Although apparently antagonistic, especially when talking about populism located on the left of the spectrum, capitalism and populism have a point of coincidence: the commercial exploitation of the masses. Apart from the differences, insofar as one focuses on the economic issue and the other on the political issue, the instruments used for this purpose are similar, since it is about enhancing the attractiveness of their respective products to sell them better in the field of the market. The masses have been seen as that inexhaustible flow of income that must be maintained in order not to dry up the source, since the progress of the business depends on them. It should be clarified that maintenance involves entertaining them, in the case of populism,without really appreciating solutions beyond what is propagandistic and the distribution of state products among its most loyal followers - a priority function of those in power, without prejudice to the permanent fight to stay in it - in exchange for exploitation consented, via taxes, from the rest of society. In the case of capitalism, without disregarding the same idea, here going to advertising - for example, Reisman, to the point of considering him benevolent -, goes one step further to provide really perceptible material incentives that aspire to facilitate a better life, although be upon payment.In the case of capitalism, without disregarding the same idea, here going to advertising - for example, Reisman, to the point of considering him benevolent -, goes one step further to provide really perceptible material incentives that aspire to facilitate a better life, although be upon payment.In the case of capitalism, without disregarding the same idea, here going to advertising - for example, Reisman, to the point of considering him benevolent -, goes one step further to provide really perceptible material incentives that aspire to facilitate a better life, although be upon payment.
Once a first difference has been established, another can be seen in relation to the contextualization of the masses -concept the latter, which in general does not separate from the old sense of crowd. If from the ideology on which capitalism is supported, the masses have been universal, although for the purposes of greater effectiveness of order they have been established in terms of the State, populism has always left them within the enclosure, while capitalism He has taken them out to pasture from time to time in the open ground. Traditionally, capitalism, from the bourgeois era, went to the term nation to mix the human base of the enclosure vertebrated by the elites, while the populism of recent appearance -although doctrinally it tries to go back its origins in the late nineteenth and early twentieth-, refers to the term town, that is,the masses endowed with a local idiosyncrasy - called culture - governed by the political class. In these assumptions there is also a coincidence regarding the political exploitation of the masses. Since politically they are considered as a collectivity of individuals incapable of self-government due to an emerging lack of coordination, thus trying to justify the exploitation of one and the other sign, capitalism imposing its market rules on the economic and populism the rules of the political from politics. Such a reality, as Pareto, Mosca and Michels demonstrated at the time, it seems that today there is no room for too many questions and, if there was any possibility of redeeming elitist dominance over the masses, populism and capitalism from their respective strategies, they have been dealing to cancel it. In this point,In spite of the obstacles, it is also to be appreciated that capitalism has contributed to improving the situation of dependence on the masses, by promoting a consuming conscience, which has allowed them to gain relevance in the panorama of power; in the face of populism that only indulges in rhetoric, if not the tavern verbiage to continue the show.
Populism, as an ideology to deceive the masses - politics has been led to this sad fate - falsely advocates its capacity for self-government, since it ends up supplanting it, whatever its position on the political spectrum, by the government of their elites, who say they do it for the people, when it turns out that they only aspire to take over from the preceding ones or to define themselves as such. If populism is an ideology aimed at the access and consolidation of power, its executing arm is the party, which takes its precepts adapting them to the interests of the group. Taking into account that ultimately, as Sartori points out, the party is a political group that identifies itself with a supposedly ideological label and that participates in the elections so that its candidates access public political positions.The electoral instruments provided by modern populism initially referred to the politics of countries with exported democracy - the so-called second-tier countries - to smooth the transition to real representative democracy; later it has become a doctrinal reference used to the measure of the different parties of advanced democracy, whose common link is to use the term people to justify all their actions -legal and illegal- from the support of an ideology that has abused the term to be popular. Used by the radical wing as a destabilizing resource of capitalism since the time of utopian socialism and subsequent subsequent trials, left-wing populism limits itself to selling canned smoke so that when the container is opened the consumer has a moment of fun watching how it comes out.Reduced to party terms of supposed social ideology, always saving class privileges - his class - he thinks of the people as a herd of his property directed and conserved by his elites for the benefit of the group - it should not be overlooked that the party As Ostrogorski says, it is a machine that works in the interest of its affiliates and especially of its leaders. Equally used by populism on the other side - called right wing - to offer the people also canned and colorful products, following the rules of marketing, but at exorbitant prices, it builds its elitism from the availability of money. As for the populism of power, it limits itself to governing for the people, but without counting on the people.think of the people as a herd of property run and preserved by their elites for the benefit of the group - it should not be overlooked that the party, as Ostrogorski says, is a machine that works in the interests of its affiliates and especially its leaders -. Equally used by populism on the other side - called right wing - to offer the people also canned and colorful products, following the rules of marketing, but at exorbitant prices, it builds its elitism from the availability of money. As for the populism of power, it limits itself to governing for the people, but without counting on the people.he thinks of the people as a herd of his property directed and preserved by his elites for the benefit of the group - it should not be overlooked that the party, as Ostrogorski says, is a machine that works in the interests of its affiliates and especially of its leaders -. Equally used by populism on the other side - called right wing - to offer the people also canned and colorful products, following the rules of marketing, but at exorbitant prices, it builds its elitism from the availability of money. As for the populism of power, it limits itself to governing for the people, but without counting on the people.It is a machine that works in the interest of its affiliates and especially of its leaders. Equally used by populism on the other side - called right wing - to offer the people also canned and colorful products, following the rules of marketing, but at exorbitant prices, it builds its elitism from the availability of money. As for the populism of power, it limits itself to governing for the people, but without counting on the people.It is a machine that works in the interest of its affiliates and especially of its leaders. Equally used by populism on the other side - called right wing - to offer the people also canned and colorful products, following the rules of marketing, but at exorbitant prices, it builds its elitism from the availability of money. As for the populism of power, it limits itself to governing for the people, but without counting on the people.
