
































Microsoft Word - APE-V2N2-p85


Advances in Politics and Economic 
ISSN 2576-1382 (Print) ISSN 2576-1390 (Online) 

Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape 

85 
 

Original Paper 

Populism & Political Participation 

Peter Bearse, Ph.D. (Economics)1* 
1 Development Strategies Corporation, Carrabelle, United States 
* Peter Bearse, Ph.D. (Economics), Development Strategies Corporation, Carrabelle, United States 
 

Received: March 10, 2019       Accepted: March 30, 2019       Online Published: April 8, 2019 

doi:10.22158/ape.v2n2p85                URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/ape.v2n2p85 
 

Abstract 

This article defines both populism and political participation, tells why they are both important and 

how they interact and interrelate. Program and policy implications are drawn. 

Keywords 

participation, political, cooperatives, democratic, power, populism, grassroots, elites, dialogue, 

deliberation, volunteering, corruption, adulthood, oligarchy, learning, top-down, bottom-up 

 

1. Introduction 

This topic is critical to the health and survival of the world’s greatest democratic republic. My first 

political book offered a then and now, still controversial theme—a core, simple, gosh-a-rootie populist 

theme: WOW!—the American people should be the key actors in the political process. A “key actor?”, 

YES!, YOU!, via participation in politics. You could be a powerful participant, especially in concert 

with others. To revive what should be but is unfortunately not now ours—OUR democratic system!  

 

2. Method 

The method of our investigation is twofold, Socratic and exegetical. Socratic: A systematic asking of 

questions from general to specific; e.g., from “What is populism?” to “What the specific factors that 

induce people to get involved in the political process?”. 

Exegetical: In so far as we seek to characterize and categorize modalities of human behavior in light of 

critical readings of various sources. 

 

3. Result 

What is political participation? It comes in many forms. Voting is the most featured and familiar and 

yet it is only the end of a long process of prior activities. Voting then signals the beginning of others. 

Priors to voting include:  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

86 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

• Paying attention to what’s going on in politics and government at all levels;  

• Joining with others in a political club, party or other organization devoted to electoral and/or 

other public issue concerns.  

Remember:  

“We either hang together or hang separately”.  

• Talking about political issues with friends, family, relatives, workmates and others.  

• Selecting issues and organizations with which you would like to be involved and/or in 

communication.  

• Volunteering to help candidates or organizations with their campaigns.  

• Serving on governmental committees.  

• Writing letters to editors, essays or “Op-Ed” pieces on the major issues of your concern.  

After voting is done and elected officials begin or continue their jobs for “We the People”, the hard part 

begins—tracking their performance and trying to influence the gestation, development, passage and 

implementation of laws and regulations. The main challenge here is that of bringing people-power to 

bear on administrative agencies—parts of government now popularly recognized as “The Swamp”. 

People’s political participation at this stage is critical to influencing whether they can truly “take back” 

their government. Since this stage has been dealt with in a little-noticed but great old book by Holtan 

Odegard, and by this author in his latest book as well, this essay will focus on participation in electoral 

politics.  

Why is such participation important? Because it determines:  

❖ Whether politics is truly ours (of, by and for “We the People”), or whether we let it become 

someone else’s game (which it now largely is).  

❖ The nature and meaning, or even the existence of, citizenship. Several comparable nations; for 

example, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, France and the U.K., do not offer citizenship as a right of 

birth. For every right there is a corresponding responsibility. Genuine citizenship in a democratic 

republic requires citizens to assume some responsibility in order for that republic to survive and prosper. 

Australia, for example, requires its citizens to vote.  

❖ The degree and nature of one’s growing up to adulthood. Growing up is a process of broadening 

horizons, deepening understandings, and increasing responsibilities, so “time is of the essence”. Now at 

age 77 and looking back, I realize how important participation was to bringing this process to fruition 

in my own life.  

❖ Whether and how we learn to talk to, learn from and work with a diverse set of others on serious 

matters of concern in the public domain that we share with others. The keyword is “learn”.  

❖ The extent to which we share in power.  

