Can left wing socialists and right wing populists cooperate?

[cyberrevolution1]

Socialism is an ideology based on seizing the power and wealth from the rich elite and returning it to the masses.

 

Populism is an ideology based on running the country based on the will of the common man, and challenging the corrupt elite

These two ideologies have always been opposed to eachother, yet they share a common goal. Both want to stop the rich elite holding the power and making the decisions. There are key differences, such as nationalism vs internationalism, support and opposition to capitalism and progressive vs traditional social values. But we do share that common aim. Could the socialists use the populists to weaken the power of the elites so a global revolution could occur? The populists divide the global borguises, so we can conquer them.

 

While I personally think that populism is a working class movement lead by upper class tyrants, I am interested to know the opinions of the socialists on this site 

[jondwhite]

Lending support to populist leaders means you're in a worse (at least psychologically) position for taking power back from them at the next opportunity.The surest footing for socialism is popularity on its own merits.Something like what you're proposing happened in the US when officially meeting with FDR set the Socialist Party of America on a downward spiral from which it never recovered. It decimated their vote.https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2016/no-1343-july-2016/spa-dashed-rocks-compromise

[Anonymous]

cyberrevolution1 wrote:

Socialism is an ideology based on seizing the power and wealth from the rich elite and returning it to the masses. Populism is an ideology based on running the country based on the will of the common man, and challenging the corrupt eliteThese two ideologies have always been opposed to eachother, yet they share a common goal. Both want to stop the rich elite holding the power and making the decisions. There are key differences, such as nationalism vs internationalism, support and opposition to capitalism and progressive vs traditional social values. But we do share that common aim. Could the socialists use the populists to weaken the power of the elites so a global revolution could occur? The populists divide the global borguises, so we can conquer them. While I personally think that populism is a working class movement lead by upper class tyrants, I am interested to know the opinions of the socialists on this site 

 Your definition of socialism sounds like Robin Hood, peoples do not have to take anything, we produce  everything, we do not need charities, and we are not masses, we are living thinking beings, and socialism is not an ideology, we are not going  to have a ruling  elite. We must expropiate the expropiatorPopulism is not a working class movement, it is a movement run andf financed by the ruling elite using demagogues to motivate the workers to support their national and international interests, and their geopolitical plans. Even more, populism in its original form was rejected by leftist in Russia, and it was rejected by socialists tooReal socialists are not leftists, because we  are not reformists and conciliators, and left and right are not relevants, and both have made alliances many times, and both have support tyrants, dictatorships, massacres, wars and oppression, therefore ,it is not newWorkers should not make alliances with their own class enemies, and workers should not support the rat poison known as nationalism and patriotism, we should bring down all nationals barriers, all national borders, because our real allied are inside the borders and outside the borders of the nations, our rulers are not our allied.Personally, I would like like to send all of them inside of a rocket to another planet, and get rid of them forever, they have done more than enough damages to mankind and to our planet

[cyberrevolution1]

Interesting. Thank you for challenging my view of socialism. I'm learning more and more about it every day. Perhaps sieze was a poor choice of words, I was trying to imply that socialism is about taking back control from the rich elites.i agree with you that populism and socialism should not become an alliance-I was playing devils advocate really as I was interested in people's opinions on it- but I do not think denouncing populism as an evil movement will do the impossiblist socialism movement any favours. While populism is led by the rich elites, the followers are often members of the working and middle classes. These are people who are sick of elites, and believe populism will challenge the elites not realising that the populist candidates are elites themselves. The movement is elitist and imperialist, but the followers are not necessarily that. Pherhaps socialists should recognise what the appeal of populism is to people in Britain who feel left behind by the state, and use this understanding to preach socialism to them in a way that would get through to them 

[Bijou Drains]

Cyberrevolition1, I can see to an extent where you're coming from, there is a history of populist movements and even fascist/nazi movements wearing pseudo socialist clothes in their own propaganda. These movements have also included "leftist" elements, the Strasserites in the Nazi party, for example. They may complain about "crony capitalism", unfortunately they usually want to replace one set of cronies with their own particular brand, and even if there were no cronies, we'd still have capitalism and all of the shite that brings. The Socialist Movement does its best to counter the falsehoods and horse shit of the likes of Farage and Trump, but we need help. If you agree with our Socialist Principles why not join us and add another voice to that movement?yours for Socialism Tim

[robbo203]

cyberrevolution1 wrote:

. Could the socialists use the populists to weaken the power of the elites so a global revolution could occur? The populists divide the global borguises, so we can conquer them. 