For its part, capitalism, once the state model has been consolidated as a vehicle to establish the capitalist order, continues with its global development, defining strategies in terms of the masses to expand markets. It was not by chance in advanced societies the appearance of the mass consumer society exported to all parts of the globe under the auspices of capitalist interests, since it came to advance for market purposes a uniform consumer society, which absorbed like a sponge all industrial production. The masses, hungry for well-being, found solutions and not just words in the formula of capitalism, even if that well-being had an abusive cost. In addition, a panorama of real dignity was illuminated, far from the rights and freedoms of paper, because in consumption resided a real base of power.Overflowing the framework of the States, at this point a new model of an international order was entrusted, entrusted to institutions of this nature to coordinate, albeit weakly, market strategies. In the end, corporate globalization and consumer dignity have affected capitalism, which currently faces two obstacles to overcome: the international political bureaucracy and the consuming masses.the international political bureaucracy and the consuming masses.the international political bureaucracy and the consuming masses.
Under the protection of the situation, the state political bureaucracies expand and reinforce themselves as international power, as new ones emerge. The former increase their power both from the multiplicity of functions assumed by the new capitalist State, and from the hegemonic sense, derived from the economic base, expressed not only in the different commercial activities of the business community, which the State flags, but in other of a cultural or military nature. The ability to influence and impose itself internationally involves going beyond the traditional limits of the State, which implies setting legal limits, in use of its normative monopoly reserve, that affect capitalist interests and indicate the beginning of the investment of power. that capitalism has been dominating.The political bureaucracy of international institutions comes to represent another power added to the idea of state bureaucracy by dictating provisions, controlling actions that affect both capitalism and world citizenship. The shift of power from capitalism, as the dominant force, to the bureaucracy arising from the advance of capitalism is clear. As for the masses, they demand higher levels of well-being.
The masses are no longer seen in the local panorama for political purposes as a people or nation, now their meaning prevails in an international context. The capitalist model has been stranded for lack of new perspectives to offer, new technologies based on the expansion process find limitations in the field of creativity, and if the imagination is lacking, the masses are no longer entertaining. As capitalist power darkens, that of the international political bureaucracy over the masses increases, both because of the functions assumed, and because of the use of individual rights as a currency in the process of inflation affected by populism, by becoming guarantor. of them, even if it is done at their own convenience. On one side and the other, the masses play a determining role today, not only as consumers,but as arbiters of the politicians, with which, serving as support of both powers, their will, inclined on one side or the other, becomes decisive in the respective business fields of the political bureaucracy and capitalism. The political and economic reality is that the masses demand increasing welfare and unlimited rights, and both must be supplied by the respective powers. On the other hand, a struggle between powers follows to break the balance, tilting the balance to one side or the other. Capitalism has always diverted it from its side, but on the bureaucratic side the weight increases bringing new elements of seduction by the masses, although they respond to the slogans of populism.it becomes decisive in the respective business fields of the political bureaucracy and capitalism. The political and economic reality is that the masses demand increasing welfare and unlimited rights, and both must be supplied by the respective powers. On the other hand, a struggle between powers follows to break the balance, tilting the balance to one side or the other. Capitalism has always diverted it from its side, but on the bureaucratic side the weight increases bringing new elements of seduction by the masses, although they respond to the slogans of populism.it becomes decisive in the respective business fields of the political bureaucracy and capitalism. The political and economic reality is that the masses demand increasing welfare and unlimited rights, and both must be supplied by the respective powers. On the other hand, a struggle between powers follows to break the balance, tilting the balance to one side or the other. Capitalism has always diverted it from its side, but on the bureaucratic side the weight increases bringing new elements of seduction by the masses, although they respond to the slogans of populism.a fight between powers follows to break the balance, tilting the balance to one side or the other. Capitalism has always diverted it from its side, but on the bureaucratic side the weight increases bringing new elements of seduction by the masses, although they respond to the slogans of populism.a fight between powers follows to break the balance, tilting the balance to one side or the other. Capitalism has always diverted it from its side, but on the bureaucratic side the weight increases bringing new elements of seduction by the masses, although they respond to the slogans of populism.