❖ The depth of personal satisfaction and gain we can get from making new friends and contacts, as 

well as “making a difference” in the otherwise presumably impersonal world of politics.  

The time for revival of political participation is now—for four reasons:  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

87 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

1) We are in the midst of another “Great Transformation” driven by entrepreneurship, innovation 

and new, high-technology-driven modes of production featuring Peer to Peer (P2P), Do-It-Yourself 

(DiY), and “Wikinomics”. These are substantially less capital intensive, smaller scale and more 

democratic in nature than old industrial development patterns. They also tend to put more people out of 

work.  

2) Internet technology has put cheap, powerful information and communications tools in the hands 

of most everyone, enabling the emergence of collective intelligence and masses of people readily 

organized to demand change 4.  

3) The country’s elites have failed us. There is no reason to assume we can rely on them to govern 

us. We can and must find ways to better govern ourselves.  

4) Political and governmental systems have become corrupted, dysfunctional and unable to solve 

our basic problems. “Altogether now!”, “We the People” can do so. How?—by becoming coproducers 

of a new politics; a crowd-sourced, collective intelligence and wisdom, and Internet-enabled 

democratic politics that would enable us to take back our government.  

What are we to bequeath to our children and grandchildren? Here are the options we face in terms of 

basic questions that can only be answered by “We the People”:  

❖ An economy in which 90% of the gains go to the top 1% of those receiving income?, or one in 

which a majority of the gains go to a majority of workers?  

❖ An unequal society of less opportunity in which your child is significantly less likely to get into a 

good college or pull down a good, well-paying job?, or an equal opportunity society in which your 

child has the same chances as the child in a family of the top 1%?  

❖ A top-down rather than a bottom-up political/governmental system?  

❖ An elite, major-media dominated, so-called “democracy”, or a real democracy grounded on a 

grassroots, people-based politics?  

❖ A country ruled by a rigid, dictatorial oligarchy or a plutocratic system, or one energized by a 

new politics that empowers ordinary working folks who care deeply about their families, their 

community and their country?  

❖ A politics-as-usual dominated by big money, political pro's and the powers-that-be. 

❖ A politics dominated by people who are thought to be “ordinary” only because they are so seldom 

presented with opportunities to show just how extra-ordinary they are, or a politics that continues to 

show us day after day just how little we count in the game of politics-as-usual?  

Would a bit of personal history help? I didn’t get involved in politics until I moved to New York City at 

age 25. An old friend invited me to attend a meeting of the Village Independent Democrats. There, over 

several years, I made many new friends, met my wife-to-be, and got involved with some great 

campaigns. Politics has been my avocation ever since. Subsequently, I ran for office ten times. My 

election record is mediocre. I was elected only three of the ten. Nevertheless, politics has added much 

to my life. I am still active, writing primarily on political issues. Family influence? None. My father’s 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

88 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

only “political” comment?  

“Throw the bums out!”  

The big question still remains: What influences the extent to which people participate in what should be 

but now is not, THEIR politics? To begin to find a multi-faceted answer, take a look at the FIGURE to 

follow in which “PP” stands for political participation both here and hereafter. There are four major 

influences in the Figure defined as sets, as follows:  

1) PERSONAL: Including 

factors—Envy/Ambition/Energy/Drive/Extroversion/Experience/Fear/Curiosity/ 

Responsibility/Age/Sex/Work/Children/Income and Wealth/Ignorance/Inequality/ 

2) RESOURCES: Including 

factors—Culture/Time/Information/Friends/Family/Organizations/Memberships/Affiliations/Communit

y/Education/Jobs/Inequality/ 

3) CONTEXTS: Including factors—Laws/Institutions/Gaps/ 

Organizations/Culture/Community/Events/Issues/Inequality/Media/Difference/ 

4) BARRIERS & CONSTRAINTS (B&C): Including 

factors—Circumstances/Time/Culture/Institutions/Laws/Family/Experience/Media/Community or 

Place/Let us now focus on each set in-order.  

