Populism in 2009

The Populist Party (actually, The People's Party) in the very late 19th century was the main force behind the eventual creation of a graduated income tax -- they were statists out to soak Northeastern fat cats. Populism today might be a different movement, but there is still the same anger directed against Northeastern fat cats with political connections. The idea was to lower tarrifs and raise taxes through the confiscation of a portion of income based on a graduated scale. Of course government being what it is eventually needed revenue from both sources, and this changed America from a country of individual liberty, capitalism and limited government to a country of subjects under state rule. We maintained a lot of our freedoms -- moreso than most countries -- but we lost our original libertarianism. This has progressed to the present financial storm which builds more menacingly every day, and it has led to a gradual loss of freedom, which doesn't appear to improve or abate anytime soon. 

What could distinguish the present populist movement is the purported defense of the free market and support for a limited government, which, if the populists have integrity, would include ending subsidies to their favored interests such as the farming industry. The earlier Populist movement was tainted by their special interests and statist tendencies to seek protection. If the present populist movement is merely a collective effort to gain political advantage over Big Finance, then it's no better than Goldman Sachs seeking government protection at the expense of small and medium size financial companies, and, by extension, of the whole nation.

If the present populist movement aims at ending corporate/business/industry welfare in order to allow the free market to sort out winners and losers, then it will have integrity and deserve support -- if not, then it deserves condemnation.