Demagogue: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 1:

{{pp|small=yes}}▼

{{short description|Politician or orator who panders to fears and emotions of the public}}

{{use mdy dates|date=January 2023}}▼

{{about||the song by Urban Dance Squad|Demagogue (song)}}

{{confusion|Demigod|Demogorgon}}

▲{{pp|small=yes}}

▲{{use mdy dates|date=January 2023}}

[[File:José Clemente Orozco - The Demagogue - Google Art Project.jpg|thumb|upright=1.2|[[José Clemente Orozco]]'s painting ''The Demagogue]]

A '''demagogue''' ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|d|ɛ|m|ə|ɡ|ɒ|g}}; (from Greek {{lang|grc|δημαγωγός}}, a popular leader, a leader of a mob, from {{lang|grc|δῆμος}}, people, populace, the commons + {{lang|grc|ἀγωγός}} leading, leader),<ref name=OED /> or '''rabble-rouser''',<ref name=OED-rabble/><ref name=MW-rabble /> is a political leader in a [[democracy]] who gains popularity by arousing the [[common people]] against [[elites]], especially through oratory that whips up the passions of crowds, [[Appeal to emotion|appealing to emotion]] by scapegoating out-groups, exaggerating dangers to stoke fears, lying for emotional effect, or other [[rhetoric]] that tends to drown out reasoned [[deliberation]] and encourage fanatical popularity.<ref name=LarsonDefn /> Demagogues overturn established norms of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}

Historian [[Reinhard Luthin]] defined ''demagogue'' as "...a politician skilled in oratory, flattery and invective; evasive in discussing vital issues; promising everything to everybody; appealing to the passions rather than the reason of the public; and arousing racial, religious, and class prejudices—a man whose lust for power without recourse to principle leads him to seek to become a master of the masses. He has for centuries practiced his profession of 'man of the people'. He is a product of a political tradition nearly as old as western civilization itself."{{r|Luthin|page=3}}

Demagogues have appeared in democracies since ancient [[Athenian democracy|Athens]]. TheyDemagogues exploit a fundamental weakness in democracy: because ultimate power is held by the people, it is possible for the people to give that power to someone who appeals to the lowest common denominator of a large segment of the population.{{r|Signer|page=31–71}} Demagogues have usually advocated immediate, forceful action to address a crisis while accusing moderate and thoughtful opponents of weakness or disloyalty. Many demagogues elected to high executive office have unraveled constitutional limits on executive power and tried to convert their democracy into a [[dictatorship]], sometimes successfully.

==History and definition of the word==

{{Rhetoric}}

{{Pull quote|text=A demagogue, in the strict signification of the word, is a 'leader of the rabble'.|author=[[James Fenimore Cooper]]|source="On Demagogues" (1838)<ref name=Cooper />}}

TheDemagogue, worda ''demagogue,''term originally meaningreferring to a leader of the common people, was first coined in [[ancient Greece]] with no negative connotation, but eventually came to mean a troublesome kind of leader who occasionally arose in [[Athenian democracy]].<ref name="Samons-etym" /><ref name="Ostwald" /> Even though democracy gave power to the common people, elections still tended to favor the aristocratic class, which favored deliberation and decorum. Demagogues were a new kind of leader who emerged from the lower classes. Demagogues relentlessly advocated action, usually violent—immediately and without deliberation.{{rCitation needed|Signer|pagedate=32–38July 2023}} Demagogues [[appeal to emotion|appealed directly to the emotions]] of the poor and uninformed, pursuing power, telling lies to stir up hysteria, exploiting crises to intensify popular support for their calls to immediate action and increased authority, and accusing moderate opponents of weakness or disloyalty to the nation.▼

ThroughoutThe itsterm history,"demagogue" peoplehas have oftenbeen used the word ''demagogue'' carelessly, as an "attack word" to disparage anyleaders leaderperceived whom the speaker thinksas manipulative, pernicious, or bigoted.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}<ref name=Gustainis /> While there can be no precise delineation between demagogues and non-demagogues, since democratic leaders exist on a continuum from less to more demagogicHowever, what distinguishes a demagogue can be defined independently of whether the speaker favors or opposes a certain political leader.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} What distinguishes a demagogue is ''how'' he ora sheperson gains or holds democratic power: by exciting the passions of the lower classes and less-educated people in a democracy toward rash or violent action, breaking established democratic institutions such as the rule of law.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} [[James Fenimore Cooper]] in 1838 identified four fundamental characteristics of demagogues:{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}<ref name=Cooper />▼

▲The word ''demagogue,'' originally meaning a leader of the common people, was first coined in [[ancient Greece]] with no negative connotation, but eventually came to mean a troublesome kind of leader who occasionally arose in [[Athenian democracy]].<ref name="Samons-etym" /><ref name=Ostwald /> Even though democracy gave power to the common people, elections still tended to favor the aristocratic class, which favored deliberation and decorum. Demagogues were a new kind of leader who emerged from the lower classes. Demagogues relentlessly advocated action, usually violent—immediately and without deliberation.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} Demagogues [[appeal to emotion|appealed directly to the emotions]] of the poor and uninformed, pursuing power, telling lies to stir up hysteria, exploiting crises to intensify popular support for their calls to immediate action and increased authority, and accusing moderate opponents of weakness or disloyalty to the nation.