FIRST—Personal [see DIAGRAM, below]:  

 

4. Diagram 

Envy and ambition are drivers for those who see political participation (hereafter labelled “PP”) as an 

entry-level requirement for careers in politics and government. Energy and drive obviously help the 

ambitious to succeed. It’s hard to imagine an introverted personality stepping out of his or her shell 

sufficiently to get involved in politics.  

Experience counts here, too, as elsewhere, but there is a threshold to cross. Too many people harbor a 

fear or a reluctance to get involved, so they don’t gain any political experience. There is a vicious circle 

here: Lack of experience discourages PP, which further decreases experience. Fear as a factor may also 

be aggravated by barriers and constraints as indicated further on.  

“Reluctance” correlates with indifference, but the latter may be more important. It arises from lack of 

information and low economic status along with other factors connected with both. Low income folks 

in particular see no value in PP because, as studies have revealed, little or no attention is paid to their 

opinions as influential.  

People not oriented to political career paths may get involved out of curiosity or responsibility. The 

latter is especially important. Citizenship demands the assumption of political responsibility. It’s not a 

choice like buying sausages or twinkies; it is a requirement for citizens of a democratic republic.  

The set of attributes asked about in the Census also count as influences on PP. Age: Younger and older 

folks may be deterred from PP; the younger for lack of voter registration; the older because of 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

89 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

overwork, health, childcare and other factors (see more under Barriers & Constraints). Sex: The need 

for two-incomes to support a family, number of children, and the lack of balance in family 

responsibilities may diminish the likelihood of PP by women (though here, thankfully, “the times they 

are a’change’n”).  

Work, Income and Wealth: Statistics have revealed that:  

Occupational status is a significant factor. PP rises with such status. People working in jobs that require 

less education, for example, are less likely to vote. Also note that:  

PP is higher, the higher are persons’ income and wealth.  

These are dangerous numbers, especially because they reveal vicious cycles at work. Levels of income 

and wealth correlate with occupational status and PP correlates with both. But economic inequality has 

been rising—significantly. Thus, “one-man, one-vote” is increasingly meaningless. The votes of those 

of lesser means count less in a society where money counts for more and those of greater means exert 

greater influence. Thus, economic inequality spells political inequality. We are in danger of becoming a 

society stratified by class. This means there is little meaningful society overall, only one defined for the 

group that sponsors society balls. We have become a country separated by economic class.  

Second is the set of “Resources”. Culture:  

Besides being guided by a set of values and goals, any culture may enhance or inhibit PP, just as there 

are cultures that encourage learning and some that do not. Article 1 of our Declaration of Independence 

implies that the U.S.A. should be a politically activist culture. Recall: 

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their 

Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of 

Happiness… That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just 

powers from the consent of the governed… (and) whenever any form of Government becomes 

destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new 

Government…”.  

Our over-commercialized culture has come to override the active civic/political culture indicated by the 

Declaration, just as it increasingly intrudes on the values of Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter all other 

valued holidays.  

Time: Lack of this severely limits PP. PP becomes discretionary because of competition from other 

activities deemed more necessary to health and well-being. Time management of PP with respect to 

other human needs is crucial. Time often depends on location, especially with regard to meetings:  

“Their timing and location can… serve to lock out activists from engaging…” For example, the choice 

of Sunday afternoon in a location other than church “will make sure that no working parents… show up 

to the meeting, as this is prime family time”.  

It is also important to set strict time limits for meetings. Priorities!  

The perception, utilization and value of time are by strongly influenced by contexts established by the 

historical and other pre-existing, higher level values and goals of specific cultures. Political cultures 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

90 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

also vary. In Thailand, for example, though less “developed” than the U.S., activities are pursued in a 

more leisurely or more relaxed manner lacking the haste of American culture. There is much more on 

this subject than this essay can accommodate. The matter of time is the subject of many books. 

Information: Lack of it is often equated with lower levels of education. Other factors are the 

disappearance of local news outlets, the decline of public education, and lack of sufficient public 

information through either direct provision (e.g., political flyers) or advertising.  

Family and Friends: One is more likely to at least take an interest in politics if a friend or family 

member is already involved. How many of your friends or family members are politically active? The 

answer depends on economic status, especially given the severe decline of unionism. Here again, 

inequality raises its sometimes-ugly head: economic stratification leads to political stratification.  

