The "common" man. Every populist movement in history seems to be driven by this "common" man. He's clearly been very busy. I personally am not 100% sure who this "common" man is. Is it based on one's income? Racial background? Sexual orientation? Political affiliation? There are so many criteria that need to be met- yet it seems lots of people fit the bill.
For me, personally, the "common" man is white, relatively well-off, well-educated (debatably), and has an acute desire to retaliate whenever they feel threatened. As DeAne said in class on Wednesday, "The perception of threat is as powerful as real loss." The "common" man is a perfect example of that, especially with the modern day Tea Party.
The Tea Party movement was born from threat of over-reaching government. Many found truth in the movement and it gained strength, becoming a force to be reckoned with in our politics. The "common" man seeks a reduction of big government, which he believes eventually could reach the size where it restricts moral freedom and liberty.
I don't buy it. I don't even buy the concept of the "common" man in our society. We're so diversified, so unique, that common cannot be used to describe our society. Some would say I fit the description of the "common" man but I definitely do not feel like the Tea Party shares my views.
"Common" man I am not.
Jake,
ReplyDeletea clarion call for conceptual clarity!
And yet, as is so often the case, the really central concepts are the ones that are contested.
Since "common people" is a concept that endures we'll have to take account of changes across time, both that they have taken place and the reasons for the changes. We'll also want to consider other concepts and terms in the same semantic zone, e.g. popular sentiment.
LDL