Yesterday in my video I discussed the factors that I saw as the cause for partisanship, and one of the main ones was inequality based on the fast-pace of technology development, and how technology is displacing people who are not able to keep up. I had an IRL question about populism, so thought I’d put together a post that dives a little deeper into explaining it.
Since Brexit, we’ve been hearing a lot in the media about populism, specifically right-wing populism, and how this movement has led to enormous political shakeups in Britain, in the US, and now potentially in France (and a little shake up in Germany when Chancellor Angela Merkel didn’t win her constituency during the regional election, it went to a right-wing conservative group – but had no real bearing on her position as Chancellor).
So what is populism? By definition it is a political belief that the “common people are exploited by a privileged elite, and which seeks to resolve this.” It is generally a movement to bring people together against the the dominant political elites who do not prioritize the needs of the average person.
In this context, the “average,” or “common” people are those who are on the political peripheral, often neglected and forgotten by the establishment; people who live in small, rural communities and have traditionally based their livelihoods on industries like manufacturing and agriculture; factory workers, miners, farmers, etc. Basically, people who have been left behind by our cosmopolitan cities and technological development. More often than not, these communities are hurt by technological development by way of job loss and a widening knowledge gap (if you are not technologically inclined; you aren’t familiar with a computer, or don’t have reason to constantly be engaged by your smartphone, it is far less likely that you are receiving the same amount of information as somebody who is).
Nigel Farrage, the British politician who led Britain towards the Brexit vote, and Donald Trump both leaned into populism, identifying a class of people who felt they were left out and forgotten. We saw this in Trump’s messaging as he talked frequently about bringing coal back, immigration causing job loss, and removing the establishment (oh, the irony now, much of his cabinet is from Wall Street, or more specifically, Goldman Sachs – the epitome of the establishment). The Atlantic looks at Trump’s base here.
The Economist published an interesting article (5 min read), that discusses how important continued education is in keeping up with technology, and in keeping employed.
“When education fails to keep pace with technology, the result in inequality. Without the skills to stay useful as innovations arrive, workers suffer – and if enough of them fall behind, society starts to fall apart.”
The article also touches on how education has evolved to both meet the needs of employers today, and reach people who are not able to take time off to attend schooling; organizations like Udemy and Coursera. Personally, I can’t say enough good things about companies like this who are working to democratize education. The courses that Udemy and Coursera offer are often Ivy League level, taught by professors at universities like MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Yale, etc, and cover subject matter including finance, high technology (machine learning, artificial intelligence), marketing, business, etc, etc. (PSA : These courses can come pretty cheap. Highly recommended!)
Of course, no matter how many online courses you offer, they aren’t going to help somebody in their life or career who doesn’t already have proficiency in computers, and so this type of lifelong learning largely benefits those who are already high achievers, and can exacerbate the gap of inequality.
Populism is a global movement. Here in Canada, we have our own budding mini-Trump in Kevin O’Leary, making statements that appeal to Canadians who find attraction in Trump’s policies, and even seemingly copying his behaviour; cancelling his attendance at an event where the rest of the conservative candidates were debating because he didn’t “like the format” and holding his own event instead, cancelling when the political debate was bilingual and he is not, and pumping up his business acumen as more important than political experience.
Getting into a tangent here, while I aggressively disagree with much of what O’Leary says and does (and how he generally behaves), I am open to his stance on immigration and more conservative lean to fiscal policy. But this is NOT my endorsement of him – just giving you a balanced view.
Feature image via US news.
