³1username³2LarrySanger³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2982304976³2ip³2209.66.79.109³2data³2newauthor³31³3minor³30³3text³3Someone (Tim?) wrote:
:DemagoguerY is identical to PopulisM according to those in power. This is why businesspeople frequently condemn democracy wherever it gives the "wrong" socialist result. One can define DemagoguerY as appealing to the base instincts of the masses, and PopulisM as appealing to the enlightened interests of the masses.
Sorry for deleting this, but I don't even understand it.  Who are "those in power"?  Is something bad being said about Demagoguery, Populism, or those in power?  What "socialist results" are referred to?  Basically, this needs to be completely rewritten so that it is absolutely clear what the point is.  Can you restate this so that it is fact-stating--so that no one would disagree with it?  Perhaps it will take something to the effect that "a cynic would point out that..." and "demagoguery and populism are, according to some cynics, two sides of the same coin.  Here's what that means, exactly..."
³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2982304976³2keepts³2982306708³2id³21280³2host³2cobrand.bomis.com³2revision³21³1username³2TimShell³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2982306708³2ip³2209.66.79.109³2data³2text³3Someone (Tim?) wrote:
- Sounds just like me, doesn't it?  Tim

:DemagoguerY is identical to PopulisM according to those in power. This is why businesspeople frequently condemn democracy wherever it gives the "wrong" socialist result. One can define DemagoguerY as appealing to the base instincts of the masses, and PopulisM as appealing to the enlightened interests of the masses.
Sorry for deleting this, but I don't even understand it.  Who are "those in power"?  Is something bad being said about Demagoguery, Populism, or those in power?  What "socialist results" are referred to?  Basically, this needs to be completely rewritten so that it is absolutely clear what the point is.  Can you restate this so that it is fact-stating--so that no one would disagree with it?  Perhaps it will take something to the effect that "a cynic would point out that..." and "demagoguery and populism are, according to some cynics, two sides of the same coin.  Here's what that means, exactly..."
³3minor³31³3newauthor³31³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2982304976³2keepts³2982306720³2id³21149³2host³2cobrand.bomis.com³2revision³22³1username³2TimShell³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2982306720³2ip³2209.66.79.109³2data³2newauthor³30³3minor³31³3text³3Someone (Tim?) wrote:
 - Sounds just like me, doesn't it?  Tim

:DemagoguerY is identical to PopulisM according to those in power. This is why businesspeople frequently condemn democracy wherever it gives the "wrong" socialist result. One can define DemagoguerY as appealing to the base instincts of the masses, and PopulisM as appealing to the enlightened interests of the masses.
Sorry for deleting this, but I don't even understand it.  Who are "those in power"?  Is something bad being said about Demagoguery, Populism, or those in power?  What "socialist results" are referred to?  Basically, this needs to be completely rewritten so that it is absolutely clear what the point is.  Can you restate this so that it is fact-stating--so that no one would disagree with it?  Perhaps it will take something to the effect that "a cynic would point out that..." and "demagoguery and populism are, according to some cynics, two sides of the same coin.  Here's what that means, exactly..."
³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2982304976³2keepts³2982307709³2id³21149³2host³2cobrand.bomis.com³2revision³23³1username³2LarrySanger³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2982307709³2ip³2209.66.79.109³2data³2text³3Someone (Tim?) wrote:
 - Sounds just like me, doesn't it?  Tim
 - I guess so...?  :-)  OK, so the logs prove definitively, it was you.

:DemagoguerY is identical to PopulisM according to those in power. This is why businesspeople frequently condemn democracy wherever it gives the "wrong" socialist result. One can define DemagoguerY as appealing to the base instincts of the masses, and PopulisM as appealing to the enlightened interests of the masses.
Sorry for deleting this, but I don't even understand it.  Who are "those in power"?  Is something bad being said about Demagoguery, Populism, or those in power?  What "socialist results" are referred to?  Basically, this needs to be completely rewritten so that it is absolutely clear what the point is.  Can you restate this so that it is fact-stating--so that no one would disagree with it?  Perhaps it will take something to the effect that "a cynic would point out that..." and "demagoguery and populism are, according to some cynics, two sides of the same coin.  Here's what that means, exactly..."
³3minor³30³3newauthor³31³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2982304976³2keepts³2982309823³2id³21280³2host³2cobrand.bomis.com³2revision³24³1username³2RichardKulisz³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2982309823³2ip³2209.66.79.109³2data³2newauthor³31³3minor³30³3text³3Richard wrote:

