Beware of the Populists

Anonymous and I are home, and the Populists are coming soon.

Mar 01, 2024

Happy Friday, Okay History, Friends! Anonymous and I are back from our secluded island, where we had a wonderful time enjoying 80-degree and all-around perfect weather conditions.

Anonymous and I taking in God’s creation.

Now we are back in the cold, we were immediately greeted with two significant events that took place in our hometown.

First, Mitch McConnell, the senior senator from Kentucky and longest-serving Leader of the Senatorial Republicans, announced he would resign after the November election. After what I assume was a long, awkward pause, Mitch also announced he would remain in office until his term finishes, which I believe is in another ten years.

Next, the Supreme Court agreed to hear former President Donald Trump’s claims that he is immune from prosecution for any illegal acts he committed while president, like trying to reverse an election. The Supreme Court effectively killed any possibility of completing his trial by the election. Therefore, we continue to kick the can down the road. There is a strong possibility we may elect a guy who will be sitting in a jail cell at his inauguration. Fantastic.

Neither event is all that surprising. McConnell wouldn’t lead forever, and the Supreme Court has zero ethics.

While it’s scary to see who will replace McConnell and the possibility that Trump could return to the White House, neither is as terrifying as the thought that the Populists are coming and no one is ready to stop them.

Which leads us to another round of me Asking Myself Anything. Let’s jump in because it’s at the top of my mind.

You are probably asking, Chris, who are populists?

Great question! Even if you didn’t ask it, we are going with it.

Populism is a term that we use in American political discourse that we attach to anything we can’t explain. Good or bad. But primarily according to the media, political think tanks, and, for some reason, fundraising experts, populism and the people who practice it, populists, are the monsters under your bed, ready to strike when you fall asleep.

You are probably asking yourself, Chris, what are you talking about?

Another great question! What am I talking about?

Well, when I’m not ranking institutions of United States history, I work in the world of philanthropy. The pay is much better. But my work and hobby have overlapped a bit these last few weeks, and I’d like to share my thoughts.

To make a long story short, every year, more and more money is donated to nonprofit organizations. It’s been this for, like, ever. Giving USA, the most comprehensive philanthropic report, has compiled giving trends as far back as 40 years, showing increase after increase despite market downturns and pandemics. Philanthropy in the United States is resilient.

While there is more money, there has been a steady decline in the number of donors for the past few decades.

So more money is coming from fewer people. In other words, nonprofits received $200 billion when I graduated college. Last year, about $500 billion was given to charitable organizations. At the same time, back in 1998, the United States had about 300 billionaires. Twenty-five years later, we have twice as many.

This isn’t good for philanthropy. Philanthropy thrives when everyone feels they can participate and is not something that is left to the rich. Philanthropy needs more people.

Over the same period, we have seen the rise of money flowing into our politics. I don't know what to tell you if you didn’t realize that more money has flowed into our elections. Here’s a small sample of what I’m talking about: in 2022, Josh Shapiro spent $72 million to win the governorship in Pennsylvania by securing 57% of the vote. Twenty years earlier, both candidates spent around $20 million.

We have seen a decline in small-dollar donations (those under $200) in this presidential election cycle, even though we will see a vast total come in, surpassing what we did in 2020, which topped $14.4 billion, double what was spent in 2016.

This is also a problem.

So you are probably asking – what does this have to do with populists and populism?

The only way you make philanthropy thrive is by providing more opportunities for people to participate. We also need more people to feel that participating in our democracy is a good thing. Because you don’t want the rich to control the market, charity, and government. There’s room for everyone in all three areas, and it’s essential that we have some equity in all three, or we are screwed.

This is where populists come in.

Populism became a term in the late 19^th century when farmers in Kansas decided they were sick of being screwed. They demanded a more people-centered government instead of one controlled by bankers, railroads, and corporations. In 1891, the People’s Party was formed. The Party did not last long.

The backlash was swift, and since then, we haven’t come close to defining what populism is and what it is not.

And to me, this is a fundamental problem we face.

Let me begin by defining my position on what populism is, which dates back to those farmers and ordinary people who came up with the term.