 Going off at a slight tangent, as a regular viewer of RT I have a strong suspicion that it has a hidden agenda of courting populism and giving sympathetic coverage to populist issues like immigration precisely becuase the interests of Russian state lies with a divided Europe. Its the same with Trump with  whom its sympathies clearly lay in the presidential contest

[Anonymous]

One of the largest populist movement is chavezism and it has been a failure for the workers and beneficial for the ruling class

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

Going off at a slight tangent, as a regular viewer of RT I have a strong suspicion that it has a hidden agenda of courting populism and giving sympathetic coverage to populist issues like immigration precisely becuase the interests of Russian state lies with a divided Europe

Also having been a regular viewer during my absence from the internet, i can agree with Robbo here. RT has been guilty of highlighting the refugee crisis as a social problem and reporting on the crimes of refugees in their host countries.Has anybody got figures on the numbers of Syrian refugees Russia has admitted, even if only temporaily by offering advance medical treatment in their hospitals for the casualities of the civil war? As one of the major perpetrators of the conflict, Russia has failed to provide adequate humanitarian help to the victims while blaming Merkel for welcoming asylum-seekers.RT has been shamelessly pro-Trump, denouncing the protests against him such as the Women's march as a George Soros conspiracy and the Berkley University demonstrations as criminal anarchy. As you say, in the world of geo-politics a divided EU and US is in the interests of Russia's national interest and Putin's personal interest (are they the same thing?) It regularly invites UKIP policians on to their shows as commentators as well as American right-wingers from Ron Paul Institute. I should add they also make use of the SWP's Chris Banbury and Scot Nat John Wight.

[Anonymous]

cyberrevolution1 wrote:

Interesting. Thank you for challenging my view of socialism. I'm learning more and more about it every day. Perhaps sieze was a poor choice of words, I was trying to imply that socialism is about taking back control from the rich elites.i agree with you that populism and socialism should not become an alliance-I was playing devils advocate really as I was interested in people's opinions on it- but I do not think denouncing populism as an evil movement will do the impossiblist socialism movement any favours. While populism is led by the rich elites, the followers are often members of the working and middle classes. These are people who are sick of elites, and believe populism will challenge the elites not realising that the populist candidates are elites themselves. The movement is elitist and imperialist, but the followers are not necessarily that. Pherhaps socialists should recognise what the appeal of populism is to people in Britain who feel left behind by the state, and use this understanding to preach socialism to them in a way that would get through to them 

The real target should be capitalism instead of blaming the economical problems in others workers, that is what the Trump movement is doing. Blaming the economical and political problems on the Mexicans and the Middle Easterners and leaving intact the profit system, destroying one commercial cartel to create another one is only beneficial to the capitalist class, a group Mafioso trying to take the market of others groups of Mafioso, they are just a bunch of glorified  gangsters. The drugs cartels are using the same tacticThey are not so tired of the elite when they are electing members of the ruling class to govern them, a capitalist is not going to defend our own interests. They are tired of certain problems that are taking place in the capitalist society, but they do not have the proper political and economical knowledge to understand  why this is taking place, that is the importance of studying socialist theory.If we understand that  profit is produced by the workers and that we are supporting a bunch of parasites, and legalized thieves known as capitalists, we will understand that  the root of the problems is capitalism. If we understand that we are wages slaves we will understand that this society in divided into two social classes only and that the so called middle class is one a fallacyIf we understand that our real allied are all the members of the working class of the whole world, workers would not be claiming to build wall s and to  deport others workers, or to go into wars with others workers.If we understand that the state is financed with surplus value, and we are not the so called taxpayers, workers will not become echo of the rulers by saying that they are the ones providing social services to others workers. Religion is not the main problem of the world, it is the profit system, that is the excuse used in order to cover the real root of the problemsThere is a long list of social and economical issues that workers do not understand due to the lack of political and economical knowledge, that is reason why workers should read socialist materials, and throw in the trash the bourgeois political education

[robbo203]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Quote:

Going off at a slight tangent, as a regular viewer of RT I have a strong suspicion that it has a hidden agenda of courting populism and giving sympathetic coverage to populist issues like immigration precisely becuase the interests of Russian state lies with a divided Europe

Also having been a regular viewer during my absence from the internet, i can agree with Robbo here. RT has been guilty of highlighting the refugee crisis as a social problem and reporting on the crimes of refugees in their host countries.Has anybody got figures on the numbers of Syrian refugees Russia has admitted, even if only temporaily by offering advance medical treatment in their hospitals for the casualities of the civil war? As one of the major perpetrators of the conflict, Russia has failed to provide adequate humanitarian help to the victims while blaming Merkel for welcoming asylum-seekers.RT has been shamelessly pro-Trump, denouncing the protests against him such as the Women's march as a George Soros conspiracy and the Berkley University demonstrations as criminal anarchy. As you say, in the world of geo-politics a divided EU and US is in the interests of Russia's national interest and Putin's personal interest (are they the same thing?) It regularly invites UKIP policians on to their shows as commentators as well as American right-wingers from Ron Paul Institute. I should add they also make use of the SWP's Chris Banbury and Scot Nat John Wight.

 All true Alan, And the guy who hosts the Crosstalk show declared himself to be frankly conservative.  Somehow RT has pulled off the trick of appearng liberal in some ways while courting deeply reactionary sentiments in other ways, It is a tool of the Russian state and its reactionary oligarch leader, Putin, who is a good example of a Right wing populist . I  see Putin has just signed off some bill decriminalising domestic violence.  So macho violence  is OK then.  Like macho displays of military strength it all helps to cement the image of a strong leader  which is what populism tends to cultivate.  We are living in deeply reactionary times

[Author]

Posts