The article’s main argument is centered around the misuse of populist terminology when describing popular grassroots organizing and movements. Linda Gordon writes that ‘populism’ became a trendy word during the recent US election to describe Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders’ campaigns. These referrals are damaging to the political landscape and emphasises that historians and media should be stricter when calling a person or group populist.
The argument is expanded upon by outlining the history and practices of the KKK, what she calls a true populist movement. The KKK is characterized by all of the 13 elements that are displayed by populist groups such as, large size, mass mobilization, extreme nationalism, victimization and conspiracy theories. For example, the Klan considered all white Anglo-Saxon protestant’s victims who have fallen to the Jews and Catholics. The Jews, ran Hollywood and attempted to subvert women’s morality through their near naked depiction and the Catholics invaded the police, politics and schools.
Is the ‘alt-right’ filling the void that the KKK once occupied? I believe they could fit in most of the 13 elements, but they seem less harmful. They have mass participation which can be seen online and in the event in Charlottesville. They are anti-immigration and angry and distrustful of elites. A distrust of experts can also be seen in the ‘fake news’ campaigns. The alt-right has also expressed disdain for the Jewish community following the fashion of the KKK. One of the leaders, Richard Spencer is a proponent for a Jewish free white only North America.
Does the alt-right wield the same power as the KKK once did? Does the alt-right lack central leadership that diminishes the cohesion needed to wield such power? Can they evolve to be as recognisable as the KKK? How has the Trump era influenced groups like the KKK and the alt-right?