Organizations: Organizational structure is another major factor in PP—the more hierarchical, the less 

PP among employees. It’s always important, before entering into employment or membership in any 

organization, for one to assess the extent to which the organizational environment facilitates or 

discourages one’s participation in politics. Organizations, like culture, reveal the huge influence of 

context on behavior, a feature that is the subject of the 3rd section of this essay.  

Most organizations either actively discourage or fail to encourage PP. Contrast a democratic political 

organization, which: “may resemble a traditional hierarchical organization. However, it is important to 

understand that the role of (organizational) scaffolding is not directing and controlling the 

masses…Rather, its role and value is in supporting the other 95%...which makes its own decisions…”.  

Organizational environs with respect to PP are even more problematic when the level of organization is 

the administrative state. Holtan Odegard was the first to address this issue nearly 50 years ago. He 

asked: “What can be done to make (government) administration democratic”. His startling answer is 

still a…challenge today:  

“In place of the vast effort to manipulate… is to be envisioned a democratic, self-governing, 

self-controlling re-organization, with participation and scientific-experimental development”.  

Another perspective has been provided by Michel Bauwens and his P2P Foundation. They advocate 

broad adoption of cooperative forms at all levels:  

“…the state form is always also a class institution which defends a particular arrangement of social 

privilege…” the welfare state has slowly given way to the contemporary corporate welfare state 

(sometimes called the “market state”), which only helps the privileged, (and) guts social solidarity 

mechanisms…fatally weakening the middle class.  

Enter “The Partner State”, first theorized by Italian political scientist Cosma Orsi. It is:  

“a state form that: enables and empowers the social creation of value by its citizens. It protects the 

infrastructure of cooperation that is the whole of society”. 

As “infrastructure”, this moves to the top of our public priorities. It is more than just bridges and roads.  

Institutional innovations are also called for at sub-national levels, such as land trusts and cooperatives 

devoted to various purposes. Note, for example, the Dynamite Hill-Smithfield Community Land Trust. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

91 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Founded in 2015, it has: “adopted 2.5 acres across eight empty lots (for planting) in the…black 

neighborhood named after the dozens of Klu Klux Klan bombings there…”.  

This is but one aspect of a 10-year strategy led by the Magic City Agricultural Project [MCAP] in 

Birmingham, AL, to “create an autonomous cooperative economy in Birmingham”. MCAP, in turn, is a 

member of the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, also part of a “resurging co-op movement in small 

cities across the United States…”.  

Community and Education: Any group may be informal; i.e., not a legal form of organization. Nor is 

education necessarily provided by organizations. Witness the growing importance of home-schooling. 

Yet, communities may be governed by local elites—often dubbed “the good old boys”—that may 

discourage an education that would encourage PP.  

The lack or shortcomings of so-called “Civics” education in the public schools reinforces rather than 

reduces the lack-of-information factor cited earlier. Here, home-schooling is not the answer. It is an 

option primarily open to those who are already better-off, who can afford money to pay for both public 

school taxes and the expenses of homeschooling. Politically activist households among them may do a 

better job of teaching civics, but this hardly suffices to offset the overall lack thereof. Reporting on the 

2018 mid-term elections, Steve Hilton, TV host of the Next Revolution and author of POSITIVE 

POPULISM, remarked on his program that “The education gap has increased between college and 

no-college voters”. Inequality again!  

The basic lesson here?—That groupings at any level need to be governed by mission statements that 

place high priority on enabling their members to be politically active co-members of a democratic 

republic. And so this brings us to “Contexts”, our 3rd major set.  

THIRD: Contexts:  

A lot of what we have already noted, such as “culture” and “organizational environment”. Could be 

placed under this heading. What needs to be first recognized here, however, is the influence of contexts 

on behavior. The process of human development places individuals in a variety of contexts. Unless one 

is fortunate enough to grow up within a family setting that is politically activist or which has a 

politically oriented family tradition, then one must ask, as above: To what extent does any context 

facilitate, discourage or ignore PP? Most ignore it. Laws encourage or discourage types of behavior. 

