No. It’s a tool. A sort of cudgel used to beat others with, in order to secure political power.
It’s more a rhetorical device.
It invokes a Manichean world of the Good People vs. the Eeeeeeeeeeeevil Elites.
But it’s effectively content-free. The People and The Elites are just convenient containers for the speaker to pour the things they support and oppose into, and who gets to be ‘the people’ depends on who they’re trying to attract.
This. It can take many shapes. Although I guess it’s at odds with certain (ideological?) positions, like valuing pluralism, valuing internal dissent (e.g. independent press) and the idea that everyone benefits from mutually adhered to checks and balances (like the separation of executive and legislative branch of government).
Really well said. Saved.
This. It can take many shapes. Although I guess it is at odds with certain (ideological) sentiments, like valuing pluralism (which suggests respecting minority interests), valuing internal dissent, recognizing the value of mutually adhered to checks and balances (like separating the executive and the legislative part of government).
I mean I have yet to meet the angry mob that aggressively demands for critical investigative journalists to analyze its internal conflicts and diversity of opinions.