:DemagoguerY is identical to PopulisM according to those in power. This is why businesspeople frequently condemn democracy wherever it gives the "wrong" socialist result. One can define DemagoguerY as appealing to the base instincts of the masses, and PopulisM as appealing to the enlightened interests of the masses.
Sorry for deleting this, but I don't even understand it.  Who are "those in power"?  Is something bad being said about Demagoguery, Populism, or those in power?  What "socialist results" are referred to?  Basically, this needs to be completely rewritten so that it is absolutely clear what the point is.  Can you restate this so that it is fact-stating--so that no one would disagree with it?  Perhaps it will take something to the effect that "a cynic would point out that..." and "demagoguery and populism are, according to some cynics, two sides of the same coin.  Here's what that means, exactly..."

How about:

A cynic would point out that demagoguery and populism are two sides of the same coin. Demagoguery appeals to people's baser instincts while populism appeals to their enlightened interests. Too often, the flaws of democracy are brought up by people whose interests run counter to the public's. For example, following the victory of the Socialist Party in the French election in June 1997, newspaper editors explained that the problem with democracy is that it can give the "wrong" answer. The same thing occured upon the election of Salvatore Allende (a Marxist) in Chile. This tragic failure of democracy prompted the UnitedStates' government to "liberate" the people of Chile by giving Generalissimo Augusto Pinochet (a known concentration camp commander) the resources to execute a coup d'etat and impose a brutal military junta on the population. Similarly, the UnitedStates was founded as a Republic based on the sentiment popular among its land-owning class (of whom the Founding Fathers were representatives) that "the people who own the country should govern it".
³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2982304976³2keepts³2982310161³2id³21284³2host³2cobrand.bomis.com³2revision³25³1username³2RichardKulisz³2name³2text_default³2version³21³2ts³2982310161³2ip³2209.66.79.109³2data³2text³3Richard wrote:

:DemagoguerY is identical to PopulisM according to those in power. This is why businesspeople frequently condemn democracy wherever it gives the "wrong" socialist result. One can define DemagoguerY as appealing to the base instincts of the masses, and PopulisM as appealing to the enlightened interests of the masses.
Sorry for deleting this, but I don't even understand it.  Who are "those in power"?  Is something bad being said about Demagoguery, Populism, or those in power?  What "socialist results" are referred to?  Basically, this needs to be completely rewritten so that it is absolutely clear what the point is.  Can you restate this so that it is fact-stating--so that no one would disagree with it?  Perhaps it will take something to the effect that "a cynic would point out that..." and "demagoguery and populism are, according to some cynics, two sides of the same coin.  Here's what that means, exactly..."

How about:

A cynic would point out that demagoguery and populism are two sides of the same coin. Demagoguery appeals to people's baser instincts while populism appeals to their enlightened interests. Too often, the flaws of democracy are brought up by people whose interests run counter to the public's. For example, following the victory of the Socialist Party in the French election of June 1997, North American newspaper editors explained that the problem with democracy is that it can give the "wrong" answer. This error on the part of the public occured upon the election of Salvatore Allende (a Marxist) by the impoverished people of Chile. This tragic failure of democracy prompted the UnitedStates' government to "liberate" the people of Chile by giving Generalissimo Augusto Pinochet (a former concentration camp commander) the resources to execute a coup d'etat and impose a brutal military junta on the population. Similarly, the UnitedStates was founded as a Republic based on the sentiment popular among its land-owning class, of whom the Founding Fathers were representatives, that "the people who own the country should govern it".
³3minor³30³3newauthor³30³3summary³3*³2tscreate³2982304976³2keepts³2982312393³2id³21284³2host³2cobrand.bomis.com³2revision³26