Talk:Demagogue: Difference between revisions
Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
:Also a "Contemporary allegations of demagoguery" subsection under modern with list of same should work, with reference to [[populism]], trump isn't unique. [[Special:Contributions/98.4.124.117|98.4.124.117]] ([[User talk:98.4.124.117|talk]]) 15:10, 18 October 2018 (UTC) |
:Also a "Contemporary allegations of demagoguery" subsection under modern with list of same should work, with reference to [[populism]], trump isn't unique. [[Special:Contributions/98.4.124.117|98.4.124.117]] ([[User talk:98.4.124.117|talk]]) 15:10, 18 October 2018 (UTC) |
||
::Adding Trump to the article has been discussed numerous times. Please read the thread above and the archives (box on right above). Then, add to the discussion above. Thank you [[User:Jim1138|Jim1138]] ([[User talk:Jim1138|talk]]) 18:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC) |
::Adding Trump to the article has been discussed numerous times. Please read the thread above and the archives (box on right above). Then, add to the discussion above. Thank you [[User:Jim1138|Jim1138]] ([[User talk:Jim1138|talk]]) 18:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC) |
||
::: wikifail, a type case. [[Special:Contributions/98.4.124.117|98.4.124.117]] ([[User talk:98.4.124.117|talk]]) 05:58, 20 October 2018 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:58, 20 October 2018
![]() | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Demagogue. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Demagogue at the Reference desk. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
|
![]() | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
Talk:Demagogue/Archive 1 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Sources
Here are some serious, reliable sources about demagogy/demagogues. I haven't checked them all closely, but I'm listing them because they appear to be scholarly research, not name-calling by opponents. Please add more such sources to this section as you find them. They'll help other editors looking for good material to summarize. —Ben Kovitz (talk) 15:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Demagogues in general
Michael Signer. Demagogue: The Fight to Save Democracy from its Worst Enemies. Palgrave Macmillan (2009).
- Modern and thorough. Takes care with definition. Details famous demagogues from history. Explains demagoguery as an inherent weakness of democracy (the traditional view), and proposes an explanation of why the United States has never faced a serious threat from a national-level demagogue. Explains why Bush was not a demagogue, regardless of one's opinion of him as a leader.
Ceaser, James W. (2011). "Demagoguery, Statesmanship, and Presidential Politics". Designing a Polity: America's Constitution in Theory and Practice. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 75–118. ISBN 1442207906.
- Scholarly, covers history back to Athens, with emphasis on the U.S. Defines and classifies demagogues.
James Fenimore Cooper. "On Demagogues." (1838).
- Careful, four-part definition of "demagogue". Documents the term's ancient origin and its extension in modern times. Still pretty authoritative.
Thoms Streissguth. Hatemongers and Demagogues. The Oliver Press, Inc. (1995).
- Eight examples from history: Samuel Parris (witch-hunter), Lyman Beecher (Puritan), Thomas Watson (Populist), William Simmons (KKK), Father Coughlin, Joseph McCarthy, George Lincoln Rockwell (American Nazi), Louis Farrakhan.
Aristotle. Politics.
- Ancient survey of democracy and demagogues.
Reinhard Henry Luthin. American Demagogues: Twentieth Century. P. Smith (1959).
- Not freely available, but widely cited. Includes Joe McCarthy.
Polybius's Histories and people's commentaries on them: Google Books search
- Something in here ought to be thorough.
Basil Montagu. "The Patriot and the Demagogue" (1837).
- Not sure if we need to cite it, but certainly we should offer a link to it. It's probably got something quotable, and it mentions some demagogues who might be of interest to describe in the article.
J. Justin Gustainis. "Demagoguery and Political Rhetoric: A Review of the Literature," Rhetoric Society Quarterly, Vol. 20, No. 2 (Spring, 1990), pp. 155–161.
- A survey of other sources on demagogues, especially their rhetorical techniques.
