principle means to achieve the American Dream.

    • Demonocracy

      That was long ago when the country was expanding. Sorry, it’s a full house now, don’t have enough resources for them and take care of our own. When the bucket is full you shut the spigot off, when the country is full and resources are strained, you shut the immigration spigot off. Try taking care of our veterans first!

      • Ephraiyim

        BS it is not a full house. There is so much land and resources out there it could boggle the mind. One problem and, mainly, the only one, most of it is in government hands.
        This nation’s growth would be exponential if government lands were transferred to private individuals who could then use it or sell it as they saw fit.

  • olde reb

    AGREED.
    Globalists (which you also identify as ‘elites’; I prefer the more
    specific identification of Wall Street or financiers [or crooks/embezzlers]) are promoting unrestricted immigration, which populists (as you identify them)
    resist as job-takers and terrorists.

    But are the true motivations and results adequately identified in this
    conclusion ?

    The result of massive human migration was obvious in Viet Nam.
    Propaganda by the CIA that Catholics in the north were going to be
    exterminated led to movement of humanity (assisted by US
    transportation) to the south. The complete disruption of the south,
    without housing, food, jobs, and more, for the requirements of the
    invaders caused strive and chaos. Would humongous increases in
    immigration into the US do less ?

    To compare current immigration to that of previous generations is
    unrealistic. Historic US immigration was inspired by individual
    ambition for self-improvement. The current immigration is an attempt
    to flee destruction of a homeland that is being destroyed by the
    destination of immigration. Animosity toward the destination is
    already instilled. Globalists would further demand the destination
    give hospitalization, food, shelter, and jobs to the invaders.
    Globalists are using immigration to further disrupt the host’s social
    order and impose financial burdens.

    The goal of the globalists is disruption—not a benevolent concern for
    the displaced persons. And from this disruption, globalists would
    promote more government oppression.

    But then again, as I reread your article, this is exactly what you have written.

    Gosh. You guys are smart.

  • paul

    Immigration into a country is supposed to be for the benefit of that country, its citizens and the immigrant in that the immigrant has something positive to offer the country in return for being allowed to immigrate. There is no “right” to immigration, it’s a priviledge afforded to immigrants in return for their integration, assimilation and contribution to the society of that country. Somewhere along the line we seem to have forgotten about that at the behest of the “globalist elite” who want open borders, free trade and free flow of people between countries regardless of the immigrant’s contribution to that country. This is assinine because it unnecessarily strains the social support systems of the host country and thereby gives more control to the ruling “elite” who can appropriate more of that country’s resources to support the “poor immigrants” and get their vote to increase their power base, which is exactly what the “global elites” are trying to do so as to achieve more power and leverage over the citizenry. It’s time that we fight back and say NO to this corruption of our Constitutional Rapublic. That’s why the attempts to increase immigration and disarm the populace is increasing, so they they can force their ideology on the public with minimal resistance and force us to compy with their globalist agenda. A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for the global elite and status quo. For the sake of our children, their future and the future of our country we need to make sure that Hillary Clinton does not become President of the United States of America because, like Obama and as she has stated in her speaches, she will do everything that she can to advance the globalist agenda of open borders, free trade and free flow of people between countries resulting in the destruction of our Constitutional Republic.

    • olde reb

      Migration has been used as a foreign policy by globalist criminals since 1951 to create turmoil and disruption in destination nations. Ref.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzPiZSw3FP0&feature=youtu.be.

    • Ephraiyim

      Your premise is only true if national boundaries actually meant anything. They are arbitrarily created by elitists to divide and conquer. This has been true throughout history.
      The world and it’s resources are Not the property of elitists but belong to all. I have no problem with property rights generally but when a nation creates a corporate structure which in turn removes property rights of individuals in favor of some “greater good” it is just plain evil.
      If people rather than nation states owned their property they would then be free to decide how it was used, when it was used and by whom. Since, in a nation, one can never truly own anything, but all is contingent on the vacillations of the state we get stuck in wars fighting to steal property from people in other nations. War is almost always about theft.
      I would have no problem sharing my property with others in some form of work for purchase for a part or even for some sort of collective whereby all share in the product of said property. You would have the same right to decide to keep it for yourself but governments deciding who can come and go , again, is evil and elitists.
      People are perfectly capable of deciding these things for themselves. Most of the fear and prejudice that occurs is through ignorance of others perpetratated by a press that serves the elitist meme of divide and conquer.

      • James

        National boundaries are sometimes arbitrary but it is not true in general. The quirks and vagaries of history impact the shapes of modern nations, but that is not at all anything arbitrary. Is Poland arbitrary because its borders in the Post Modern world are not where they were a thousand years ago? The Poles have clung stubbornly to their identity through a millennia of being slammed by Russia and Germany and the Austro-Hungarians. They might agree that at this point their borders are “arbitrary” but not in the way you make it sound.

loading