Podcasts about Populist Party

Hello Interactors,The land on which we stand can demand where we politically stand. But what happens when that land shifts, shakes, burns or blows away? Recent Southern U.S. floods displaced thousands. Disasters don't just destroy — they can redraw political lines. With second round of Trumpster fires deepening divides, geography and ideology matter more than ever. As climate crises, economic upheaval, and political struggles intensify, the question isn't just where people live — but what they'll fight for. History shows that when the ground shifts, so does power.SHIFTING LANDS AND LOYALTIESFrom fertile fields to frenzied financial hubs, geography molds the mindset of the masses. Where people live shapes what they fear, fight for, and find familiar. Farmers in the Great Plains worry about wheat yields and water rights, while coastal city dwellers debate rent control and rising tides.But political geography isn't just about climate and crops — it's about power, privilege, and the collective making of place. No space is neutral; as evidenced by the abrupt renaming of an entire gulf. History and the present are filled with examples of territories being carved and controlled, gerrymandered, and gentrified.The recent floods in the South serve as a stark reminder of how geography has historically upended political identity. Especially during Black History Month. The Mississippi River Flood of 1927 was a devastating deluge that displaced thousands of Black sharecroppers, washing away not only homes but also old political loyalties. The Republican-controlled federal government, led by President Calvin Coolidge, took a hands-off approach, refusing to allocate federal aid and instead relying on Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover to coordinate relief efforts through the Red Cross.However, aid distribution was dominated by white Southern landowners, who withheld resources from Black communities. They forced many into quasi-forced labor camps under the guise of relief. Hoover, later touting his role in disaster response to win the 1928 presidency, was ultimately seen by many Black voters as complicit in their mistreatment. This failure accelerated Black voters' gradual shift away from the Republican Party, a realignment that would deepen under FDR's New Deal in the 1930s. The flood was not just a natural disaster — it was a political reckoning. Who received help and who was abandoned shaped party loyalties for generations to come.Yet, history proves that political realignments are rarely one-sided or uniform. While Black voters were shifting toward the Democratic Party, another Southern political identity crisis was brewing. Southern white conservatives — longtime Democrats due to the party's historical ties to segregation — began their own political migration in the mid-to-late 20th century.The Civil Rights Movement and desegregation led many white Southerners to feel alienated from the Democratic Party, pushing them toward what was once unthinkable — the Republican Party. This shift cemented a racialized realignment, with Black voters backing Democrats and Southern white conservatives reshaping the GOP into today's right-wing stronghold.Both political shifts were responses to crisis — one to environmental disaster and racial exclusion, the other to social change and perceived status loss. The fact that geography remained constant but political identities flipped highlights a crucial truth: where people live matters, but how they respond to change depends on identity, history, and power.The political path of any place isn't just shaped by its space — it's who claims the land, who crafts the law, and who casts a crisis as chaos or cause.SORTED, SEPARATED, AND STUCKGeography shapes political identity but doesn't dictate it. Human agency, economics, and psychology influence where people live and how they vote. Over time, self-sorting creates ideological enclaves, deepening polarization instead of fostering realignment.Psychologists Henri Tajfel and John Turner's Social Identity Theory explains why people align with in-groups and see out-groups as threats, as identity shapes self-esteem and belonging. This leads to in-group favoritism, out-group bias, and polarization, especially when power or resources feel like a zero-sum game.But Optimal Distinctiveness Theory (ODT) adds another layer to this understanding. Developed by Marilynn Brewer, building on Social Identity Theory, ODT proposes that people need to feel a sense of belonging to a group while also maintaining individuality within it. This balancing act between assimilation and uniqueness explains why political identities are not just about partisanship — they encompass culture, lifestyle, and even geography. Individuals self-sort both by community and distinction within their chosen political and social environments.Modern political sorting has made partisanship an all-encompassing identity. It aligns with race, religion, and even consumer habits. This process has been amplified by geography, as people increasingly move to communities where they feel they “fit in” while also distinguishing themselves within their political faction. ODT helps explain why urban progressives might distinguish themselves through niche ideological positions (e.g., Socialists in Brooklyn vs. Tech libertarians in San Francisco), while rural conservatives in swing states may lean into Christian nationalism or libertarianism (e.g. Christian nationalists in rural Pennsylvania vs. Tea Party libertarians in rural Wisconsin).American political power is unevenly distributed. The Senate majority can be won with just 17% of the population, and the Electoral College inflates rural influence. The 10 smallest states hold 3% of the population but 20% of Senate seats and 6% of electoral votes. This imbalance amplifies rural conservative power, giving certain regions outsized political sway.ODT also helps explain why political polarization has deepened over time rather than softened with economic shifts. Historically, political realignments occurred when crisis moments forced cross-cutting alliances — like when poor white and Black farmers joined forces during the Populist Movement of the 1890s to challenge banking and railroad monopolies.However, these coalitions often fell apart due to racial and regional pressures. The Populist Party was ultimately absorbed into the Democratic Party's white Southern wing, leaving Black farmers politically stranded. They still are. Around 1890 Black farmers made up an estimated 14% of farmers in America, now it's fewer than 2% due to racist lending practices, discriminatory federal policies, land dispossession, and systemic barriers to credit and resources.Today, realignments are rare because identity-based partisanship satisfies both belonging and distinctiveness (ODT). Rural conservatives see themselves not just as Republicans but as defenders of a distinct way of life, reinforcing identity through regional pride, gun rights, and religion. Urban liberals, meanwhile, develop sub-identities — progressives, moderates, democratic socialists — within the broader Democratic Party. This illusion of uniformity masks deep internal ideological divides.This sorting shapes where people live, what they watch, and which policies they support. The false consensus effect deepens political silos, as rural conservatives and urban progressives assume their views are widely shared. When elections defy expectations, the result is shock, anger, and further retreat into ideological camps.This explains why U.S. political alignments resist economic and geographic shifts that once drove realignments. Where hardship once built coalitions, modern partisanship acts as a psychological refuge. The question is whether climate change, automation, or mass migration will disrupt these patterns — or cement them. Will today's anxieties redraw party lines, or will political sorting persist, turning geography into a fortress for the familiar, deepening division and partisan pride?FROM REALITY TV TO ALTERNATE REALITYIf geography and identity sketch borders of polarization, then media is the Sharpie darkening the divide. The digital age hardens these political divides, where confirmation bias runs rampant and algorithms push people to one side of the ideological line or the other.In a recent interview, political psychologist and polarization expert Liliana Hall Mason, known for her research on identity-based partisanship and rising affective polarization, recalled a 2012 TiVO study that analyzed TV viewing habits of Democrats and Republicans. The study found that among the top 10 most-watched TV shows for each party, there was zero overlap — Democrats and Republicans were consuming completely separate entertainment. Cultural, and presumably geographical, divergence was already well underway in the 2010s.Republicans favored shows like Duck Dynasty while Democrats gravitated toward satirical cartoons like Family Guy​. While it predates TiVO, I was more of a King of Hill fan, myself. I thought Hank Hill humanized conservative rural life without glorifying extremism while critiquing aspects of modernity without being elitist. Hulu has announced its return sometime this year. But Republicans and Democrats today don't even consume the same reality — they don't watch the same news, follow the same influencers, trust the same institutions, or even shop at the same grocery stores. Will both tune into watch Hank Hill walk the tight rope of a pluralistic suburban American existence?This media-driven fragmentation fuels geographic sorting, as political preferences influence where people choose to live. A person might leave a liberal city for a conservative suburb, or vice versa, based on what media tells them about their “kind of people.” Over time, partisan enclaves harden, reducing exposure to opposing viewpoints and making political shifts less likely.When political identities are so deeply entrenched that losing an election feels like an existential crisis, the risk of political violence rises. Mason's research on rising authoritarian attitudes and partisan animosity shows that political opponents aren't just seen as rivals anymore — they're seen as enemies.January 6th, 2021, wasn't an anomaly — it was the inevitable explosion of years of identity-based sorting and status-threat rhetoric. The rioters who stormed the Capitol weren't just protesting an election loss; they saw themselves as defenders of a nation slipping from their grasp, fueled by a deep-seated fear of demographic change, progressive policies, and shifting cultural power.Studies show that people who feel their group is losing influence are more likely to justify violence, particularly when they perceive existential threats to their way of life. Right-wing media reinforced these fears, political leaders legitimized them, and geographic and social sorting further entrenched them. In an era where partisan identity feels like destiny, and grievance is turned into a rallying cry, the potential for future political violence remains dangerously real.History teaches us that political geography isn't destiny — alignments shift when necessity forces cooperation. As the world faces climate crises, economic instability, and mass migration, new political realignments will emerge. The question is whether they will lead to solidarity or further strife.At the end of the Mason interview, she mentions the role anger and enthusiasm play in political motivations. This concept is part of the Norwegian philosopher and social theorist, Jon Elster, who is best known for his work on rational choice theory, emotions in politics, and historical institutionalism. He has written extensively on how emotions like anger, enthusiasm, resentment, and hope shape political behavior and social movements, especially in historical contexts like the French Revolution and modern populist movements.Anger mobilizes movements, making people willing to fight for change or push back against it. The Populist farmers of the 1890s, the labor activists of apartheid South Africa, and the displaced communities of Partition-era India all channeled rage into resistance. At the same time, enthusiasm — a belief in the possibility of transformation — is what sustains coalitions beyond crisis moments. The formation of the EU, the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland, and Brazil's leftist labor movement all survived because hope outlasted grievance.Political movements often begin with anger, but only survive through enthusiasm. This is why some burn out quickly (Occupy Wall Street, the Tea Party) while others reshape history (the Civil Rights Movement, Brexit, Trump's populism). Looking ahead, the political geography of the future will be shaped by whichever emotion proves stronger. Will fear and resentment deepen polarization, or will shared enthusiasm for economic justice, environmental sustainability, and democratic resilience create new cross-cutting alliances? The past suggests both are possible. But if history has one lesson, it's that the lines on the map are never as fixed as they seem — and neither are the people who live within them.Bibliography This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

Long before "populist" became a nebulous buzzword used to describe everyone from Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump, the farmer-founded Populist Party was a formidable force in American elections, fighting against monopolies and corruption in defense of the everyday citizen. In this episode, host Sarah Mock looks back to look forward, connecting the fiery history of agrarian politics with the elections of 2020 and 2024.

Populisme is een begrip dat sinds 2016 volop werd gebruikt om de dreiging aan verschillende politieke fronten te duiden, maar het is een verrassend breed gebruikt begrip. De meeste definities verwijzen naar het onderzoek van Cas Mudde, die populisten duidts als: “Parties that endorse the set of ideas that society is ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, “the pure people” versus “the corrupt elite”, and which argue that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale, or general will, of the people.” Mudde, 2004. Benjamin Moffitt, hoogleraar en schrijver van het boek Populism, noemt nadrukkelijk dat populisme geen ideologie is, maar een stijl van politiek bdrijven, “a way of speaking, acting, and presenting oneself.” Hierdoor zijn er veel verschillende groepen die onder deze noemer vallen, die op verschillende manieren worden beschuldigd van populisme. Populisme is niet hetzelfde als extreem-rechts of extreem-links gedachtegoed, maar die beide groepen gebruiken wel regelmatig populistische methodes. Populisme is niet hetzelfde als populariteit, hoewel er groepen zijn die populisme op die manier proberen te zuiveren van de negatieve bijklank. Populisme is ook niet hetzelfde als fascisme, hoewel populistische rhetoriek wel een kenmerk is van fascisme. De klassieke term die veel overlap vertoont met populisme is “demagogie”, waarbij een demagoog of “volksmenner” of “rabble-rouser” specifiek inspeelt op de driften en wensen van het volk door ze tegen de elite op te jagen. Dit valt samen met de definitie van populisme gebruikt door Catherine Fieschi, die stelt dat populisten niet alleen zeggen te spreken namen de moreel superieure stem van het volk, maar ook uniek in staat zijn om die stem te horen. Daarmee worden hun tegenstanders dus weggezet als vijanden van de waarheid en puurheid van het volk. Het nieuwere woord populisme komt uit de Verenigde Staten, waar in 1892 een partij genaamd de People's Party of ook de Populist Party in opstand kwam tegen de elite. Zij zagen zichzelf als gerechtvaardigd in het democratisch opstaan tegen de elite die hen onderdrukte. Sindsdien blijft de tweedeling tussen het volk en de elite een kenmerk van populistische retoriek, of er nou sprake is van een tweedeling tussen volk en elite, of niet. Vandaag onderzoeken wij de kenmerken van populisme in de hoop de term minder beladen en met meer precisie te kunnen gebruiken. Is populisme ooit “goed” of terecht? Is populisme een inherent onderdeel van bestuur door het volk? Is populisme altijd bron van polarisatie? Te gast is Sjoerd, net als in aflevering 4. Bronnen Intro Cas Mudde. “The Populist Zeitgeist.” Government and Opposition, 39:4, 2004, 541-563. Cas Mudde. “Populism in the Twenty-First Century: An Illiberal Democratic Response to Undemocratic Liberalism.” The Andrea Mitchell Center for the Study of Democracy. https://amc.sas.upenn.edu/cas-mudde-populism-twenty-first-century “Populism in the United States: A Timeline.” History.com. 7 december 2018. Gecorrigeerd: 14 december 2020. https://www.history.com/topics/us-government-and-politics/populism-united-states-timeline Yasmeen Serhan. “Populism Is Meaningless.” The Atlantic. 12 maart 2020. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2020/03/what-is-populism/607600/ The PopuList. https://popu-list.org/ What is Populism? | History. 8 januari 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uA1GBzXzr4 Umberto Eco. “Ur-Fascism.” The New York Review of Books. 22 juni 1995. The Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/umberto-eco-ur-fascism/umberto-eco-ur-fascism.lt/ The New Populism. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/series/the-new-populism Relevante artikelen zijn bijvoorbeeld: https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/mar/06/revealed-the-rise-and-rise-of-populist-rhetoric en https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/20/measuring-populism-how-guardian-charted-rise-methodology