Leaving the global system subsistent, the debate has taken to the field of the popular trying to win the support of the masses located in the territory of the States. The postponement of the nation-state model in favor of the global-state has consequences, the political class plays its game using consumers in advanced societies to democratically rebel in order to ensure its role as a party in the exercise of power. The capitalist reaction has been to enter the game directly by committing itself politically. The strategy of both positions is vented in the field of the struggle between parties to impose their respective ideological positions using populism. The doctrine of placing the people as the center of all actions of a political nature, even if it does not respond to a reality,but to simple propaganda ready to cover up the true intentions that encourage all parties to come and stay in power to fulfill the ideological goals that from the hidden side seek to attend to their group privileges.
The rise of populism could be understood as the result of the masses becoming consolidated as the determining currency of power. Today is the terrain that illuminates the development of political activity. From the earliest days of modern capitalism, driven by industrial revolutions, the advanced masses have been the key to capitalist development, since demand is capable of absorbing industrial force. Such dependence, despite the capitalist dictatorship that is exerted on the market by establishing fashions and creating apparent needs, has as a correspondence the principle of the power of the masses. Evidence that has to be assumed by political reality. It turns out that the masses have real power and are the result of adding their individual components. They are seduced by democracy,instrument of containment and determinant of governance. The populism of advanced societies is the consequence of the consolidation of the democratic system, in which individuals vote political projects in the form of parties and determine the exercise of power. Hence, the political class begins to see in the masses the object of the campaign to come to power. A new and more energetic principle of dependency is established than that set by capitalism, with the advantage that the masses can be manipulated from rhetoric, unlike the capitalism on which they depend, which only admits realities.in which individuals vote political projects in the form of parties and determine the exercise of power. Hence, the political class begins to see in the masses the object of the campaign to come to power. A new and more energetic principle of dependency is established than that set by capitalism, with the advantage that the masses can be manipulated from rhetoric, unlike the capitalism on which they depend, which only admits realities.in which individuals vote political projects in the form of parties and determine the exercise of power. Hence, the political class begins to see in the masses the object of the campaign to come to power. A new and more energetic principle of dependency is established than that set by capitalism, with the advantage that the masses can be manipulated from rhetoric, unlike the capitalism on which they depend, which only admits realities.
If the capitalists have an efficient instrument to attract the masses, such as advertising, with the aim of selling their products, a populist party plays the same trick from propaganda, and at this point it flatters the people using the formulas that it provides the dominant doctrine in its different versions, which leads to the same result: facilitating the sale of its ideological merchandise. The usefulness of populism for political ends comes from its malleability, which allows it to adopt innumerable forms, even opposed in its own ideological support. It serves everyone, that is why it is present throughout the representative spectrum of political parties, it only changes the method to flatter the masses located in the territory of the State and the degree of radicalism that they show in the friend-enemy opposition.In this way it allows the parties to offer social utopias, utopias of well-being or close utopias, present in left-wing, right-wing populism or in the populism of exercising power.
Over time, the populism practiced by the old paternalistic leaders of the weak countries who claimed to fight capitalism to attract the disadvantaged to its cause, has changed its ways to make itself compatible with the politics of advanced societies. Today the populist leader renounces outdated paternalism and tries to offer realities that connect with the possible solution of the problems that affect local front-line societies. That populism in its central idea is not new, because since the bourgeois era it has been there for electoral reasons, but the boom has come since the political role of the local masses in the determinations derived from representative democracy in consideration of role of consumers, which determines their position as arbitrators of the situation. On the other hand,The political class has seen the opportunity to free itself from the weight of capitalism by taking autonomy as a class, encouraged by the role it has played in hegemonic states and its presence in international control organizations. Both circumstances - people and political class - have marked the route of the rise of populism, establishing the debate on the primacy of individual rights or business interests.
As a complement to the ideologies that allow the political parties to be labeled, the work of populism is to politically attract the masses from their different versions, in which everything that refers to the people in one way or another has a place. It is about channeling the feeling of the political in one direction or another, within a range of options, and then caging them in a party dynamic in which only their representatives move. Politics plays with illusions of various kinds, but it cannot be detached from the mercantile realities provided by capitalist companies. Hence the need for understanding between the two. Considering the mass society as that atomized and uncoordinated society, whose members are characterized by passivity and conformity, it facilitates, as Swingewood observes,that irrational political movements end up dominating it. The ultimate objective, above their respective interests of power in the political and economic plane, is none other, once again, than to undermine the real power of the masses, alleviating the moments of leisure with trifles for them and business for who provide them.
Reference bibliography
Laclau, E., "Populist Reason".
Michels, R., "The political parties".
Mouffe, Ch., "Around the political".
Mosca, C., "The political class."
Ostrogorski, M., "Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties".
Pareto, W., "Treatise on General Sociology".
Reisman, G., "Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics".
Sartori, G., “Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis”.
Schmitt, C., "The concept of the political".
Swingewood, A., "The myth of mass culture".
Antonio Lorca Siero April 2017.
Download the original file