State laws are primary in the case of elections. These vary considerably to the degree that they 

encourage or discourage people to vote.  

Institutions—likewise. Educational institutions, for example, ride high because we attribute so much 

power and promise to their help in educating new generations. Is such attribution (handover) either 

justified or fulfilled? Hardly. Here, growing inequality again enters, so much so that those who can 

afford to do so have practically abandoned John Dewey’s vision of a public school system that is not 

only equal for all but is also one that promotes greater equality.  

And so, given the numerous factors adverse to PP already identified, PP is practically discouraged. The 

“basic lesson” cited earlier is reemphasized. Events and Issues: Events sometimes spark political 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

92 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

involvement, e.g., concerts such as “Rock the Vote”. Others may be remarkable in the context of a 

person’s life, such as a death in the family, birth of a child, loss of job or an issues forum. Even more 

sparks are provided almost daily by news reports. Some are literal, such as those shot out of the huge 

fires that have destroyed hundreds of homes and whole communities in California. Others, too, have 

called attention to global warming/climate change (hereafter abbreviated GWCC), not only as threats to 

our own well-being but also to life on our planet overall. More generally, events worldwide such as 

GWCC are showing folks how little they can depend on established authorities to secure their 

well-being.  

Such realizations are a great “spark” to political involvement. Issues?: Often, it takes a major issue to 

spark PP, especially “hot button” issues such as abortion, immigration or health costs. People wake up 

to realize that they must participate if their stand on such issues is to “carry the day” or “make a 

difference”.  

Inequality and Media: The rise in inequality has made it a major public issue. Those at the bottom had 

long come to realize that the system is “rigged” in favor of those at the top. So, too, have many people 

in our country’s diminishing middle class. And so they as well as community leaders have become 

increasingly restive and politically active to try to un-rig the system. Apart from helping to call 

attention to disparities in our society, the media are mostly part of the problem even though they could 

as well be part of the solution. Media bias is rampant and primarily on the side of wealthy elites. 

Follow the money. The poor cannot afford to advertise.  

Similarly, in the case of the social media. Witness Facebook and Google, for whose behavior its CEOs 

have had to explain the policies of their organizations to Congress, offering little more than lame 

apologies while they tried to do so. Other major organizations in the social media industry—U-tube and 

Twitter, for example, are also guilty parties. All are new but integral parts of the advertising industry. 

Their activities serve SO/SO (Same Old/Same Old) roles of serving up political pablum to citizen 

consumers rather than informing them as PP activists. Thus, they aid and abet additional increases in 

political and economic inequality. The tech-based and much-hyped post-industrial corporation, Apple, 

for example, apes its old-industrial counterparts in moving operations to China to increase its huge 

profits.  

Difference: Contexts can be ranked by their degree of diversity, i.e., differences among and between 

their members, groups or parts. Too many people are judged adversely by how much they differ in their 

social distance from those doing the judging. At the interpersonal level, the examples of the destructive 

impact of such behavior are legion. How many people do you know who love difference? Difference is 

fractal—self-similar at all levels. If we shift our vision from the inter-personal to higher levels, what do 

we reach?—the hyper-partisan character of American politics overall. Love of difference must be 

learned. Constructive social learning takes more time than does individual learning.  

And yet, various studies of the influence of diversity upon PP provide mixed results. One found two 

interrelated psychological processes at work:  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

93 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

1) “Those embedded in cross-cutting networks…are more likely to hold ambivalent political views 

which…discourage political participation”. And…  

2) Social accountability pressures in cross-cutting networks (also) discourage PP.  

Others find mixes of positive and negative influences, but they are not very comparable. Studies vary in 

populations (e.g., older, younger, student, non-student) as well as linkages. They also rely upon 

different measures of diversity, its key variates, and reciprocal effects. A few references are cited below.  