Kansas City native Thomas Frank talks with the Heartland Labor Forum radio show about his new book about American populism, the long trail of elites who hate it, why pundits called Donald Trump a populist and why he's nothing of the kind. Harvey J. Kaye on The Fight for The Four Freedoms: What Made FDR and The Greatest Generation Truly Great, from Empathy Media Lab. And on Labor History in 2:00, Rick Smith tells us about Arturo Alfonso Schomburg. Today's music includes two songs from the great MrBettsClass videos, Populist Party – a parody of Taylor Swift's "Style" – and New Deal – a parody of Bruno Mars "Uptown Funk." This show originally aired on January 24, 2021. Questions, comments, or suggestions are welcome, and to find out how you can be a part of Labor History Today, email us at LaborHistoryToday@gmail.com Labor History Today is produced by the Labor Heritage Foundation and the Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor. #LaborRadioPod #History #WorkingClass #ClassStruggle @GeorgetownKILWP #LaborHistory @UMDMLA @ILLaborHistory @AFLCIO @StrikeHistory #LaborHistory @wrkclasshistory  

Benjamin Harrison, the Centennial President, survives a deadly strike, an international conflict, and the massacre at Wounded Knee. On the campaign trail, Harrison fights to overcome these obstacles and get the best of not one, but two challengers: former Democrat President Grover Cleveland and James Weaver of the Populist Party. During his campaign for re-election, Harrison's prospects are further threatened by the death of a loved one. *** To listen to the entire series—all 59 episodes—right now and ad-free, become a subscriber at IntoHistory.com, a channel of history podcasts made just for history lovers like you. Enjoy ad-free listening, early releases, bonus content and more, only available at IntoHistory.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Throughout the podcast, we have flirted with and chit-chatted about all kinds of third parties in the United States, and while at first we didn't think it was the case, we realized it actually would have been wrong not to talk about all those extra parties - and explore what it is about our system that keeps them as extras. So HERE WE GO, starting way back with that nasty 1824 election and getting through Masons and Whigs and Free Soilers and Know-Nothings and Populists - OH MY! It's a lot more fun than anyone should have talking about third parties in America would be! Join us, why don't'cha?!This BONUS episode was Produced, Written, and Performed by:Gina BuccolaSandy BykowskiJoseph FedorkoSylvia MannPaul MoultonPatrick J. ReillyAnd Tommy SpearsThis Episode's Historians: Dr. Chelsea Denault, and James McRaeOriginal Music written and performed by Throop McClergAudio production by Joseph FedorkoSound effects procured at Freesound.orgDB Comedy Logo Designed by Adam L. HarlettELECTABLES logo and Episodic Thumbnails Caricatures by Dan PolitoTHE ELECTABLES concept was created by Patrick J. Reilly.CAST LIST THIRD PARY PART ONE OPEN – Written by Paul Moulton            DR. NAIR - Tommy            PAIGE - RamonaANTIMA - Written by Paul Moulton            FILMORE - Paul            MORGAN – Joe            MARSHALL - Sandy            WEED - Tommy VICTORIA WOODHULL - Written by Patrick J. Reilly            ANNOUNCER - Tommy            STOCKBROKER - Patrick            VICTORIA – Sandy            CAPTAIN BLOOD - Joe            POLITICIAN - Paul            HARRIET BEECHER STOWE - Ramona            FREDERICK DOUGLAS - SylviaWEAVER THE BELIEVER – Written by Paul Moulton            REV. THEO CRADDICK - Joe            MRS. BURA CRADDICK - Sylvia            WEAVER - Tommy            JESUS - PatrickTHE BIG LEAGUES - Written by Sandy Bykowski            THE RED PLAYER - Patrick            THE BLUE PLAYER - Paul            THE NEW PLAYER - Tommy             ANNOUNCER - Joe 

By 1898, two decades after the end of Reconstruction, white elites, backed by violent terror groups, have installed Jim Crow across most of the South. North Carolina, led by its largest city, Wilmington, is different. A Fusion coalition, made up of mostly-Black Republicans and mostly-White members of the Populist Party, controls the city and state governments. White supremacist Democrats are frustrated and plot to gain power by any means necessary. ​​ By Michael A. Betts, II, and John Biewen. Interviews with LeRae Umfleet, David Cecelski, and Cedric Harrison. The series story editor is Loretta Williams. Music in this episode by Kieran Haile, Blue Dot Sessions, Okaya, Jameson Nathan Jones, and Lucas Biewen. Art by Zaire MacPhearson. “Echoes of a Coup” is an initiative of America's Hallowed Ground, a project of the Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University.

Patrick Ruffini is a Republican pollster with a reputation for deciphering data and spotting trends. His new book, “Party of the People: Inside the Multiracial Populist Coalition Remaking the GOP,” takes a deep dive into one of the biggest political realignments of our lifetime.Ruffini spoke with The Daily Signal about the demographic changes that are rapidly transforming America's two biggest political parties—and what it means for the 2024 presidential election and beyond.“When I first started in politics, Republicans had this reputation as being the country club party,” Ruffini said. “Democrats had this reputation as being the party of the people, the party of the working class.”He added, “Flash forward almost 20 years, and that trend has completely almost reversed.”Recent election results show the GOP's gains with working-class voters were not an aberration or confined to one candidate. Republicans today are increasing their support among non-college voters—the type of working-class American who once loyally supported Democrats.“The parties used to be defined by income and now they're defined by education,” Ruffini said. “I argue that that's good news for Republicans in the sense that you have many more working-class, non-college voters in the country than you have college-educated voters.”The breakdown for 2024, according to Ruffini, is about 60% non-college voters compared to 40% who have college degrees. This, he surmises, will provide the GOP will an advantage in upcoming elections. Factor in Republican gains with Hispanics and black voters, and you have a different GOP than the one of yesterday.Most surprising to Ruffini, however, is how the political alignment happened.“I did not expect Donald Trump to be the one who was able to pull this off, but my credit goes to him for getting us to this point,” Ruffini said.“The fact that he was able to expand the Republican coalition first to include the Rust Belt states and dramatically expand Republican performance among working-class voters in 2016, and then in 2020, almost defying the odds and winning re-election with the help of more Hispanic voters and continued progress among black voters,” he added. “It really has upended what we think the two parties are about.”Ruffini began writing “Party of the People” after observing the trends of the 2020 election, and he hopes it serves a helpful guide for readers to understand the realignment. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Patrick Ruffini is a Republican pollster with a reputation for deciphering data and spotting trends. His new book, “Party of the People: Inside the Multiracial Populist Coalition Remaking the GOP,” takes a deep dive into one of the biggest political realignments of our lifetime. Ruffini spoke with The Daily Signal about the demographic changes that […]

The Smer-SSD party led by former PM Robert Fico had a clear lead with almost 24% of the vote despite exit polls suggesting victory by a liberal centrist party. Also on the programme: The US Congress suspends aid to Ukraine, we hear from a concerned Ukrainian politician; Poland sees hundreds of thousands turn out for an opposition rally ahead of elections; and former US President Carter celebrates his 99th birthday. (Photo: Slovak former Prime Minister Robert Fico talks to media after Slovakia's parliamentary elections at party's headquarters in Bratislava, Slovakia Credit: Martin Divisek/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock)

After another Trump-less presidential debate seemed to make few waves in the Republican primary race , what can we now expect from the contest? Is the field about to consolidate to just a handful of candidates vying to be the alternative to Trump?  How could the frontrunner be defeated? On this week's episode  of the Free Expression, conservative author and commentator Matthew Continetti talks with Gerry Baker about the state of the GOP, the future of conservatism and why he thinks the populist wing of the party is firmly in the ascendant for the foreseeable future.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Money, Power, and Respect - That is the Philosophy in a nutshell. Under cover of the demand to improve the ability of Governance, the coalition members narrowed civil rights. They cut budgets for minorities and not-for-profit organizations while over-budgeting the Ultra-Orthodox and the Religious Zionism projects. The Likkud, which used to be the Liberal Party, is now the Populist Party, which appoints point persons only based on their loyalty to Netanyahu or being good friends with Likkud Politicians.  To discuss the looting of the nation's resources, I am glad to have Eran Etzion, former Deputy head of the National Security Council and former Head of the Policy Planning Division at Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and current protestor against the Judicial Upheaval again.   #Israel #IsraeliDemocracy #JudicialOverhaul

