Besides Left/Right and Libertarian/Authoritarian, there seems to be a different divide in politics: that between those who generally support or defend the "establishment", or those who take a more "populist" line against the establishment and positioning themselves as standing for the people.

The populist Left seems to be defined by people like Bernie Sanders, the Corbyn-wing of the Labour party, Michael Moore etc. while the populist Right is defined by the likes of Trump, probably Cruz, the Tea Party and its defunct caucus, UKIP and media outlets like Breitbart. What they have in common is the decrying of 'big institutions', be they banks or governments. Both sides have criticised things like TTIP, both have criticised the involvement of financial institutions and big money in politics, both have criticised the way the government is becoming fundamentally "out-of-touch" with everyday life.

The establishment Left and Right are defined broadly the by the higher-end of the hierarchy of the main political parties in both the U.K. and U.S., and candidates like Clinton, Obama, Romney, Bush, McCain, Kasich, Rubio etc. They tend to take an attitudinally more conservative approach in decrying 'big institutions' and taking a hard-line pro-thebigguysalwaysfuckoverthepeople position.

In terms of users, I'd say Turkey, Flee, Icy and I are more on the side of the establishment. Verbatim, Midget, PSU and Challenger are more notably populist. Haven't really thought about where others fall.

I'm using the terms (pro-)establishment and populist loosely.

Government is established to support the people. Ergo, supporting the government is the best course to support the people.

Both of those propositions are highly questionable.

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 22, 2016, 10:56:49 PM

Government is established to support the people. Ergo, supporting the government is the best course to support the people.

Both of those propositions are highly questionable.

Is it not the responsibility of government to unify and support its citizens? Not necessarily through service, but by the organization of law.

Trump, Farage and Timo Soini are good populists.

People generally vote for their interests, not who is really right.

This isn't true. There's a lot of literature supporting the ideas that voters are sociotropic.

Government is established to support the people. Ergo, supporting the government is the best course to support the people.

I'm guessing that you base the assumption on the current task of the government from the populace's POV, correct?

Quote from: Desty on January 24, 2016, 02:51:44 PM

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 22, 2016, 10:56:49 PM

Government is established to support the people. Ergo, supporting the government is the best course to support the people.

I'm guessing that you base the assumption on the current task of the government from the populace's POV, correct?

Based on the social contract, Magna Carta, and John Locke's Treatises of Government.

I don't know what all that is, and I don't need to to see a different POV.

You should too. Here's the lead:
The government governs.

Quote from: Desty on January 24, 2016, 03:16:19 PM

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 24, 2016, 03:05:26 PM

Quote from: Desty on January 24, 2016, 02:51:44 PM

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 22, 2016, 10:56:49 PM

Government is established to support the people. Ergo, supporting the government is the best course to support the people.

I'm guessing that you base the assumption on the current task of the government from the populace's POV, correct?

Based on the social contract, Magna Carta, and John Locke's Treatises of Government.

I don't know what all that is, and I don't need to to see a different POV.

You should too. Here's the lead:
The government governs.

Who are the subjects? By what power do they remain governed?

People allow themselves to be governed in return for protection (primarily through the rule of civil law). The law of nature isn't sustainable; it proceeds society, and if that society decays into despotism, it follows as well. That's a shitty way of summing up Locke's second Treatise, but I would recommend you look into them.

"I need these people to work for me, so I will hire them, then I will make them do my jobs. Great, now I have enough money and power to make these areas mine, and if people wish to live in them I will tax them. Oh no, people are revolting, I better improve living conditions so that they don't bring me down."