Fourth, Barriers & Constraints: Many of these have already been revealed by discussions of the first 

three. They are manifold. What else? Lack of strong, adequate leadership is barrier #1. It is hard to 

overcome, hard to find and difficult to generate. Most people are preoccupied with the challenges of 

everyday life. Even the most famous leaders and historical figures have been reduced to everyday role 

models of goodness and excellence rather than political activists. Martin Luther King, for example: 

Only now are efforts underway to rediscover his radical political legacy. George Washington is best 

known for not telling a lie about chopping down an apple tree. The radical history of the U.S. has been 

largely ignored.  

Constraints are rife. Many have been noted earlier. There is more to be said, however, about the two 

primary constraints to PP—time and information. In Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, a speed up of time 

leads to clocks ticking more slowly. Not so in human life. We live in a time where nearly everything 

has been speeded-up but our human clocks do not tick more slowly. Our perceptions are otherwise. We 

feel as if they, too, are ticking faster and so time’s availability is less. Who can argue otherwise, given 

our fixed days and mortal lives?  

The only solution is setting priorities. Earlier, we became known as TV “couch potatoes” by spending 

an average of at least four hours a day in front of the tube. This mode of behavior has hardly been 

lessened by the newest technologies of “smart” phones and other electronic devices. Now we are 

spending hours in front of those smaller screens. Teenagers are leading the way. Have youngsters truly 

become the prologues for a better future? What are their top prioities? Why is PP not one of them?  

Instead of letting our technologies use us, let us start to use them to ease fulfillment of major 

requirements, How about our responsibilities as citizens to participate in what can become OUR 

politics. Smart phones, for example, can facilitate PP. They can be used to build networks of political 

contacts, organize them into effective political groups, and otherwise turn political consumers into 

political producers—those who altogether can truly “Make a Difference” politically.  

Why is lack of information such a serious constraint to PP? Not because of shortage in terms of 

quantity. We are actually overwhelmed with data points daily. But “data” is not information, nor is the 

overload of “information” like that provided by the daily news helpful to PP. A significant portion of 

news is infotainment. Some other parts hardly differ from either propaganda or advertising. These may 

be understatements. According to Housekeeper Dana Taff, who also reflects the views of many others: 

“I’m ignoring the news. I’m so angry about the lies we’re fed every day”. Dana’s spontaneous, 

off-the-cuff views are consistent with those of a well-known commentator, Bill Bonner, who wrote:  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

94 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

“While the average person is a decent human being… he is neither always good nor always bad, but 

always subject to influence… A skilled demagogue—a confident know-it-all with an easy solution for 

every problem—will always be better at stirring up the mob than an honest, humble thinker. There you 

have the two biggest frauds of the whole system, right together. We are all supposed to be equal. But 

some—using the political process for their own purposes—are able to tell the rest of us how to run our 

lives. And the selection process will almost always lift up the worst—not the best—candidates…And 

so… we end up being ruled by the biggest jackasses”.  

The informational part of this problem is not one of quantity of information; it is quality. One must 

search for it. In so doing, recognize that the most fundamental factor affecting PP is a large amount of 

ignorance. Look for and try alternative TV channels such as Discover and Curiosity. Escape the TV for 

more and better news. Tune into National Public Radio (NPR). Above all, especially since searching 

takes time, place strict limits on time spent on TV and social media.  

Time “spent” is not invested; it is largely wasted. In the case of children such time is likely to have 

adverse effects. PRIORITIES!  

As for leadership, the model advocated by Falkvinge as a leader of the Swedish Pirate Party differs 

greatly from our conventional way. He remarks:  

“The (political) activism leader would not lead activism as such, but rather support it…Whenever 

activists decide…that they would like to stage a rally, hand out flyers, put up posters, or…some other 

form of visible activism… the leader is the person responsible for the practical details[!], such as PA 

equipment, permits and other details…”.  

 

5. Conclusion 

Does: the solution to our central problem—lack of sufficient PP among “We the People” lie with us or 

with Donald Trump? By now, the main answer should be obvious: It lies with us. As the great 

American poet, Charles Olson, wrote: “Limits are what we are inside of”. So break out! Let us not be 

prisoners of our own barriers and constraints.  

