I always understood populist as bowing to the lowest common denominator rather than taking an actual moral position. Ie not thinking through the consequences.
It seems you are just accepting the globalist media's caricature of nationalism without thinking about it more deeply.
All nationalists take a moral position. That's what nationalism is. And all nationalists think through the consequences as well. Just like globalists do.
Are you saying nationalists like washington, lincoln, gandhi, mandela, et al weren't taking a moral position or thinking of the consequences of their nationalism?
"Populist" isn't just a label for nationalist. It's a label for a certain type or approach to politics. Bernie Sanders, for example, is a populist, though I seriously doubt that he's a nationalist in any meaningful sense.
> And all nationalists think through the consequences as well. Just like globalists do.
You surely mean "nationalist/globalist politicians", because in my experience, most people absolutely don't consider the consequences of policies that appeal to them. (Okay, maybe the first-order consequences, but not any indirect effects.)
I think PJ O'Rourke defined it best: Nationalism, the idea that every little group of human twerps with its own slang, haircut, and pet name for god should have a country.
All nationalists take a moral position. That's what nationalism is. And all nationalists think through the consequences as well. Just like globalists do.
Are you saying nationalists like washington, lincoln, gandhi, mandela, et al weren't taking a moral position or thinking of the consequences of their nationalism?