TULSI, RFK & SINEMA'S COMING 3RD 'POPULIST PARTY' DOESN'T PASS THE 2A TEST

On this day in history, in 1909, the Sixteenth Amendment was passed, which gave Congress the power to collect income taxes. Passed in 1909, the Sixteenth Amendment was ratified on February 3, 1913. This came after a series of economically destabilizing events, including a period of economic disparity between eastern industries and farmers in the south and west post-Civil War. The first federal income tax had been imposed in 1861 to fund the Civil War, but it was repealed in 1872. From that point, several political organizations, like the Grange and the Populist Party, pushed for a graduated income tax.In 1894, a 2-percent tax on income over $4,000 was enacted as part of a tariff bill, but the Supreme Court struck it down, despite having upheld the aforementioned Civil War-era income tax. Progressive Democrats and Republicans persisted in advocating for the income tax. A constitutional amendment for income tax was proposed in 1909, with conservatives believing it would fail ratification and put the issue to bed. Surprisingly, the amendment was ratified by the majority of the states, and the 16th Amendment came into effect in 1913. Despite this, in its initial year, due to numerous exemptions and deductions, only about 1 percent of the population paid income taxes. This decision substantially altered the American economic landscape.A California judge has allowed Microsoft to proceed with its acquisition of Activision Blizzard despite an ongoing antitrust case led by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley rejected the FTC's request for a preliminary injunction after five days of intensive testimony. Corley affirmed that while the merger merited scrutiny, the FTC failed to prove the deal would significantly reduce competition. Microsoft's commitments to extend Call of Duty to PlayStation and Nintendo Switch and bring Activision's content to cloud gaming services were considered as factors increasing consumer access.Microsoft, Activision Blizzard, and their respective leaders expressed gratitude and optimism for the outcome. FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar expressed disappointment and stated that the FTC would determine its next steps. However, Microsoft still faces regulatory hurdles in the UK, with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) previously blocking the acquisition. Both CMA and Microsoft are currently negotiating possible modifications to the deal to address cloud gaming concerns. If Judge Corley's decision is not appealed by the FTC by July 14th, it could indicate the regulator might abandon the case against Microsoft and Activision Blizzard.Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard - The VergeFTC would face tough appeal of Microsoft-Activision order, experts say | ReutersThe International Brotherhood of Teamsters' recent concessions from United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS) could influence the union's approach to other delivery companies like Amazon and the auto industry's "Big Three". Prior to July 5, UPS agreed to end a two-tier wage system and to equip delivery trucks with air conditioning. This outcome potentially sets a precedent for union negotiations elsewhere, despite current disputes about wages and other economic issues. The successful negotiations illustrate the union's potential to reclaim losses incurred since the late 1980s.Teamsters President, Sean O'Brien, plans to use this success as a selling point for Amazon workers. The union aims to present itself as an entity capable of securing strong contracts. As previously stated, these successes could influence negotiations between the United Auto Workers and Detroit's Big Three automakers, whose master contract expires in September. The union rate, though at a record low of 10.1%, is highest in the transportation and warehousing sector at 14.5%, indicating potential union interest among these workers.Teamsters Look for UPS Wins to Carry Over to Amazon, Big ThreeTax and law firms are experiencing expansion due to the increased demand for clean energy and corporate clients seeking to capitalize on the tax credits offered by the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act, or tax-and-climate law, passed in August 2022. This law encourages companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and has led to a surge of interest in the clean energy sector. The law allows tax credits to cover up to 70% of a project's costs and provides a 10-year certainty for incentives. Firms are witnessing a growing number of clients seeking assistance with multifaceted projects involving multiple technologies.Furthermore, the legislation allows tax credits to be sold or transferred to a third party. This provision has sparked a new market for clean energy developers to sell credits to any corporation looking to offset taxes, potentially increasing investments in renewable energy. The law also includes a direct pay option, which allows tax-exempt entities to receive a cash refund in lieu of a credit.In response to the increased demand, firms like Holland & Knight and Clifford Chance are expanding their clean energy expertise and resources. Holland & Knight merged with Thompson & Knight to expand its energy practice, while Clifford Chance announced a new office in Houston, a well-known energy transition capital.Tax Firms Build Up Energy Teams in Wake of Tax-and-Climate LawA lawsuit filed by Jaime Rogozinski, the founder of /r/WallStreetBets, against Reddit was dismissed by a U.S. judge. Rogozinski accused Reddit of unlawfully banning him from moderating WallStreetBets and infringing upon his trademark rights. He founded WallStreetBets in 2012 and applied to trademark the name in March 2020 when the community reached 1 million subscribers (now 14 million). However, the judge rejected Rogozinski's claim, stating he doesn't own the WallStreetBets trademark and dismissed his state law claims related to his ouster, indicating he lacked the standing to sue. Reddit termed Rogozinski's lawsuit a "transparent attempt to enrich himself."Reddit beats lawsuit by WallStreetBets founder | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The GOP needs to become the populist party of parents: https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/2023/03/05/josh-hammer-the-new-gop-is-the-party-of-parents/ SB246 would remove tampons from boys bathrooms: https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2023/03/04/proposal-would-remove-requirement-that-boys-bathrooms-have-tampons-sanitary-pads/ Trump's CPAC “Quantum Leap” speech was brilliant: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/03/right-on-time-a-quantum-leap-in-the-american-standard-of-living-president-trump-announces-agenda-47-video/ Trump's good couple of weeks: https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2023/03/06/trumps-good-couple-weeks-n2620226?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=73faf4fa81a03c88f2c6d53e61b4cced527bcb5ef0f78750d030720c67b499cd&recip=18637697 Steve Bannon declares all out war on Fox News: https://townhall.com//tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/03/06/bannon-declares-all-out-war-on-fox-news-n2620214?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=73faf4fa81a03c88f2c6d53e61b4cced527bcb5ef0f78750d030720c67b499cd&recip=18637697   

Guests featured in this episode: Nadia Urbinati, the Kyriakos Tsakopoulos Professor of Political Theory at Columbia University. She is also a permanent visiting professor at the Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna in Pisa (Italy), and has taught at Bocconi University Milan (Italy), Sciences Po Paris (France) and the UNICAMP University (Brazil). Her main fields of expertise are modern and contemporary political thought and the democratic, as well as anti-democratic traditions. GLOSSARYWhat is the People's Party?(13:05 or p.4 in the transcript)The People's Party: (also known as the Populist Party) was an important political party in the United States of America during the late nineteenth century. The People's Party originated in the early 1890s. It was organized in Kansas, but the party quickly spread across the United States. It drew its members from Farmers' Alliances, the Grange, and the Knights of Labor. Originally, the Populists did not form a national organization, preferring to gain political influence within individual states. The Populist Party consisted primarily of farmers unhappy with the Democratic and Republican Parties. The Populists believed that the federal government needed to play a more active role in the American economy by regulating various businesses, especially the railroads. In particular, the Populists supported women's suffrage the direct election of United States Senators. They hoped that the enactment women's suffrage and the direct election of senators would enable them to elect some of their members to political office. Populists also supported a graduated income tax, government ownership of the railroads, improved working conditions in factories, immigration restrictions, an eight-hour workday, the recognition of unions, and easier access to credit. source What is the Reconstruction?(13:10 or p.4 in the transcript)Reconstruction: in U.S. history, the period (1865–77) that followed the American Civil War and during which attempts were made to redress the inequities of slavery and its political, social, and economic legacy and to solve the problems arising from the readmission to the Union of the 11 states that had seceded at or before the outbreak of war. Long portrayed by many historians as a time when vindictiveRadical Republicans fastened Black supremacy upon the defeated Confederacy, Reconstruction has since the late 20th century been viewed more sympathetically as a laudable experiment in interracial democracy. Reconstruction witnessed far-reaching changes in America's political life. At the national level, new laws and constitutionalamendments permanently altered the federal system and the definition of American citizenship. In the South, a politically mobilized Black community joined with white allies to bring the Republican Party to power, and with it a redefinition of the responsibilities of government. source What is austerity?(16:23 or p.4 in the transcript)Austerity: (also called austerity measures) is a set of economic policies, usually consisting of tax increases, spending cuts, or a combination of the two, used by governments to reduce budget deficits. Austerity measures can in principle be used at any time when there is concern about government expenditures exceeding government revenues. Often, however, governments delay resorting to such measures because they are usually politically unpopular. Instead, governments tend to rely on other means—for example, deficit financing, which involves borrowing from financial markets—to mitigate budget deficits in the short run, a decision that usually necessitates the adoption of harsher austerity measures in the long run. source What is universal suffrage?(18:32 or p.5 in the transcript)Universal suffrage: generally understood as the right to vote for political representatives conferred to almost all adult citizens or residents, regardless of their social status, property, knowledge, religion, race, gender, or other similar qualifications. The principle of universal suffrage, together with principles of equal, free, secret, and direct suffrage, present fundamental principles of elections common to all democracies around the world. Universal suffrage is one of two historically developed concepts of the suffrage—consisting of the right to vote and the right to stand for election. The other one, a concept contrary to universal suffrage, can be denominated as so-called limited suffrage. The concept of limited suffrage, preferred until the nineteenth century, was based on the exclusion of a large number of people from the suffrage. It was done based on social status, property, knowledge, religion, race, or gender. source  Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:• Central European University: CEU• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD• The Podcast Company: Novel Follow us on social media!• Central European University: @CEU• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @AHDCentreSubscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks! 

Dimitri and Khalid discuss Gustavus Myers' final 1939 work “The Ending of Hereditary American Fortunes”, including: the Revolutionary overthrow of primogeniture, entail, and mortmain, all of which enraged the colonial American aristocracy, chartered corporations becoming the new manifestation of aristocratic perpetuities, critical support for Hamilton's nemesis Aaron Burr, Jefferson's warnings about the “aristocracy of our moneyed corporations”, the rise of the based Workingmen's Party, bribery and corruption in securing the charter of Aetna Fire Insurance Company in 1820, Jackson's war against the Bank of the United States, the decidedly less based rise of the Know Nothing Party, Irish Catholic/Nativist race riots in multiple cities, the 1834 book “Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States”, its author “Brutus” aka Samuel F.P. Morse (inventor of Morse Code), the vast Jesuit conspiracy to flood the US with Catholic immigrants to institute a demonic system of Popery, the Populist Party channeling Alex Jones in 1892, Newport, Rhode Island as the seat of Mammon, the outrageous moral degeneracy of the inheritor class, the total economic collapse of 1929, class traitor FDR's rollout of the New Deal, and finally, to what extent the American Plutocratic Class used World War 2 and the Cold War to resurrect the icy, inescapable grip of capitalist mortmain over these United States. For access to full-length premium episodes and the SJ Grotto of Truth Discord, subscribe to the Al-Wara' Frequency at patreon.com/subliminaljihad.

Give to help Truce. www,trucepodcast.com/donate Populism is a tricky subject. We use it these days as a slur, but populism can be a useful phenomenon. History professor and author Michael Kazin says that populism is an important tool when it comes to regulating power. In the late 1800s, railroads and banks were out of control. Industrialists like John D. Rockefeller had uninhibited control of their markets. Rockefeller believed in social Darwinism and didn't mind using dirty tactics to undermine his competition. The Populist Party sprouted out of frustrations women had with the political machines of their day. Republicans and Democrats were not yet willing to accept women and the issues they cared about. Women were slowly becoming a force within politics, but neither party had the guts to accept them. So women and others decided to form their own party. But in the election of 1896, the Populist Party was worried about a split vote. They worried that if they were to run a candidate of their own then they might split the vote. So the Populist Party backed Democratic nominee William Jennings Bryan. Bryan was a man of God. He quoted the Bible extensively, talked about the example of Jesus. But he was soundly defeated by the Republicans and William McKinley. He had only about 4% of the budget of his opponents. The story of Bryan is an interesting one because it contains the building blocks of fundamentalism. Discussion Questions: What is a populist? Can you name some populists? What are the advantages of populism? The drawbacks? How are Donald Trump, Elizabeth Warren, and Bernie Sanders similar? William Jennings Bryan was one of the first presidential hopefuls from a major party to tour the country. How has this shaped American politics? Why do we like to see politicians in our home states? What do populism and fundamentalism have in common? Do you think that fundamentalism relies on strong figures as populism does? Why or why not? Helpful Resources: "A Godly Hero" and "What It Took to Win" by Michael Kazin Library of Congress collection of Chautauqua materials Bernie Sanders Clip from C-SPAN Elizabeth Warren Clip from C-SPAN Donald Trump clip from C-SPAN Article about Mary Lease "These Truths" by Jill Lepore Library of Congress collection of McKinley/Bryan campaign materials. It's worth searching the site in general for images from both of them. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A brief sojourn back to the Gilded Age as we look at the coalescing of farmers into political groups known as granges and uniting with the Democratic Party under William Jennings Bryan for the election of 1896 on a ticket supporting "bimetallism." --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/cassady-cooper/message

Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 392, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: Read American 1: "O'Hara's Choice" is the final novel by this author who made his own exodus from this world in 2003. Leon Uris. 2: In 2003 he said he had completed the last 3 volumes of his "Dark Tower" series and had revised the first volume. Stephen King. 3: A werebeaver turns up in Thomas Pynchon's 1997 novel on this famous pair of surveyors. Mason and Dixon. 4: He was all at sea with 1951's "The Caine Mutiny" and back on board 20 years later with "The Winds of War". (Herman) Wouk. 5: In "Dodsworth" by Sinclair Lewis, Sam Dodsworth is president of a car co. in this town that was "at its peak". Zenith. Round 2. Category: National Rhyme Time 1: An unmarried young woman from Bern. a Swiss miss. 2: A live animal park in Lima. a zoo Peru (or Peru zoo). 3: A Havana horn. a Cuba tuba. 4: Central American ricotta. Belize cheese. 5: Southeast Asian country's ointment. Vietnam balm. Round 3. Category: Oh, Craps! 1: The combo that totals one shy of "boxcars". 5 and 6. 2: Craps roll known as "ace-deuce". 1 and 2. 3: 4, easy. 3 and 1. 4: Hard 8. 4 and 4. 5: 10, easy. 4 and 6. Round 4. Category: Geographic Pairs 1: Name of a famous hill in Cuba, or the Puerto Rican capital. San Juan. 2: You can chalk up the fact these towns in Delaware and England share the same name. Dover. 3: Nevada's oldest permanent white settlement, or the birthplace of Columbus. Genoa. 4: Name of the "twin cities" on the Arkansas-Texas border. Texarkana. 5: Island off New Jersey or Argentina, but Argentines call it "Isla de los Estados". Staten Island. Round 5. Category: Primary Colors 1: Paul Bunyan's Babe was a giant ox of this color. blue. 2: Tom Clancy's first 2 novels had this color in their titles. red. 3: It's the color mentioned in the title of the following. yellow. 4: In the election of 1892, the Populist Party supported "free" this mineral (also a color). silver. 5: The group known as "Code" this calls itself a "women-initiated grassroots peace and social justice movement". Code Pink. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!