Ordinary citizens, the people, can decide how they will be governed and not hand over their God-given right to self-government to people who are concerned elite.

If you have a negative view of what populism means, in my opinion, you have been conned by the elite class who think the people are grievance-driven demagogues who need to be stopped. Unless you are running for office and can flip that idea to help you get elected.

The People’s Party was immediately driven out of national politics by the 1896 election, sweeping William McKinley into office, backed by Wall Street and major newspapers who didn’t like the idea that people who weren’t involved in finance could be in charge. Populism merged with the Democratic Party, and we saw how populist policies can be effective, especially in times of great need, like the Great Depression.

I have recently seen this anti-populist idea spill into philanthropy. I won’t go into detail here, but plenty of people in my industry believe billionaires are good people who drive virtuous, meaningful work and are above reproach.

While I certainly do not judge all insanely wealthy people with a broad brush of mistrust, I can conclude that their views on how the world should work differ from mine. But there are ideas out there – populist critique of billionaires being one, a concept I think is so bonkers it makes my blood boil. A populist critique in the fundraising world means ordinary people can’t question billionaires' giving because they don’t understand how complex their giving is.

Yes, Aunt Joan, you are too dumb to understand the complexity of why Harvard graduate and billionaire Ken Griffin donated $300 million to his alma mater. You can’t question how Ken makes his money or how he gives it out, whether to elite education institutions or political candidates who will ensure his status.

There’s also the rise of donor anonymity. Not so much as how nonprofits recognize generous gifts but that donors don’t want the charities to know who they are. If this idea gains traction, philanthropy is dead because it kills relationships. I didn’t get to marry Anonymous by never telling her who I was.

Democracy is the same way. It works when there is more democracy. Trump would never have become president if the anti-populist blunt object called the Electoral College didn’t exist.

Instead, we must worry about how much money is being spent in Pennsylvania because of their elite status in determining who becomes president.

I know I have joked about how stupid people can be when they vote, but the idea that they are generally too stupid to figure anything out is a pretty arrogant conclusion, even for me. I know I’m the smartest person ever to create the most mediocre, unedited history blog, but I live in a world where I want more participation, not less.

And that is what anti-populists want. Whether in democracy or philanthropy. They want less of you, me, Aunt Joan, ECM, and all the Dakes who stopped reading my work. They tie populism, more of a concept than a political movement, with nationalism, authoritarianism, socialism, communism, badism, all the isms. All of these isms are terrible, according to people who have the power to elevate such narratives, because populism is a threat to their power.

We need clarity when it comes to defining who are populists. Let me help. Trump is not a populist. The farmers who wanted collective bargaining, better harvest protections, and higher wages, did not want someone who has described himself as a dictator.

Reagan was not a populist. He changed the narrative that the government can and should be the great equalizer and prevented you from succeeding instead. Now, people wonder why they can’t own homes while corporations tell everyone to eat cereal for dinner.

Final question – what are we doing here?

Wrapping up.

I’ll end with this. Please don’t assume the definition of a word simply because you heard it out in the wild. Please take some time and investigate their histories.

Take the word grievance. All anti-populists think of grievance as a pejorative. But that is not the case. America is a grievance-driven society. The Declaration of Independence was a laundry list of grievances, many of which we made up. We have a legislative branch to bring our grievances into one spot, vote, and agree on things. We have a court to decide our agreed-upon grievances. The 18^th Amendment was a stupid grievance, but one nonetheless. The 21^st Amendment was a correction of that grievance.

The 19^th, the 13^th, and 15^th Amendments are all grievances. Grievances are good things because they come from the people. We the people and all that.

So, as we spend the rest of 2024 figuring out how we are going to get our old white guy elected, let’s not focus so much on what we think of grievances in general but on how we are going to persuade people that our old white is going to solve our grievances.

Let’s take back what it means to be populist and not give in to the biased, uninformed narrative that appears to be infecting way too many of our institutions. The people of the United States are generous, good people. Let’s stop using terms that block our opportunities to express ourselves.

What do you think? Agree? Disagree?

Beware of the Populists

Anonymous and I are home, and the Populists are coming soon.

Discussion about this post