But we have identified a number of intermediaries that influence our behavior and encourage or 

discourage PP. Prime among these influences are those provided by the contexts of organizations. If we 

are to move away from an individualistic “dog eat dog” world, cooperative forms would be more 

desirable than competitive. Other intermediaries would require another paper to present. Called 

“democratic spaces” or “spaces for change”, they are promising, they are promising, too.  

Above all, beware of leaders who represent “populism” as just voting for them-selves without 

recognizing that to “work for us” also means the mark of true leadership—working to build our 

capacity to participate in politics and govern our-selves. Steve Hilton recently lamented the failure of 

the President to emphasize the populist politics that got him elected. So, in both words and deeds, it’s 

truly up to us if the torch of freedom is to continue to burn bright. Get involved! Be engaged! Lend 

your good name to help honor a positive populism and give politics a better name! America needs a 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

95 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

new political culture whose keynote and product is “Power to the People”! PARTICIPATE!  

 

References 

“Inequality”, ADVANCES IN POLITICS AND ECONOMICS (Fall). (2018). 

“Populism and Political Participation”, forthcoming in ADVANCES in POLITICS and ECONOMICS. 

(2019).  

Alinsky, S. (1946). REVEILLE for RADICALS and RULES for RADICALS. Random House: Vintage 

Books. 

Bauwens, M. (2012). The Partner State, SHAREABLE MAGAZINE. Also in THE P2P PRIMER (P2P 

stands for Person-to-Person). Retrieved from https://primer.commonstransition.org/2-longarticles/ 

Bearse, P. J. (2004). WE THE PEOPLE: A Conservative Populism. Lafayette, LA: Alpha Publishing 

Co. 

Colaico, J. A. (1988). MARTIN LUTHER KING Jr., Apostle of Militant Nonviolence. NY: St. Martin’s 

Press.  

Falkvinge, R. (2013). SWARMWISE: The tactical manual to changing the world. Create space 

Independent Publishing Platform.  

Grudin, R. (1982). TIME and the ART of LIVING. New York: Tickner and Fields.  

INDIVISIBLE: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda. Former Congressional staffers 

reveal best practices for making Congress listen. (n.d.). 

Johnson, S. M., & Lollar, X. L. (2002). Diversity Policy in Higher Education: The Impact of Students’ 

Exposure to Diversity on Cultural Awareness and Political Participation. Network Diversity and 

Political Participation” (draft). https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930210127577 

Kadushin, C. (2012). Social Networks and Inequality: How Facebook contributes to economic (and 

other) inequality. PSYCHOLOGY TODAY (March 7).  

Lee, K. F. (2018). The Human Promise of the AI Revolution. WALL ST. JOURNAL REVIEW. 

Manstead, A. S. R. (2018). The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, 

feelings, and behavior. BRITISH JOURNAL of SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY (February 28). 

https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12251 

Matz, D. (2002). The Consequences of Cross-cutting Networks for Political Participation. AMERICAN 

JOURNAL of POLITICAL SCIENCE. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088437 

Odegard, H. (1971). THE POLITICS of TRUTH. University, AL: The University of Alabama.  

Polanyi, K. (1957). THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION: The Political and Economic Origins of Our 

Time. Boston: Beacon Press.  

POLITICAL MANUAL: How “We the People” can take back our politics and government. (2018). 

Forthcoming, Shoestring: Publishers. 

Quinteller, E. D. S., & Harell, A. (2011). Politics in Peer Groups. POLITICAL RESEARCH 

QUARTERLY. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/ape              Advances in Politics and Economic                       Vol. 2, No. 2, 2019 

96 
Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

Shirky, C. (2008). HERE COMES EVERYBODY. New York: Penguin. 

THE BETRAYAL OF THE AMERICAN DREAM. (n.d.). Philadelphia, PA: Public Affairs Press. 

Weintraub, K. J. (1966). VISIONS OF CULTURE. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Also: Magnet, 

Myron. (1993). THE DREAM and the NIGHTMARE: The Sixties Legacy to the Underclass. New 

York: William Morrow & Co.  

Zinn, H. (n.d.). THE PEOPLE’S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES.  

 

 