The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution allows Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states on the basis of population. It was passed by Congress in 1909 in response to the 1895 Supreme Court case of Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. The Sixteenth Amendment was ratified by the requisite number of states on February 3, 1913, and effectively overruled the Supreme Court's ruling in Pollock. Prior to the early 20th century, most federal revenue came from tariffs rather than taxes, although Congress had often imposed excise taxes on various goods. The Revenue Act of 1861 had introduced the first federal income tax, but that tax was repealed in 1872. During the late nineteenth century, various groups, including the Populist Party, favored the establishment of a progressive income tax at the federal level. These groups believed that tariffs unfairly taxed the poor, and they favored using the income tax to shift the tax burden onto wealthier individuals. The 1894 Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act contained an income tax provision, but the tax was struck down by the Supreme Court in the case of Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. In its ruling, the Supreme Court did not hold that all federal income taxes were unconstitutional, but rather held that income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were direct taxes and thus had to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. For several years after Pollock, Congress did not attempt to implement another income tax, largely due to concerns that the Supreme Court would strike down any attempt to levy an income tax. In 1909, during the debate over the Payne–Aldrich Tariff Act, Congress proposed the Sixteenth Amendment to the states. Though conservative Republican leaders had initially expected that the amendment would not be ratified, a coalition of Democrats, progressive Republicans, and other groups ensured that the necessary number of states ratified the amendment. Shortly after the amendment was ratified, Congress imposed a federal income tax with the Revenue Act of 1913. The Supreme Court upheld that income tax in the 1916 case of Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co., and the federal government has continued to levy an income tax since 1913.

Welcome back, y'all! This week we return to the story of Jacob Coxey. His army of unemployed men might not have achieved everything he wanted...or anything he wanted, but when Congress tells you to get off the grass, you tell Congress you're coming for their job. And if you're Jacob, you tell them that as many times as your life will allow.

Hey, y'all! Welcome back to this week as we discuss the Pride of Massillon, industrialist, and guy who was not good at naming things at all, Jacob Coxey.

Kansas City native Thomas Frank talks with the Heartland Labor Forum radio show about his new book about American populism, the long trail of elites who hate it, why pundits called Donald Trump a populist and why he’s nothing of the kind.Harvey J. Kaye on The Fight for The Four Freedoms: What Made FDR and The Greatest Generation Truly Great, in an excerpt from Empathy Media Lab.And on Labor History in 2:00, Rick Smith tells us about Arturo Alfonso Schomburg.Today’s music includes two songs from the great MrBettsClass videos, Populist Party – a parody of Taylor Swift's "Style" – and New Deal – a parody of Bruno Mars "Uptown Funk."Produced and edited by Chris Garlock. To contribute a labor history item, email laborhistorytoday@gmail.comLabor History Today is produced by the Metro Washington Council’s Union City Radio and the Kalmanovitz Initiative for Labor and the Working Poor at Georgetown University. We're a proud founding member of the Labor Radio Podcast Network, more than 80 shows focusing on working people’s issues and concerns. #LaborRadioPod

Hey, y'all! Welcome back to the final installment of the tale of one Lt. Col. Bo Gritz.The man has already had one bonkers bit of a life. Supposedly Rambo is based on him. He's invaded Laos more times than 95% of the nations on Earth. And he sort of ran for Vice President whilst diving super hard into every conspiracy theory possible and getting real into Christian Identity (aka Oops! All White Supremacy!).So what could possibly be left but for Bo to take a chance at running for freaking President?

Welcome back, y'all as this week we continue into part two of the life of Lt. Col. Bo Gritz.Its 1986 and Bo's career of private invasions into Laos have come to an end. What's a man to do when his first passion is over? Dive into the new passions of political campaigns, conspiracy theories, and maybe even a little bit of acting, of course.

And yes, we touch of Trump catching the virus.  The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism patreon.com/wiecellarmediafund paypal.me/PhoenixAndWilliam Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers' great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement's provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

And yes, we touch of Trump catching the virus.  The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism patreon.com/wiecellarmediafund paypal.me/PhoenixAndWilliam Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers’ great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement’s provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

Aidan Regan discusses left populism and Irish politics with Eoin Ó Broin, Sinn Féin spokesperson on Housing, Planning & Local Govt and Teachta Dála for Dublin Mid-West.–Check out Ó Broin's latest book on public housing here: https://irishacademicpress.ie/product/home-why-public-housing-is-the-answer/–Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UCD_DEI–Check our webpage! http://www.newpoliticaleconomyeurope.eu/

The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism patreon.com/wiecellarmediafund paypal.me/PhoenixAndWilliam Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers' great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement's provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism patreon.com/wiecellarmediafund paypal.me/PhoenixAndWilliam Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers’ great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement’s provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism patreon.com/wiecellarmediafund paypal.me/PhoenixAndWilliam Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers' great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement's provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism patreon.com/wiecellarmediafund paypal.me/PhoenixAndWilliam Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers’ great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement’s provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism From the prophetic author of the now-classic What’s the Matter with Kansas? and Listen, Liberal, an eye-opening account of populism, the most important―and misunderstood―movement of our time. Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers’ great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement’s provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism From the prophetic author of the now-classic What's the Matter with Kansas? and Listen, Liberal, an eye-opening account of populism, the most important―and misunderstood―movement of our time. Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today “populism” is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party―the biggest mass movement in American history―fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers' great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement's provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us.

Episode 53. July 10, 2020 CLP  Topic. Democrat Party Socialism The Right to Work Constitutional Amendment to Reign In North Carolina’s Rogue Lockdown Governor. Introduction. Our podcast today is titled The Right to Work Constitutional Amendment to Reign In North Carolina’s Rogue Lockdown Governor and we re-examine North Carolina’s history of tyrannical governors, to gain insight into the lessons of history about how common citizens deal with rogue governors. The most important lesson is that when the normal legislative channels do not work, and rogue governors ignore the rule of law, common citizens must take matters into their own hands to protect their liberties. We argue that the citizens must enact a constitutional amendment to clarify the rights of citizens during any future emergency declarations by rogue governors, who may use the emergency powers for political purposes. We argue that modifying, or amending, the defective Emergency Management Act is insufficient protection of citizen rights. North Carolina has a vast, overwhelming population of common, working class citizens, and a tiny percentage of social class elites, compared to other states. North Carolina is unique among the states because of its cultural traditions of radical egalitarianism among common citizens. The cultural value is captured by the phrase “We are as good as anyone. And, anyone is as good as us.” Part of our cultural heritage is that common citizens applied this egalitarian philosophy to social class aristocrats and royal governors in demanding equal and fair treatment on economic exchange issues. The rogue governors, then, and now, never appreciated being equated with common citizens, and used violence and fraud to subjugate Black and White common citizens to the elite tyranny. Part of our egalitarian heritage is derived from the historical fact that North Carolina was initially settled by settlers who were lower class migrants from other states, primarily Virginia. The felons and poor people came to North Carolina to escape elite class tyranny in other states. For many years, the state’s own historians liked to use the phrase “a sea of humility between two mountains of conceit,” to contrast the common class of citizens in North Carolina with the slaveocracy of Virginia and South Carolina. On a per capita comparison, North Carolina had many more common farmers and far fewer slave owners than either Virginia or South Carolina. One of our most honored and highest praise that we can bestow on a citizen is to call the citizen a “yeoman” derived from the tradition of our mountain independent, hard-working farmers. In general, as a people, we are very slow to anger, and very slow to adopt social change to the status quo. But, when we finally reach our limit of toleration, as a people, we are tenacious in defending out social values. For many years, historians from outside of North Carolina called the state “the Rip Van Winkle” state because the citizens seemed to slumber through the crises that affected other states. The Encyclopedia of North Carolina noted,           “There was general political apathy under the state's Democrat-          controlled one-party system, which resulted in widespread           indifference to all economic, social, and cultural improvements. A           letter writer to the North Carolina Farmer in 1845 voiced his           frustration: "O! that our State, . . . would wake up from her Rip Van           Winkle agricultural sleep!!" We were the only state, in 1788, that refused, on a matter of principle, to ratify Madison’s new centralized Constitution, until it contained a citizen’s Bill of Rights. For 3 years after the refusal to ratify, the Federalists inflicted serious economic damage on the citizens, in an attempt to coerce North Carolina into ratifying the defective document. The citizens of North Carolina were extremely reluctant to join the Confederacy, but once committed to battle, the State sent more soldiers to the Confederacy than any other state, suffered more casualties and death than any other state, and had more soldiers skedaddle, from the Army, than any other state. Our proud heritage of tenacity in the face of overwhelming odds is captured in the phrase from the Civil War:           First at Bethel. Farthest at Gettysburg. Last at Appomatox. Robert E. Lee admired the fighting spirit of the North Carolina soldiers by saying that they stuck to the front lines of battle and fought like they had tar on ‘dem’ heels. North Carolina citizens liked Lee’s description of common Confederate soldiers so much that they nicknamed the UNC athletic teams “The Tar Heels.” Silent Sam, the statute torn down by socialists, on the campus of the University of North Carolina, was a tribute to the courage of the common soldier, not to the slaveocracy of plantation owners. The common citizen soldiers of the Confederacy were acutely aware of their economic class differences between themselves and the slave-owners. One of their favorite sayings was that the War “Was a rich man’s war, and a poor man’s fight.” Unlike the plantation elite rendition, after the War as “the lost cause,” the common soldiers said that they were fighting for “a southern commonwealth of independent producers.” Later history, as in the fusion politics of 1890s, confirms that the purpose of the War, for common citizens, would have been to create a southern commonwealth of independent producers which was multiracial and egalitarian. An example of how common North Carolinians citizens have dealt with tyranny, after the War, is provided by the example set by Leonidas Lafayette Polk, the State’s first Commissioner of Agriculture, the founder of N. C. State University, and the leader of the North Carolina farmer’s agrarian populist party, whose political motto was,            “equal rights for all. special privilege for none.” Polk confronted the neo-slaveocracy of one-party rule of the Democrats by creating a third political party, which successfully won the campaign for Governor in 1896.  The Encyclopedia of NC noted,           “thousands of desperate farmers abandoned the Democrats, who           called themselves "the white man's party," for the Populists, who           claimed to be the poor man's party. The Democrat (white mans’s)           Party had abolished the right to vote in local self-governments in a           number of counties having Republican majorities. Local officials in           these counties had been appointed by the Democratic majority in the           legislature.” The Encyclopedia could have been more accurate by noting that fusion was a political coalition between common white farmers, and common Black citizens, that “fused” together to elect Republican Governor Russell, in 1896. We argue that this history of fusion would have been the desired outcome of the War for common citizens, but not for the slave-owners. The Democrat slave-owners organized a violent revolt to kill the populist insurgency, including the use of gatling guns and howitzers to kill unnamed Blacks in Wilmington, in 1898. After the Democrat white man’s party coup d’etat of the overthrow of the Republican Wilmington town council, in 1898, North Carolina endured 70 years of one-party tyrannical apartheid of white man Democrat governors. As Josephus Daniels, the owner of the Raleigh News and Observer, put it, in 1899,           “North Carolina is a WHITE MAN'S STATE and WHITE MEN will           rule it, and they will crush the party of Negro domination (Polk’s           Populist Party) beneath a majority so overwhelming that no other           party will ever dare to attempt to establish negro rule here.” One hundred years before the agrarian populism of Polk, North Carolina’s farmers formed a resistance movement to tyrannical royal governors, who had been appointed by the King’s Privy Council. Known as the Regulator Movement, 6,000 farmers joined forces in an armed revolt against royal officials, who were engaged in corruption and fraud, by charging the farmers with excessive fees, falsifying records, and engaging in other mistreatments. The farmer’s called themselves “regulators” because they wanted to regulate their own affairs, free from centralized tyranny. According to the Encyclopedia of North Carolina,           “A new governor, William Tryon, arrived in 1765; he was a British           army colonel and became the cause of renewed unrest, The           Regulators sought a public meeting with colonial officials to       discover "whether the free men of this county labor under any        abuses of power or not." In March 1771, the governor's privy     council advised Tryon to call out the militia and march against the          rebel farmers.” One lesson from that episode comes from Tryon’s seeking advice from his privy council, modeled after the King’s Privy Council, in London. The historical genesis of the Governor’s Privy Council is derived from John Locke’s first constitution of North Carolina, in 1669. The legacy of the rogue governors caused the common citizens to distribute executive power in the hands of many other elected representatives. From that point forward, all of North Carolina’s Constitutions have included a provision for the governor to seek advice from the privy council, renamed to the North Carolina Council of State. The most recent version of the North Carolina Constitution, adopted in 1971, states,           “Sec. 8.  Council of State. The Council of State shall consist of the           officers whose offices are established by this Article.” The “other officers” mentioned in Section 8, are the ten independently state-wide, elected executive officers, who share co-equal executive powers with the Governor. And, it is to this provision that citizens must now turn for insight into how to deal with Governor Cooper’s rogue Covid lockdown tyranny. (Tyranny Slips Quietly Into the Tar Heel State, Laurie Thomas Vass, The CLP News Network, March 29, 2020.) I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the Introduction of a much longer copyrighted article of the Citizen Liberty Party News Network, for July 13, 2020. The other sections of the longer article include: Section 1. Governor Cooper’s Illegal and Unconstitutional Covid Lockdown Edicts. Section 2. The Inadequacy of Reforming the Defective General Statute 166A. Section 3. The Constitutional Amendment Imperative to Protect Citizen’s Right to Work. Our podcast today is under the CLP topic category Democrat Party Socialism, and is titled, The Right to Work Constitutional Amendment to Reign In North Carolina’s Rogue Lockdown Governor. The most recent podcast of the CLP News Network is available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription of $30 per year, at the CLP News Network.com.

