It’s more a rhetorical device.
It invokes a Manichean world of the Good People vs. the Eeeeeeeeeeeevil Elites.
But it’s effectively content-free. The People and The Elites are just convenient containers for the speaker to pour the things they support and oppose into, and who gets to be ‘the people’ depends on who they’re trying to attract.
This. It can take many shapes. Although I guess it is at odds with certain (ideological) sentiments, like valuing pluralism (which suggests respecting minority interests), valuing internal dissent, recognizing the value of mutually adhered to checks and balances (like separating the executive and the legislative part of government).
I mean I have yet to meet the angry mob that aggressively demands for critical investigative journalists to analyze its internal conflicts and diversity of opinions.
Really well said. Saved.
No. It’s a tool. A sort of cudgel used to beat others with, in order to secure political power.
