Dear Friends,
It seems to me, the definitions of populism and elitism are stale, and in need of redefining. Today, if you query most sources, they would say that populism is socialism, and elitism is capitalism. When the reality is, both stand for socialism, and neither stand for free markets. How can we split this hair? Both seek an unlimited central government to regulate every aspect of the lives of the masses. Making them totalitarian in nature. They only empower the elite. Populism the most if you believe the manipulators. So we are presented with one choice, despotism, either for the “benefit” of populists or of the elite. The reality is, the universe offers us an option other then totalitarian centralization. That option is decentralization… actual populism, or free enterprise, limited government, self rule and accountability.
Socialism in and of itself is an elitist enterprise. Far from being populist, all ideologies that seek to centralize authority are in fact elitist, while those that seek to decentralize authority are populist… or should be called populist anyway. How can the economy, society and national affairs be effectively run from a central authority, without a cadre of expert elites? AI is not ready yet, and if it is someday, AI would then become the elite, by definition. So no matter what a nation has, elitism or populism as the guiding philosophy, both will become despotic in time. Since both seek to centralize all authority and power into the hands of the elite. The one so the elite can become a self interested oligarchy, and the other so the people will be cared for, by big brother… a self interested oligarchy.
Elitism is the idea that intellectuals should make all the decisions. It is often thought that elitism means capitalism because the elite are the “capitalists.” The reality is, the elite are industrialists, but also bureaucrats, politicians, judges, media influencers, etc… they are the egoistic top ten percent of the population. The experts. Those that would run the world with unlimited power, beneficent for the betterment of the masses, or selfishly for their own good. Either way, they are the elite, seeking unlimited power. Does it matter what theater the show is in, if it is the same show? Elitism no more favors a free market than Marx. Because elitism and populism are different words for the same thing. The elite want us to think that all roads lead to Rome, or in our case… totalitarian global oligarchy.
Language is used to manipulate us in a myriad of ways. Misinformation and disinformation are simply rebranded wrongthink and wrongspeak. They are manipulations to keep us from thinking and instead react emotionally. Elitism and populism are similar. They might have had some utility in the past, back when elitism was associated with republican government (a blending of Aristotle’s Right forms), and populism as equality. Now elitism’s definition is the same as populism. That way our minds are channeled into one way of thinking. That the inevitable end of government, the ultimate government, is a global oligarchy of the elite, oppressing us for our own good. The elite want us to think limited government, accountable leaders and freedom for the individual… is impossible, absurd and racist.
It serves the elite to manipulate our thinking on the most fundamental level. When they control not only what we are allowed to say, but what the words themselves mean, that is absolute control. Making language itself a tool of oppression. How can we even talk about limited government if there is no language for it? Under such a regime how can the elite fail to get their global corporatocratic administrative state? If populism and elitism both mean unlimited government by experts, then what word means limited government, people power and capitalism? There is none. Unless we make up a new word, but the elite will quickly pervert its meaning anyway. It has to be elitism or populism. Since elitism obviously means rule by the elite, populism (people rule) will have to do.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