JULY 5 -- 1872 Happy belated Birthday Calvin Coolidge (July 4); 1892 Weaver nominated for president in the Populist Party; 1986 Janet Jackson becomes 2nd youngest since Stevie Wonder to top album charts

This week at In The Past Lane, the American History podcast, we take a look at the original March on Washington. “Coxey’s Army” was a group of 500 men who amidst a terrible economic depression in 1894, marched from Ohio to the nation’s capital to demand that Congress provide employment through public works projects. They were turned away, but many of the Populist ideas that inspired them were enacted into law in the coming decades.    Feature Story: “Coxey’s Army” Arrives in Washington, DC On April 30, 1894 a man named Jacob Coxey arrived in Washington, DC at the head of a group of about 500 men. By then the whole nation knew them as “Coxey’s Army.” They had set out weeks earlier from Coxey’s hometown of Massillon, Ohio in what was the first ever March On Washington. So what was the fuss all about? The immediate answer was that in the spring of 1894 the United States was in the midst of the most severe economic depression in its history. It was triggered one year earlier by the financial Panic of 1893 which caused tens of thousands of businesses and farms to fail, and the unemployment rate to soar to 20% - and often. Double that in big cities like Chicago and New York. The US had seen its share of economic depressions in the 19th century – the panic of 1837, the panic of 1857, the panic of 1873, just to name a few. In each of these previous cases, political leaders agreed that the best policy was: do nothing. Depressions, the reasoning went, were like bad weather or an illness. Wait long enough, and the good times would return. The most dangerous thing the government could do was provide assistance to the people because, so the logic went, that would only foster dependence and lead the US down the path to socialism. Here’s how President Grover Cleveland put it in his second inaugural address, in March 1893. “The lessons of paternalism ought to be unlearned,” said Cleveland, “and the better lesson taught that while the people should patriotically and cheerfully support their Government its functions do not include the support of the people.” But despite proclamations such as these, there was growing support among many Americans in this period known as the Gilded Age for the government to take a more active role in the economy to protect the vulnerable from exploitation and promote the greatest possible amount of opportunity for all. They argued that laissez-faire might have made sense back in the late-18th century when the US took form. But not anymore in an age of industry, wage work, mass immigration, huge cities, and giant corporations. That was the view that inspired Jacob Coxey. He was no radical, at least compared to the socialists, communists, and anarchists of the day. He was a successful farmer who also bred horses for sale and owned a sand quarry business. But as a farmer in the 1880s, he’d gotten involved in the burgeoning protest movement among farmers that came to be called Populism. Its leaders argued that the only way to effectively battle the power of the monopolies and trusts was to create a political movement that would elect farmers or pro-farmer politicians to office, so they could use political power to curb the power of banks, railroads, and brokers and save the honest American farmer from ruin. And in 1892 they established a new national party called the People’s Party that called for a wide range of new government policies, everything from taking over the railroads and telegraphs, to the adoption of a graduated income tax that would make the rich pay their fair share. Its candidate for president that year polled a million votes and won four states. It was no joke. So his embrace of Populism explains Jacob Coxey’s motivation behind his protest march. He advocated that, given the severity of the depression, the federal government must abandon its traditional commitment to laissez-faire and provide funding to states to create public works projects such as road building to alleviate mass unemployment and stimulate the economy. Now, if this sounds familiar, it’s because Coxey was advocating an approach to economic crisis that 40 years later would be embraced by Pres. Franklin Delano Roosevelt during the Great Depression. And succeeding administrations, of course, have turned to varying forms of “stimulus packages” to boost the economy and help workers in times of economic crisis. To draw attention to this idea, Coxey organized his march to Washington, D.C. He actually got the idea from a fellow activist named Carl Browne who was more of a true blue radical. He not only came up with the idea of a march, but also the group’s official name, the “Commonweal of Christ,” which was intended to evoke both the ideals of the common good and Christianity. About 120 men gathered in Massillon, OH and on Easter Sunday 1894 they set off for the nation’s capital. As the press picked up the story, the group acquired a new name, “Coxey’s Army.” It was meant on the one hand to evoke ridicule and on the other to stoke fears of radicalism and civil unrest. The press alternately dismissed them as a bunch of delusional cranks, or a dangerous group of losers who wanted handouts and a socialist revolution. But Coxey dismissed this talk and declared that his army’s campaign was one to save the republic and honest capitalism from the clutches of corporate trusts and the politicians they controlled. Despite the negative press, as they marched, more men joined the ranks, including some African American men. Coxey had hoped to assemble an "army" of 100,000 men. But he had to settle for a peak of 500. In some places they were met by hostile townspeople and policemen who threatened arrest if they set up camp. But in many places Coxey and his growing number of followers were greeted by enthusiastic supporters who offered money, food, clothing, and shoes, as well as words of support. Finally, after walking 400 miles in 35 days, Coxey’s Army arrived in Washington on April 30, 1894. As this was the first ever protest march on Washington, apprehension was in the air as the men set up a makeshift camp. Hundreds of police and 1,500 soldiers stood by, ready for a confrontation. The next day, May 1, Coxey tried to enter the US Capitol to deliver a speech before Congress, but security guards turned him away. So, Coxey tried the next best thing: delivering the speech in front of the Capitol. But before he started speaking, police arrested him and took him off to jail.  He was charged with “disturbing the peace,” but the charges were eventually reduced and he was convicted only for walking on the lawn of the Capitol grounds. Had he spoken, Jacob Coxey would have said, in part: “We stand here to-day in behalf of millions of toilers whose petitions have been buried in committee rooms, whose prayers have been unresponded to, and whose opportunities for honest, remunerative, productive labor have been taken from them by unjust legislation, which protects idlers, speculators, and gamblers.” While Jacob Coxey did not get what he came for in Washington DC, the larger Populist movement to which he belonged did influence a generation of reformers who, in what we now call the Progressive Era, achieved notable successes in enacting many of the Populist Party demands, and so much more, ranging from regulations on trusts to measures to improve working conditions, public health, and political reform. And then there’s this - 50 years later to the day after he was arrested for trying to give a speech on the steps of the US Capitol, in Washington, DC, a 90-year old Jacob Coxey was allowed to deliver that speech. On May 1, 1944, he stood on the Capitol steps and said what had been on his mind back in 1894. But by then, in the wake of the New Deal and its vast array of government programs to alleviate suffering during the Great Depression, Coxey’s speech seemed hardly radical at all. What a difference half a century makes. So what else of note happened this week in US history? April 28, 1967 heavyweight champion boxer Muhammad Ali defies the draft and refuses to be inducted into the US military to fight in Vietnam. Ali argued that his religious beliefs prohibited him from participating in a war against the poor, nonwhite people of Vietnam. He was widely condemned for his stand, and subsequently stripped of his boxing title and sentenced to five years in prison. “I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs,” said Ali. “So I'll go to jail, so what? We've been in jail for 400 years.” The sentence was later overturned. April 30, 1789 The first presidential inauguration took place in New York City. George Washington took the oath of office at Federal Hall on Wall St before a crowd of thousands. April 30, 1975 South Vietnam fell to the forces of North Vietnam, marking the unofficial end of the Vietnam War. For Americans, this moment is captured in the photograph of people boarding a helicopter on the roof of the American embassy in Saigon. If you want to learn more about the Vietnam War, check out ITPL episode 39 featuring my interview with Ken Burns about his documentary on the war. And what notable people were born this week in American history?   April 27, 1822 – Union Army general and 18th POTUS, Ulysses S. Grant April 28, 1758 – 5th POTUS James Monroe April 29, 1899 - composer and jazz orchestra leader Duke Ellington May 2, 1903 - Dr Benjamin Spock, author of the best selling book on baby care May 3, 1919 – folk singer and social justice activist Pete Seeger The Last Word Let’s give it to Jacob Coxey, who 126 years ago this week arrived at the head of the first march on Washington. Here’s a passage from the speech he hoped to deliver that day from the steps of the US Capitol. “We stand here to declare by our march of over 400 miles through difficulties and distress…that we are law-abiding citizens, and as men our actions speak louder than words. We are here to petition for legislation which will furnish employment for every man able and willing to work; for legislation which will bring universal prosperity and emancipate our beloved country from financial bondage to the descendants of King George. We have come to the only source which is competent to aid the people in their day of dire distress. We are here to tell our Representatives, who hold their seats by grace of our ballots, that the struggle for existence has become too fierce and relentless. We come and throw up our defenseless hands, and say, help, or we and our loved ones must perish. We are engaged in a bitter and cruel war with the enemies of all mankind—a war with hunger, wretchedness, and despair, and we ask Congress to heed our petitions and issue for the nation’s good a sufficient volume of the same kind of money which carried the country through one awful war and saved the life of the nation. … we appeal to every peace-loving citizen, every liberty-loving man or woman, every one in whose breast the fires of patriotism and love of country have not died out, to assist us in our efforts toward better laws and general benefits.” For more information about the In The Past Lane podcast, head to our website, www.InThePastLane.com  Music for This Episode Jay Graham, ITPL Intro (JayGMusic.com) The Joy Drops, “Track 23,” Not Drunk (Free Music Archive) Sergey Cheremisinov, “Gray Drops” (Free Music Archive) Pictures of the Flow, “Horses” (Free Music Archive) Ondrosik, “Tribute to Louis Braille” (Free Music Archive) Alex Mason, “Cast Away” (Free Music Archive) Squire Tuck, “Nuthin’ Without You” (Free Music Archive) Ketsa, “Multiverse” (Free Music Archive) Ketsa, “Memories Renewed” (Free Music Archive) Dana Boule, “Collective Calm” (Free Music Archive) Borrtex, “Motion” (Free Music Archive) Blue Dot Sessions, "Pat Dog" (Free Music Archive) Jon Luc Hefferman, “Winter Trek” (Free Music Archive) The Bell, “I Am History” (Free Music Archive) Production Credits Executive Producer: Lulu Spencer Graphic Designer: Maggie Cellucci Website by: ERI Design Legal services: Tippecanoe and Tyler Too Social Media management: The Pony Express Risk Assessment: Little Big Horn Associates Growth strategies: 54 40 or Fight © In The Past Lane, 2020 Recommended History Podcasts Ben Franklin’s World with Liz Covart @LizCovart The Age of Jackson Podcast @AgeofJacksonPod Backstory podcast – the history behind today’s headlines @BackstoryRadio Past Present podcast with Nicole Hemmer, Neil J. Young, and Natalia Petrzela @PastPresentPod 99 Percent Invisible with Roman Mars @99piorg Slow Burn podcast about Watergate with @leoncrawl The Memory Palace – with Nate DiMeo, story teller extraordinaire @thememorypalace The Conspirators – creepy true crime stories from the American past @Conspiratorcast The History Chicks podcast @Thehistorychix My History Can Beat Up Your Politics @myhist Professor Buzzkill podcast – Prof B takes on myths about the past @buzzkillprof Footnoting History podcast @HistoryFootnote The History Author Show podcast @HistoryDean More Perfect podcast - the history of key US Supreme Court cases @Radiolab Revisionist History with Malcolm Gladwell @Gladwell Radio Diaries with Joe Richman @RadioDiaries DIG history podcast @dig_history The Story Behind – the hidden histories of everyday things @StoryBehindPod Studio 360 with Kurt Andersen – specifically its American Icons series @Studio360show Uncivil podcast – fascinating takes on the legacy of the Civil War in contemporary US @uncivilshow Stuff You Missed in History Class @MissedinHistory The Whiskey Rebellion – two historians discuss topics from today’s news @WhiskeyRebelPod American History Tellers ‏@ahtellers The Way of Improvement Leads Home with historian John Fea @JohnFea1 The Bowery Boys podcast – all things NYC history @BoweryBoys Ridiculous History @RidiculousHSW The Rogue Historian podcast with historian @MKeithHarris The Road To Now podcast @Road_To_Now Retropod with @mikerosenwald © In The Past Lane 2020