Cal M. Logue and Howard Dorgan, editors. The Oratory of Southern Demagogues (1981).
- A survey of eight demagogues of the southern U.S., by a variety of authors. Includes an overview of demagogues in general.
G.M. Gilbert. "Dictators and Demagogues," Journal of Social Issues, Vol 11(3), 1955, 51-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1955.tb00330.x
- General analysis of demagogues. (Unfortunately behind a paywall.)
Allan Louis Larson. Southern Demagogues: A Study in Charismatic Leadership (1964).
- Might have a thorough analysis of defining characteristics of demagogues and how they target and exploit their followers.
Wilma Dykeman. "The Southern Demagogue," The Virginia Quarterly Review, 33.4 (Fall 1957): 558.
- Appears to analyze why demagogues were so common in the southern U.S. in the early 20th century. (Behind a paywall.)
Allport, Gordon Willard. The Nature of Prejudice (25th-anniversary edition, 1979). Basic Books.
- Includes a chapter on demagogues. Discusses the followers of demagogues as well as their motives and tactics.
Specifically about McCarthy
Robert Shogan. No Sense of Decency: The Army-McCarthy Hearings: A Demagogue Falls and Television Takes Charge of American Politics. Ivan R. Dee (2009).
Charles Joseph Pruitt. Demagogue McCarthy. University of Oregon. (1967)
William T. Walker. McCarthyism and the Red Scare: A Reference Guide. ABC-CLIO (2011)
Is another trait of the demagogue "a misguided appeal to patriotism"?
I wonder if this should be added to the list of potential attributes of the demagogue? It seems that many demagogues use an appeal to their country to gain support and divide their opposition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.64.44 (talk) 12:10, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Adding Trump to list of famous demagogues
There has already been a discussion about this, but a general conclusion was never clear to me. President Donald Trump appears to fit the definition of a demagogue, but many editors have refused to add him to this list because of POV pushing. Can we have people comment on whether or not to add Donald Trump to a list of demagogues on this article? AIN515 (talk) 20:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Actually we've had several discussions about this. (See the archives for this year and 2016.) But to respond, we have to make sure that WP remains neutral on the topic, every topic. And including Trump as an example of a demagogue is POV, pure and simple. The readers are informed about demagogues through the other, neutral, scholarly sources in the article. Besides, "fits the definition" is an "according to whom?" matter. The WP:TOPIC of the article is an historical discussion of demagogues over thousands of years of history, and Trump is a recent event. More importantly, we have the content policy of WP:LIVE which mandates we stay clear of POV problems when it comes to living people. The proper page(s) for stating the demagogue view-points about Trump are those pages which discuss him directly. We cannot let WP be a WP:SOAPBOX for announcing Trump=demagogue=Trump. – S. Rich (talk) 02:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I've said it before and I say it again: characterising Trump as demagogue is not POV; in line with Wikipedia policies, that's only reporting what many reputable sources have written. On the other hand, whether this Wikipedia article includes him or not doesn't affect that fact – see the results of this Google search. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:27, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- What I'm wondering is why we can have Hitler and Joseph McCarthy, but not Trump. If we list anybody, there are bound to be people who will object to the classification. This is not a matter of opinion. This is a list of people that meet a specific criteria. AIN515 (talk) 18:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Ain515: Wikipedia only summarizes the authoritative literature on a topic. So, the fact that someone is a demagogue is by itself a weak reason to include him. There are many demagogues that we don't cover. We cover Hitler and McCarthy because they are covered extensively in the literature on demagogues—not simply because they're demagogues. However, there is some authoritative literature pointing out that Trump is a demagogue and analyzing his demagoguery. I have never heard of any controversy about this. I think it would be OK to briefly mention Trump somewhere as an example of a demagogue, maybe like the way we briefly mention Stanisław Tymiński. (However, see above for a discussion where this conclusion did not reach consensus.) But it would not be appropriate to write a whole section about Trump or Tymiński or cover either of them in depth, because Trump and Tymiński occupy only a tiny fraction of a percent of the whole literature on demagogues; see WP:BALASPS. —Ben Kovitz (talk) 05:49, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Your President doesn't fit the definition of demagogue, quite simply because he doesn't make the grade. To be a real