Third-Party, All-Knowing Observer is Not Neopopulism
Posted by: Erick G. Kaardal in Untagged on Oct 25, 2009
In a recent conversation with book publisher Richard Vigilante, he indicated that neopopulist authors should consider using the third-party, all-knowing observer point of view.
I attempted this in my recent blog article on the Vietnam War. It was a disaster. Our neopopulist friend John came into my office and told me that he was not a "chump" for signing his draft card for the Vietnam War.
After some thought, I realized my mistake. In the article, by being a third-party, all-knowing observer, I was acting as a rationalist and declaring conservatives who supported the Vietnam War out of fealty to the state "chumps."
This was wrong for me to do. What I should of stated in the neopopulist voice (the voice for the people) was that Presidents Johnson and Nixon treated these people like chumps -- not that I as a rationalist believed they were chumps.
After this important dialogue, Dahlberg and I have written a new chapter showing how the neopopulist voice is not a third-party, all-knowing voice. Instead, it is a voice for the people. The neopopulist voice is opposed to the third-party, all-knowing observer point of view. It's elitist. It's rationalist. It's wrong.
Again, Tom and I have re-learned that the battle is between neopopulist humility and rationalist arrogance.
We are well on our way in winning that war.