Benjamin Harrison, the Centennial President, survives a deadly strike, an international conflict, and the massacre at Wounded Knee. On the campaign trail, Harrison fights to overcome these obstacles and get the best of not one, but two challengers: former Democrat President Grover Cleveland and James Weaver of the Populist Party. During his campaign for re-election, Harrison’s prospects are further threatened by the death of a loved one.Created, hosted and executive produced by Lindsay Graham for Airship. Sound design by Derek Behrens. Co-Executive produced by Steven Walters in association with Ritual Productions. Written and researched by Cielle Salazar. Fact checking by Gregory Jackson and Cielle Salazar from the podcast History That Doesn’t Suck. Music by Lindsay Graham.If you like this show, please support it! Become a subscriber at www.wickedgamepodcast.com.

It's now 1991, and Governor Buddy Roemer is making his first sacrifices of personal character, only to make way for the worst Louisiana had to offer, David Duke.In Part 2 we follow the 1991 Louisiana Gubernatorial Election between the once idealist Roemer, the shamelessly crooked former Governor Edwin Edwards, and the white supremacist Duke.

St. Louis itself has been the home of a number of national political conventions dating from the 19th and into the 20th century. Five in fact, starting with the democrats in 1876.Samuel Tilden was nominated by the democratic party, you know of course because; you have never heard his name in connection with the presidency that he didn`t win and instead the presidency went to Rutherford b. Hayes.Undaunted by the loss, the democrats returned to St. Louis in 1888 nominating Grover Cleveland, who won.Then in 1896; the GOP came to town, nominating William McKinley, who also won.There was a lot of hoopla surrounding these conventions, there were parades and there were horns and there were demonstrators of all kinds who had causes for which they were advocating.The democrats returned again in 1904, but got little notice thanks to the World’s Fair in forest park.But they came back again anyway in 1916. Sending Woodrow Wilson back to the White House with a cause to champion thanks in part to his experience in St. Louis.There were women who demonstrating for female suffrage who were lining the street and the point was made clearly, as the men walked from the Jefferson hotel to the Coliseum that were was a very powerful and strong group of people; who were very much in favor of suffrage for women and of course female suffrage came not too long after that.In 1896, it wasn’t just the republicans who came to St Louis, in July of that year, the city also hosted conventions for the Bi-Metallic party. Which wanted to put the united states on a gold and silver standard and the Populist Party; who ended up nominating the same man as the democrats, William Jennings Bryan. Who despite having the backing of two political parties, still lost the election.

Throughout the 1880s, local political action groups known as Farmers' Alliances grew rapidly among Middle Westerners and Southerners, who were discontented because of crop failures, falling prices, and poor marketing and debt. Although it won some significant regional victories, the alliances generally proved politically ineffective on a national scale - until the Populist Party of 1892. While trying to broaden their base to include labor and other groups, the Populists remained almost entirely agrarian-oriented. They demanded the unlimited coinage of silver, a graduated income tax, government ownership of the railroads, a tariff for revenue only, and the direct election of U.S. Senators. And while their efforts did not win the White House, their legacy lasted into the 20th Century - through Progressives.

Here are the Key Terms, People, and Events for each topic covered in the podcast: Party Politics - Stalwarts, Half-Breeds, patronage, James Garfield, Pendleton Act, Election of 1888 Farmers - Grangers, Farmer's Alliances, Mary Elizabeth Lease, Populist Party, Free silver Government Regulation - Interstate Commerce Act, Sherman Antitrust Act, Coxey's Army, Currency Act