demagogue you have to be able to shut down reasoned deliberation: read the lede. Last time I looked, reasoned deliberation was still going on in America. (And I sort of remember that most American voters voted for the other candidate.) Sorry, but some people on this forum seem to me not old enough to remember what a real demagogue was like. Now, Senator McCarthy knew how to shut down reasoned deliberation. I can remember reasonable people being scared to speak out in case he labelled them a Communist – which could cost you your job in those days. But Trump? Get real. Ttocserp 09:14, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- to address these criticisms that trump is to witless and charmless and unpopular to be considered a demagogue, I have added: “Trump is considered the most archetpical demagogue since Hitler, alveit with considerably less warmth or charm.” I hope this adderesses your concerns. Unconcealment (talk) 04:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah, um, no. This is an encyclopedia and not a place to post your personal opinions. Rklawton (talk) 04:06, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
- to address these criticisms that trump is to witless and charmless and unpopular to be considered a demagogue, I have added: “Trump is considered the most archetpical demagogue since Hitler, alveit with considerably less warmth or charm.” I hope this adderesses your concerns. Unconcealment (talk) 04:00, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
"The enduring character of demagogues"
@Srich32977: I just reverted your change of "The enduring character of demagogues" to "The character of demagogues". I'm actually not especially fond of "The enduring character of demagogues". I'll explain it here; maybe you or someone else reading this can suggest a better title. The section is about a common observation made in the sources: demagogues and demagoguery have stayed pretty much the same across millenia (modulo the changing technologies of news media). That's why I changed it back from merely "The character of demagogues": the point is the enduringness. "Enduring" isn't ideal, and I think "The perennial character of demagogues" doesn't fit right. "Demagogues are pretty much the same in every age" is clear but lacks encyclopedia tone, of course. I haven't looked over the sources in a long time. They might have good word for this. Or maybe you do. Any ideas? (Signer says that demagogues are an "endemic" problem of democracies, but that word seems even less clear without explanation.) —Ben Kovitz (talk) 22:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- How about "Character of demagogues through history"? – S. Rich (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- I think that title suggests that the character of demagogues has changed throughout history. I'll keep thinking… —Ben Kovitz (talk) 12:30, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
WP:WEASEL as an out
The non-occurrence of "trump" in the current text looks very bad for a site that is supposed to be a compendium of knowledge, various policies notwithstanding. I came here to see what was said after seeing that Stephen Hawking had called him one. At the very least the acknowledgement of "some people", for which a long list of similar illuminaries could be compiled as a reference (so it wouldn't in fact be WP:WEASEL) is in order. Nothing at all is a) glaring and b) an invitation to endless milling on both the front and back matter of this article. A single sentence with a short set of similarly apolitical references should settle the matter. e.g.. 98.4.124.117 (talk) 05:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Also a "Contemporary allegations of demagoguery" subsection under modern with list of same should work, with reference to populism, trump isn't unique. 98.4.124.117 (talk) 15:10, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
- Adding Trump to the article has been discussed numerous times. Please read the thread above and the archives (box on right above). Then, add to the discussion above. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 18:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- wikifail, a type case. 98.4.124.117 (talk) 05:58, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
- Adding Trump to the article has been discussed numerous times. Please read the thread above and the archives (box on right above). Then, add to the discussion above. Thank you Jim1138 (talk) 18:27, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- C-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- Start-Class Greek articles
- Low-importance Greek articles
- WikiProject Greece general articles
- All WikiProject Greece pages
- Start-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles
- Low-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles
- All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages
- Start-Class history articles
- Low-importance history articles
- WikiProject History articles
- Wikipedia pages with to-do lists
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press