In times of disruptive changes that have complex and overlapping reasons, populists tend to boil it down to one or two explanations to suit their ends The most repeated cliche in advertising and marketing circles is the word “disruption.” It implies breaking away from the norm and using jarring ways to attract the attention of potential consumers towards a product or a service. Nevertheless, American author David Von Drehle explains this idea of disruption as being part and parcel of a mindset that eventually aided the rise of neo-populism. Drehle equates this with the nature of populism ruling various countries, especially the US, India, Brazil, Hungary, Italy, the UK, the Philippines, Venezuela, Pakistan, and do on. Such changes can trigger an optimistic outlook, as they did with the rise of science and brand new economic and political ideas, which aided the growth and influence of the middle classes from the 18th century onwards. In his book The Populism Explosion, John Judis writes that things remain in check as long as the elected and unelected political elite work to deliver sustained prosperity to the masses and steadily improve the nation’s living standards. For example, during the early decades of the 20th century, when revolutions were erupting, wars were being waged among dying monarchies, new political ideas were being shaped and Western societies were rapidly shifting from rural to urban, “the typical populist boiled it down to a problem of corrupt railroad barons and Jews.” Daniel Linsker writes, “Populist governments, reliant on their need to constantly convey positive messaging that bolsters their support, have struggled to take the decisive, forward-looking action that the Covid-19 crisis demands.” Perpetrators have simply revived the tactics of a time when the US spent billions of dollars to portray China as an evil entity out to destroy humanity. In the book, Hunter claimed that the Chinese had invented an elusive brainwashing technique to create a slave race.
You May Also Like