The leaders of Italy’s two leading populist parties are on the brink of a formal alliance after a nine-week stalemate followed by less than a week of serious negotiations. Gideon Rachman discusses the potential impact of their policies on Italy and the eurozone with the FT's James Politi and Ben Hall See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Welcome back to The Emancipation Podcast Station - the place to hear about history researched and retold through the eyes of Middle school and HS students. Last time on the show…   Today we discuss the causes of the Civil War. Let’s dive in.   Introduction to the Gilded Age Why was it called the Gilded Age? And Who coined the term.   Hunter- The gilded age in American was the late 19th century, from 1870 to about 1900. The name of this point in time was used in the early 20th century, and was derived from writer Mark Twain’s 1873 novel the Gilded Age: A Tale Of Today, which started an era of social problems covered by a thin gold gilding. Skylar - The Gilded Age began in 1865 and Ended in 1898. The gilded age was a time where everyone was focused on the development of the United states, mainly industrial type things. The Gilded age didn’t mean the golden age but more of a cover, like everything is perfect but really it’s not. Ricky-Ricky-The Gilded Age was an age in the 1870s to the early 1900s it was a time of economic growth for American citizens and non-immigrants. In wages Rose from $380 from 1880 to $564 in 1890, a gain of 48%. The widespread industrialization led to a real wage growth of 60% in between 1860 and 1890. - Blake (gabe)- The Gilded age was a time period in which hard times fell on the american and immigrant people.   Gabe - The Gilded age was a time where americans economy went good and bad in a way because industry grew but money not so much.     - Ethan - The Gilded Age was the time that America began to revolutionize their industrial world. Mark Twain coined the term “Gilded Age” which meant the time seemed pretty good but was truly miserable. Someone who profited from the Gilded Age was John D. Rockefeller, who was the founder of oil. Oil was just 1 of the “titans of industry” which were steel, banking, and oil. The miserable part would probably be that they got their money mostly through corruption. Ben- And with every urban explosion there were poor people, in apartments without heating or even light, it was 5 cents a night, which doesn’t sound like much, but they were poor and money was different then it is now. They had to fit as many people as possible to get the most out of the room too.   The Gilded Age and the Second Industrial Revolution Name one invention that came out of the Second Industrial Revolution. Hunter- The Second Industrial Revolution, also known as the Technological Revolution, was a time of quick industrialization in the last third of the 19th century, and the beginning of the 20th. Some of the inventions are of the following the swiss army knife, barbed wire, dynamite, and the motorcycle. Oh and some of my personal favorites are the Maxim Machine Gun, and the colt .45 M-1911. Skylar - The Second Industrial Revolution went on in the same time as the Gilded Age. This was time for mass production of things, as well as communicating about business tractions, materials, all that weren’t existing before. The Bessemer Process was a big deal in this time, it made steel easy and quicker to produce, so trains became more of a option for transporting things before. During this time the US had more railroads than all of Europe combined. Ricky- As everyone said the Second Industrial Revolution was basically a time when a bunch of new inventions were made that revolutionized the industrial system like as Skylar said it made steel a lot easier to produce creating easier ways to create a railroad system. A lot of inventions like petroleum gas, electrification was a big thing, Machine Tools like drills and saws, chemical tools like ammonia, and chlorine, rubber, bicycles, the invention of automobiles, some fertilizers, telephones, and a lot of scientific knowledge, as well as the making of new weapons as Hunter said like the Colt 45 M119 pistol, the Thompson submachine gun which shoots 45. ACP rounds which is famously said to be used by high-ranking gangsters, the M1 Garand which is a 30 caliber round.                                                                        4. Gabe - as Hunter and Ricky said we Developed a lot of technology in the gilded ages second industrial revolution. But railroads helped increase income and production because we used them for transportation shipping goods all across america.   - Blake(ben) - As everyone has said previously this was a big time for the early United States which revolutionized building and processing for wealthy businessman looking to get a start in the material industry. - Ethan - The Second Industrial Revolution took place in 1870-1914. Some say it went up to the start of World War 1. This Revolution was also known as the Technological Revolution. During this revolution things like the telephone and electricity were made. This revolution wasn’t just in America, but in Britain and Germany. Lesser known countries were France, Italy, and Japan. - Ben - After the first industrial revolution they had all these new things so they refined it and made it better.   Social Darwinism in the Gilded Age What is Social Darwinism and do you think there is any truth in it? Skylar - Social Darwinism is just basically seeing what people are on the outside. Social Darwinism says that the poor have less worth that a higher class rich person. It’s judging people for what’s on the outside and your social class rather than judging someone for what’s on the inside like being kind. Acting like a snob means you have more worth to someone who believes in Social Darwinism, when in reality they are worth less for judging people just by how much money they have, or how they look. Ricky-- Social Darwinism is the idea and belief that it is survival of the fittest. It stole the term from Darwinism evolution and plastered itself all over politics as social Darwinism. Gabe - Social Darwinism started in the gilded age because people started applying his idea that the strong rule the weak to people in there life and so on. - Blake(hunter) - Do I seriously have to do this one? Oh boy. Social Darwinism was a terrible thing it basically said that white people are better than others and that humans evolved from apes. - Ethan - Social Darwinism, in more proper terms, was seeing natural selection in the people around us. Anyone that considered themselves a Social Darwinist did not go by any such term. The term Darwinism wasn’t really used much except by people that were opposed to it. Ben- It got the term Darwinism because Charles Darwin studied evolution, so since people believed in survival of the fittest, like the theory of evolution, the called it darwinism. America moves to the city Why did most of America start moving to cities and leaving farms? Skylar - In 1790 nearly everyone lived in the country or on a farm. Due to The Second Industrial Revolution, growing population, and new machinery the United States needed more room to expand into the countryside to make big cities for railroads and new jobs. By 1920 only 28% of people lived in rural areas and the majority lived in the larger cities. Ricky- -a majority of people lived in rural areas than in urban areas, but then suddenly 11 million people migrated from rural areas to urban areas along with 25 million immigrants pouring in to the country.   Gabe - Another thing that happened which was people started urbanizing living in urban places it started in the 1800s and it made its ascent from there until 1920s where more people lived in urban areas then actual rural areas. And here is a quote from thomas jefferson who said “once we start piling upon one another in large cities  as in europe   We will become as corrupt as europe”.   - Blake(hunters) - America began to enter industrialization and because of this more people moved to bigger cities to find work and be prosperous. - Ethan - In 1920 more Americans lived in cities than on farms. This was kind of the transition between farm life and the urban living of today. In 1890 28% of the population lived in urban environment. - Ben - It started all the mass population you see in the popular urban cities around the world today. People were obsessed with industrial industry and thought it would be more profitable to move to cities. The Knights of Labor   What were the Knights of Labor and what do you think about them? Good or bad? 1.Hunter- The K of L, officially Noble the Holy order of the Knights of Labor, Was the largest and one of the most important American labor organizations 1880. It’s most important leaders were Terence V. Powderly and step-brother Joseph bath. The Knights promoted the working man, rejected socialism and anarchism, demanded the eight-hour day, and promoted the producersethic of republicanism. The Knights of Labor was a union founded in 1869. They promoted 8 hour work days and wanted to end child labor. It was mostly white men in this union, but immigrants, african americans, as well as women were welcome to be members. By 1886 the Knights of Labor had over 700,000 members and supporters. Ricky-- The Knights of Labor had officially crashed and disbanded near 1886 following the Haymarket Square riot. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) was growing at the time which then eventually took over. Gabe - So the knights of labor were a group who promoted like skylar said 8 hour work days and were in a union which aloud individual industrial workers to go on strike if they were not paid well or treated correctly. Another thing is that the person who started protesting 8 hour work day was also the one of the founders of socialism Ben- The skilled and simple workers of the country together to promote a safe and healthy work schedule and environment, there were people like this in the past but not as influential as the knights. - Ethan - They basically told the working class they had to work 8 hours a day and they rejected any possible anarchy or socialism. They were founded by Uriah Stephens and by 1884 had 100000 members. - Blake - Unions were a group of workers organizing to gain better wages, less hours and more employee benefits. The Populists What was the Populists agenda? Did they succeed? Skylar - The people who were called populists were an agrarian-based movement trying to better the conditions for the farmers and agrarian workers of the United States. In 1876 the farmers alliance was made to help end the crop-lien system that put many farmers into poverty, this movement began in Texas. The crop-lien system operated in the south were cotton was grown. Any sharecroppers, tenant farmers, black, and white people who didn’t own the land that they worked, would have to take out loans to be able to purchase supplies had to pay back their loans with cotton. Ricky- in 1892 a homestead strike broke out in the carnegie steel company steel works. Which caused a gun fight between unionized workers and a group of hired men to break the strike. The workers lost. Gabe - the populists were a Group of people who wanted to help farmers and help  those people that were not and industrial worker someone who farmer worked off his land but didn't make much because of the industrial work Ben- After the end of slavery the farmers had a hard time making as making as much money as before, they now had to actually hire workers and even if they hired that costed a lot of money and they still wouldn’t have as many people as before. - Ethan - A.K.A the People’s Party or Populist Party. Their goal was to improve life for farmer-like workers and they were disbanded very quickly. - Blake - (Hunter’s) Money was a troubling problem for the farming south so farmers supported a new party called the Populists Party who supported the farming economy. 7.Hunter- the Populists were an agrarian-based  political movement. The South after the Civil War What happened to the farming economy, why? Skylar - The period of Reconstruction lasted from 1865 to 1877. During this time 3 newly adopted amendments were passed, the Thirteenth Amendment to end slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment that promised the African Americans the right to have citizenship in The United States Of America, and the Fifteenth Amendment that guaranteed black men the right to vote. Ricky- Everything was topsy turny for the south, because their “country” was destroyed and their social system was wrecked and they had extreme hate from the north.   Gabe - The South crashed economically because they were built on selling tobacco and cotton  and since the prices dropped the south was economically destroyed.   Ben- Just because slavery ended doesn’t mean racism did, some is still here today, and people are doing things about it. But the end of slavery was pretty cool. Allowing people of color to now vote and be American citizens. Some of the industry based on slavery like farming and other labor tasks sort of crashed since they now had to hire workers and pay them. - Ethan - As we have said the discrimination did not end but the South did not truly let things go. The economy changed drastically since slaves were gone. - Blake - Well we still had some problems even after the war as even though we passed laws to stop discrimination against African Americans the south was able to pass laws that would stop them from doing things such as voting we’ll talk about these laws later. Life after slavery for African Americans What happened to racism, did it get better or worse? Why do you think that Skylar - When the civil war was over life got a lot better for the people living in the United States. African Americans became free in 1865 and was put into the Amendments as the 13th amendment. Which made a huge difference in everyone’s lives, especially the cotton plantation owners in the south because they would no longer have free labor. Ricky- life for African Americans, as Skylar said, “got a lot better”. After the emancipation proclamation/13th amendment African Americans worked on railroads, owned shops, and even got to vote (black men).   African americans became as the same as any white person there was no “an african american person couldn't do this because blank” anymore. There was a african american named george washington carver who made 300 different products from peanuts. Another named Booker T Washington started a University.   Ben - There were still some restrictions on what they could do though, they still couldn’t testify against white people, serve in a jury, or serve in some state militias. - Ethan - All their bad treatment didn’t completely disappear because the idea of slavery was still fresh in people’s minds so while they weren’t whipped as slaves anymore, they still were discriminated. - Blake - Just like I said before this wasn’t a good time for African Americans even though we had passed anti-discrimination laws southern states were still able to get around these laws. The Compromise of 1877 Why did the compromise have to happen? What was the final factor that gave Hayes his victory. What was the main deal in the Compromise? Skylar - The Compromise of 1877 was put into place to resolve a Presidential election that took place a year before. There was a dispute between the democrat Samuel Tilden and republican Rutherford Hayes. This dispute was obviously over who was going to become the next President of the US. Samuel J. Tilden won with 247,448 votes, but votes in 3 states were being disputed. These states were in the South and were, Florida, Louisiana, as well as South Carolina. This lasted 4 months then this compromise was put into place. Ricky-ricky-The compromise was put in place because of a dispute because Samuel J. Tilden won the popular vote, but Rutherford B Hayes won the electoral vote. So the Democrats agreed that he would be president in exchange for the withdrawal of federal troops from the South also granting of home rule in the south.   Basically the exchange in this compromise was that Rutherford B Hayes would become President and the south would get home rule and federal troops with withdraw from the south   - Ethan - The compromise was seemingly a president in exchange troop withdrawal.   Ben- With most debates the best option is a compromise, it will make both sides an equal amount of happy or sad. And with the destruction of the souths economy everyone was reconstructing their businesses.   - Blake - The compromise of 1877 was basically meant as a tiebreaker for the previous presidential election which had also affected African Americans Jim Crow The origins of Jim Crow - introduction Origins of Jim Crow - the Black Codes and Reconstruction Origins of Jim Crow - the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments Origins of Jim Crow - Compromise of 1877 and Plessy v. Ferguson What are the Jim Crow Laws and what did they encompass, why did people think there was a need to put those laws into place? Skylar - Jim Crow laws were racist laws. Saying for example, this bathroom is for blacks and this is a special one for whites. Jim Crow laws were really popular in the South from the 1870 through the 1960. Nearly 100 years. Most schools, restaurants, bathrooms, buses, stores, ect. Were using these laws to keep African Americans out of their places of business. If a black man had a business that was making good money some nieve white men would burn their homes/shops down because they were jealous. If a white and black person were together they’d hang the black person in the middle of town which is so crazy. Ricky- a Jim Crow was a stock character, used for getting a point across to the General Public, a Jim Crow was used in Minstrel shows as a means of communication to people who did not know how to read. And now it's where we go into extremely racist territory, hm Crow was a white person who put whatever black stuff all over their face to look like a black person and to act like a black person for the plays that they had of the book Uncle Tom's Cabin - Ethan - These laws enforced racial segregation. Like saying that they were equal but separated. Jim Crow was also a character used in some plays which was an ethnic depiction of the white man's idea of a black person. Ben- Ending slavery didn’t end racism that’s for sure, I’d say only 80% of the laws making slaves free were really only 80% freedom. It just shows how people have socially adapted and even though there are still bad things happening today, it’s a lot better than before. - Blake - So y’all basically covered everything and give me crap for writing about something already used so i’ll just be going over the basics. Jim Crowe was a derogatory term used to describe African Americans it was also used as a name for a set of laws set by white people to legally segregate. That’s all we have time for today. Thanks for joining us in this emancipation from the box, that is learning.

Welcome back to The Emancipation Podcast Station - the place to hear about history researched and retold through the eyes of Middle school and HS students. Last time on the show…   Today we discuss the causes of the Civil War. Let’s dive in.   Introduction to the Gilded Age Why was it called the Gilded Age? And Who coined the term.   Hunter- The gilded age in American was the late 19th century, from 1870 to about 1900. The name of this point in time was used in the early 20th century, and was derived from writer Mark Twain’s 1873 novel the Gilded Age: A Tale Of Today, which started an era of social problems covered by a thin gold gilding. Skylar - The Gilded Age began in 1865 and Ended in 1898. The gilded age was a time where everyone was focused on the development of the United states, mainly industrial type things. The Gilded age didn’t mean the golden age but more of a cover, like everything is perfect but really it’s not. Ricky-Ricky-The Gilded Age was an age in the 1870s to the early 1900s it was a time of economic growth for American citizens and non-immigrants. In wages Rose from $380 from 1880 to $564 in 1890, a gain of 48%. The widespread industrialization led to a real wage growth of 60% in between 1860 and 1890. - Blake (gabe)- The Gilded age was a time period in which hard times fell on the american and immigrant people.   Gabe - The Gilded age was a time where americans economy went good and bad in a way because industry grew but money not so much.     - Ethan - The Gilded Age was the time that America began to revolutionize their industrial world. Mark Twain coined the term “Gilded Age” which meant the time seemed pretty good but was truly miserable. Someone who profited from the Gilded Age was John D. Rockefeller, who was the founder of oil. Oil was just 1 of the “titans of industry” which were steel, banking, and oil. The miserable part would probably be that they got their money mostly through corruption. Ben- And with every urban explosion there were poor people, in apartments without heating or even light, it was 5 cents a night, which doesn’t sound like much, but they were poor and money was different then it is now. They had to fit as many people as possible to get the most out of the room too.   The Gilded Age and the Second Industrial Revolution Name one invention that came out of the Second Industrial Revolution. Hunter- The Second Industrial Revolution, also known as the Technological Revolution, was a time of quick industrialization in the last third of the 19th century, and the beginning of the 20th. Some of the inventions are of the following the swiss army knife, barbed wire, dynamite, and the motorcycle. Oh and some of my personal favorites are the Maxim Machine Gun, and the colt .45 M-1911. Skylar - The Second Industrial Revolution went on in the same time as the Gilded Age. This was time for mass production of things, as well as communicating about business tractions, materials, all that weren’t existing before. The Bessemer Process was a big deal in this time, it made steel easy and quicker to produce, so trains became more of a option for transporting things before. During this time the US had more railroads than all of Europe combined. Ricky- As everyone said the Second Industrial Revolution was basically a time when a bunch of new inventions were made that revolutionized the industrial system like as Skylar said it made steel a lot easier to produce creating easier ways to create a railroad system. A lot of inventions like petroleum gas, electrification was a big thing, Machine Tools like drills and saws, chemical tools like ammonia, and chlorine, rubber, bicycles, the invention of automobiles, some fertilizers, telephones, and a lot of scientific knowledge, as well as the making of new weapons as Hunter said like the Colt 45 M119 pistol, the Thompson submachine gun which shoots 45. ACP rounds which is famously said to be used by high-ranking gangsters, the M1 Garand which is a 30 caliber round.                                                                        4. Gabe - as Hunter and Ricky said we Developed a lot of technology in the gilded ages second industrial revolution. But railroads helped increase income and production because we used them for transportation shipping goods all across america.   - Blake(ben) - As everyone has said previously this was a big time for the early United States which revolutionized building and processing for wealthy businessman looking to get a start in the material industry. - Ethan - The Second Industrial Revolution took place in 1870-1914. Some say it went up to the start of World War 1. This Revolution was also known as the Technological Revolution. During this revolution things like the telephone and electricity were made. This revolution wasn’t just in America, but in Britain and Germany. Lesser known countries were France, Italy, and Japan. - Ben - After the first industrial revolution they had all these new things so they refined it and made it better.   Social Darwinism in the Gilded Age What is Social Darwinism and do you think there is any truth in it? Skylar - Social Darwinism is just basically seeing what people are on the outside. Social Darwinism says that the poor have less worth that a higher class rich person. It’s judging people for what’s on the outside and your social class rather than judging someone for what’s on the inside like being kind. Acting like a snob means you have more worth to someone who believes in Social Darwinism, when in reality they are worth less for judging people just by how much money they have, or how they look. Ricky-- Social Darwinism is the idea and belief that it is survival of the fittest. It stole the term from Darwinism evolution and plastered itself all over politics as social Darwinism. Gabe - Social Darwinism started in the gilded age because people started applying his idea that the strong rule the weak to people in there life and so on. - Blake(hunter) - Do I seriously have to do this one? Oh boy. Social Darwinism was a terrible thing it basically said that white people are better than others and that humans evolved from apes. - Ethan - Social Darwinism, in more proper terms, was seeing natural selection in the people around us. Anyone that considered themselves a Social Darwinist did not go by any such term. The term Darwinism wasn’t really used much except by people that were opposed to it. Ben- It got the term Darwinism because Charles Darwin studied evolution, so since people believed in survival of the fittest, like the theory of evolution, the called it darwinism. America moves to the city Why did most of America start moving to cities and leaving farms? Skylar - In 1790 nearly everyone lived in the country or on a farm. Due to The Second Industrial Revolution, growing population, and new machinery the United States needed more room to expand into the countryside to make big cities for railroads and new jobs. By 1920 only 28% of people lived in rural areas and the majority lived in the larger cities. Ricky- -a majority of people lived in rural areas than in urban areas, but then suddenly 11 million people migrated from rural areas to urban areas along with 25 million immigrants pouring in to the country.   Gabe - Another thing that happened which was people started urbanizing living in urban places it started in the 1800s and it made its ascent from there until 1920s where more people lived in urban areas then actual rural areas. And here is a quote from thomas jefferson who said “once we start piling upon one another in large cities  as in europe   We will become as corrupt as europe”.   - Blake(hunters) - America began to enter industrialization and because of this more people moved to bigger cities to find work and be prosperous. - Ethan - In 1920 more Americans lived in cities than on farms. This was kind of the transition between farm life and the urban living of today. In 1890 28% of the population lived in urban environment. - Ben - It started all the mass population you see in the popular urban cities around the world today. People were obsessed with industrial industry and thought it would be more profitable to move to cities. The Knights of Labor   What were the Knights of Labor and what do you think about them? Good or bad? 1.Hunter- The K of L, officially Noble the Holy order of the Knights of Labor, Was the largest and one of the most important American labor organizations 1880. It’s most important leaders were Terence V. Powderly and step-brother Joseph bath. The Knights promoted the working man, rejected socialism and anarchism, demanded the eight-hour day, and promoted the producersethic of republicanism. The Knights of Labor was a union founded in 1869. They promoted 8 hour work days and wanted to end child labor. It was mostly white men in this union, but immigrants, african americans, as well as women were welcome to be members. By 1886 the Knights of Labor had over 700,000 members and supporters. Ricky-- The Knights of Labor had officially crashed and disbanded near 1886 following the Haymarket Square riot. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) was growing at the time which then eventually took over. Gabe - So the knights of labor were a group who promoted like skylar said 8 hour work days and were in a union which aloud individual industrial workers to go on strike if they were not paid well or treated correctly. Another thing is that the person who started protesting 8 hour work day was also the one of the founders of socialism Ben- The skilled and simple workers of the country together to promote a safe and healthy work schedule and environment, there were people like this in the past but not as influential as the knights. - Ethan - They basically told the working class they had to work 8 hours a day and they rejected any possible anarchy or socialism. They were founded by Uriah Stephens and by 1884 had 100000 members. - Blake - Unions were a group of workers organizing to gain better wages, less hours and more employee benefits. The Populists What was the Populists agenda? Did they succeed? Skylar - The people who were called populists were an agrarian-based movement trying to better the conditions for the farmers and agrarian workers of the United States. In 1876 the farmers alliance was made to help end the crop-lien system that put many farmers into poverty, this movement began in Texas. The crop-lien system operated in the south were cotton was grown. Any sharecroppers, tenant farmers, black, and white people who didn’t own the land that they worked, would have to take out loans to be able to purchase supplies had to pay back their loans with cotton. Ricky- in 1892 a homestead strike broke out in the carnegie steel company steel works. Which caused a gun fight between unionized workers and a group of hired men to break the strike. The workers lost. Gabe - the populists were a Group of people who wanted to help farmers and help  those people that were not and industrial worker someone who farmer worked off his land but didn't make much because of the industrial work Ben- After the end of slavery the farmers had a hard time making as making as much money as before, they now had to actually hire workers and even if they hired that costed a lot of money and they still wouldn’t have as many people as before. - Ethan - A.K.A the People’s Party or Populist Party. Their goal was to improve life for farmer-like workers and they were disbanded very quickly. - Blake - (Hunter’s) Money was a troubling problem for the farming south so farmers supported a new party called the Populists Party who supported the farming economy. 7.Hunter- the Populists were an agrarian-based  political movement. The South after the Civil War What happened to the farming economy, why? Skylar - The period of Reconstruction lasted from 1865 to 1877. During this time 3 newly adopted amendments were passed, the Thirteenth Amendment to end slavery, the Fourteenth Amendment that promised the African Americans the right to have citizenship in The United States Of America, and the Fifteenth Amendment that guaranteed black men the right to vote. Ricky- Everything was topsy turny for the south, because their “country” was destroyed and their social system was wrecked and they had extreme hate from the north.   Gabe - The South crashed economically because they were built on selling tobacco and cotton  and since the prices dropped the south was economically destroyed.   Ben- Just because slavery ended doesn’t mean racism did, some is still here today, and people are doing things about it. But the end of slavery was pretty cool. Allowing people of color to now vote and be American citizens. Some of the industry based on slavery like farming and other labor tasks sort of crashed since they now had to hire workers and pay them. - Ethan - As we have said the discrimination did not end but the South did not truly let things go. The economy changed drastically since slaves were gone. - Blake - Well we still had some problems even after the war as even though we passed laws to stop discrimination against African Americans the south was able to pass laws that would stop them from doing things such as voting we’ll talk about these laws later. Life after slavery for African Americans What happened to racism, did it get better or worse? Why do you think that Skylar - When the civil war was over life got a lot better for the people living in the United States. African Americans became free in 1865 and was put into the Amendments as the 13th amendment. Which made a huge difference in everyone’s lives, especially the cotton plantation owners in the south because they would no longer have free labor. Ricky- life for African Americans, as Skylar said, “got a lot better”. After the emancipation proclamation/13th amendment African Americans worked on railroads, owned shops, and even got to vote (black men).   African americans became as the same as any white person there was no “an african american person couldn't do this because blank” anymore. There was a african american named george washington carver who made 300 different products from peanuts. Another named Booker T Washington started a University.   Ben - There were still some restrictions on what they could do though, they still couldn’t testify against white people, serve in a jury, or serve in some state militias. - Ethan - All their bad treatment didn’t completely disappear because the idea of slavery was still fresh in people’s minds so while they weren’t whipped as slaves anymore, they still were discriminated. - Blake - Just like I said before this wasn’t a good time for African Americans even though we had passed anti-discrimination laws southern states were still able to get around these laws. The Compromise of 1877 Why did the compromise have to happen? What was the final factor that gave Hayes his victory. What was the main deal in the Compromise? Skylar - The Compromise of 1877 was put into place to resolve a Presidential election that took place a year before. There was a dispute between the democrat Samuel Tilden and republican Rutherford Hayes. This dispute was obviously over who was going to become the next President of the US. Samuel J. Tilden won with 247,448 votes, but votes in 3 states were being disputed. These states were in the South and were, Florida, Louisiana, as well as South Carolina. This lasted 4 months then this compromise was put into place. Ricky-ricky-The compromise was put in place because of a dispute because Samuel J. Tilden won the popular vote, but Rutherford B Hayes won the electoral vote. So the Democrats agreed that he would be president in exchange for the withdrawal of federal troops from the South also granting of home rule in the south.   Basically the exchange in this compromise was that Rutherford B Hayes would become President and the south would get home rule and federal troops with withdraw from the south   - Ethan - The compromise was seemingly a president in exchange troop withdrawal.   Ben- With most debates the best option is a compromise, it will make both sides an equal amount of happy or sad. And with the destruction of the souths economy everyone was reconstructing their businesses.   - Blake - The compromise of 1877 was basically meant as a tiebreaker for the previous presidential election which had also affected African Americans Jim Crow The origins of Jim Crow - introduction Origins of Jim Crow - the Black Codes and Reconstruction Origins of Jim Crow - the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments Origins of Jim Crow - Compromise of 1877 and Plessy v. Ferguson What are the Jim Crow Laws and what did they encompass, why did people think there was a need to put those laws into place? Skylar - Jim Crow laws were racist laws. Saying for example, this bathroom is for blacks and this is a special one for whites. Jim Crow laws were really popular in the South from the 1870 through the 1960. Nearly 100 years. Most schools, restaurants, bathrooms, buses, stores, ect. Were using these laws to keep African Americans out of their places of business. If a black man had a business that was making good money some nieve white men would burn their homes/shops down because they were jealous. If a white and black person were together they’d hang the black person in the middle of town which is so crazy. Ricky- a Jim Crow was a stock character, used for getting a point across to the General Public, a Jim Crow was used in Minstrel shows as a means of communication to people who did not know how to read. And now it's where we go into extremely racist territory, hm Crow was a white person who put whatever black stuff all over their face to look like a black person and to act like a black person for the plays that they had of the book Uncle Tom's Cabin - Ethan - These laws enforced racial segregation. Like saying that they were equal but separated. Jim Crow was also a character used in some plays which was an ethnic depiction of the white man's idea of a black person. Ben- Ending slavery didn’t end racism that’s for sure, I’d say only 80% of the laws making slaves free were really only 80% freedom. It just shows how people have socially adapted and even though there are still bad things happening today, it’s a lot better than before. - Blake - So y’all basically covered everything and give me crap for writing about something already used so i’ll just be going over the basics. Jim Crowe was a derogatory term used to describe African Americans it was also used as a name for a set of laws set by white people to legally segregate. That’s all we have time for today. Thanks for joining us in this emancipation from the box, that is learning.

Join us as we discuss... Harrison's lackluster presidency,the Populist Party,Grover the Good's return to the White House,and more!______________________________ Support the show! Use this link to do your shopping on Amazon. It won't cost you a penny more and it will help us out!  ElectionCollege.com/Amazon ________________________ Be sure to subscribe to the show! Leave us a review on iTunes - It really helps us out! Facebook  |  Twitter  | Instagram ________________________ Get a free month of Audible and a free audiobook to keep at ElectionCollege.com/Audible ________________________ Make sure you sign up for our newsletter for news, resources, freebies, and more! ElectionCollege.com/Newsletter ________________________ Music from: http://www.bensound.com/royalty-free-music ________________________ Some links in these show notes are affiliate links that could monetarily benefit Election College, but cost you nothing extra. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The short-lived Populist party left an enduring legacy for workers and citizens in the U.S.

Our guest for this episode, Dr. Steven Hahn of New York University helps us turn this political buzzword into a historical phenomenon from a time period in American history that has a number of parallels with our own.

Join us as we discuss... Harrison's lackluster presidency, the Populist Party, Grover the Good's return to the White House, and more! ______________________________  Did you know that Jason and Ben do podcast and social media consulting? Shoot us a message to find out more about our services and what we can offer. ______________________________ Support the show! Use this link to do your shopping on Amazon. It won't cost you a penny more and it will help us out!  ElectionCollege.com/Amazon ________________________ Be sure to subscribe to the show! Leave us a review on iTunes - It really helps us out! Facebook  |  Twitter  | Instagram ________________________ Election College is recorded using Audacity and produced with help from the BossJock for iPad App. ________________________ Get a free month of Audible and a free audiobook to keep at ElectionCollege.com/Audible ________________________ Get $10 free from Canva at ElectionCollege.com/Canva! ________________________ Make sure you sign up for our newsletter for news, resources, freebies, and more! ElectionCollege.com/Newsletter ________________________ Music from: http://www.bensound.com/royalty-free-music ________________________ Some links in these show notes are affiliate links that could monetarily benefit Election College, but cost you nothing extra.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Here is the story of The People's Party, aka The Populist Party, that sparked a movement that continues to this day.

Homestead Act, Dry-farming, Turner Thesis, The Grange, Greenback Labor Party, The Populist Party, Coxey's Army, Pullman Strike, Election of 1896

Election of 1876 (Compromise of 1877), Plessy v. Ferguson, Financial Panic of 1873, Assassination of James Garfield, Chester Arthur, Pendleton Civil Service Act, Grover Cleveland, Benjamin Harrison, The Populist Party, Depression of 1893

Populist manifesto or just good, clean fun? Learn the real story behind L. Frank Baum's book, The Wizard of Oz.