▲Throughout its history, people have often used the word ''demagogue'' carelessly, as an "attack word" to disparage any leader whom the speaker thinks manipulative, pernicious, or bigoted.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}<ref name=Gustainis /> While there can be no precise delineation between demagogues and non-demagogues, since democratic leaders exist on a continuum from less to more demagogic, what distinguishes a demagogue can be defined independently of whether the speaker favors or opposes a certain political leader.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} What distinguishes a demagogue is ''how'' he or she gains or holds democratic power: by exciting the passions of the lower classes and less-educated people in a democracy toward rash or violent action, breaking established democratic institutions such as the rule of law.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} [[James Fenimore Cooper]] in 1838 identified four fundamental characteristics of demagogues:{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}<ref name=Cooper />

* They present themselves as a man or woman of the common people, opposed to the elites.

* Their politics depends on a visceral connection with the people, which greatly exceeds ordinary political popularity.

Line 25:

The central feature of demagoguery is persuasion by means of passion, shutting down reasoned deliberation and consideration of alternatives. While many politicians in a democracy make occasional small sacrifices of truth, subtlety, or long-term concerns to maintain popular support, demagogues do these things relentlessly and without self-restraint.<ref name="Ceaser">{{cite book | title=Designing a Polity: America's Constitution in Theory and Practice | publisher=Rowman & Littlefield | author=Ceaser, James W. | chapter=Demagoguery, Statesmanship, and Presidential Politics | year=2011 | pages=75–118 | isbn=978-1442207905 | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WTz-2DB0Xb8C&pg=PA90 | access-date=2016-10-14 | archive-date=2017-09-13 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170913070132/https://books.google.com/books?id=WTz-2DB0Xb8C&pg=PA90 | url-status=live }}</ref> Demagogues "pander to passion, prejudice, bigotry, and ignorance, rather than reason."<ref name=LarsonDefn />

==History and characteristics of demagogues==

== Good demagoguery ==▼

=== Tactical demagoguery ===▼

Some scholars have challenged the consensus that demagoguery is necessarily a bad form of leadership and rhetoric. In ''Demagogues in American Politics'', for example, Charles U. Zug argues that demagoguery can be legitimate and even good if integrated into a broader strategy for political reform and if coupled with a robust rationale for political change.<ref name="zug">{{Cite book |last=Zug |first=Charles U |title=Demagogues in American Politics |date=2022-10-18 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-765194-0 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Constitutionalist |first=The |date=2022-10-03 |title=Demagogues in American Politics |url=https://theconstitutionalist.org/2022/10/03/demagogues-in-american-politics/ |access-date=2023-01-12 |website=The Constitutionalist |language=en-US}}</ref> Zug contrasts classical or traditional approaches to demagoguery, which assume that demagogues are motivated by vicious intentions (such as an unrestrained desire for power), with a modern approach that focuses on the external words and deeds that demagogues use to advance political goals.<ref name="zug"/> Relatedly, as Princeton Classicist Melissa Lane has argued, in [[Pre-Socratic philosophy|pre-Socratic]] antiquity demagogues were originally viewed as neither inherently good nor inherently bad, but rather as advocates for the common people (as opposed to the oligarchs).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lane |first=Melissa |date=2012 |title=The Origins of the Statesman?Demagogue Distinction in and After Ancient Athens |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/LANTOO-3 |journal=Journal of the History of Ideas |volume=73 |issue=2 |pages=179–200 |doi=10.1353/jhi.2012.0020}}</ref> Zug has argued that conceiving of demagoguery as an inherently negative practice incentivizes political actors to weaponize the label "demagogue"; as a consequence, otherwise innocent victims--such as the supposed leader of [[Shays' Rebellion]], [[Daniel Shays]]<ref>{{Cite book |last=Beeman |first=Richard |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Yz_68SNGKuMC&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&hl=en |title=Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution |date=2010-02-09 |publisher=Random House Publishing Group |isbn=978-0-8129-7684-7 |pages=17 |language=en}}</ref>--can be inaccurately branded as vicious, unscrupulous leaders.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Zug |first=Charles U. |date=2021-09-01 |title=Creating a Demagogue: The Political Origins of Daniel Shays’s Erroneous Legacy in American Political History |url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/716687 |journal=American Political Thought |language=en |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=601–628 |doi=10.1086/716687 |issn=2161-1580}}</ref> ▼

=== Demagoguery in constitutional office ===▼

Zug also argues that demagoguery takes on different meanings when deployed by public officials in different institutions; for example, American federal judges should be scrutinized more carefully for using demagoguery than should legislators, since the act of judging well--i.e., adjudicating legal disputes--does not require direct appeals to the public.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Zug |first=Charles |date=2021-02-18 |title=Rhetorical Duty and the Constitutional Order |url=https://theconstitutionalist.org/2021/02/18/rhetorical-duty-and-the-constitutional-order/ |access-date=2023-01-12 |website=The Constitutionalist |language=en-US}}</ref> In contract, being an effective [[member of Congress]] requires advocating for a constituency and getting (re)elected; and these responsibilities in turn require direct public appeals, and sometimes, demagoguery.<ref name="zug"/>▼

==The enduring character of demagogues==

{{Pull quote|text=In every age the vilest specimens of human nature are to be found among demagogues.|author=[[Thomas Macaulay]]|source=''The History of England from the Accession of James&nbsp;II'' (1849)<ref name=Macaulay />}}

Demagogues have risen to power in democracies from Athens to the present day. While many demagogues have unique, colorful personalities, the psychological tactics they use have been similar throughout history (see [[#Methods|below]]).

Demagogues have arisen in democracies from Athens to the present day. Though most demagogues have unique, colorful personalities, their psychological tactics have remained the same throughout history (see [[#Methods|below]]). Often considered the first demagogue, [[Demagogue#Cleon|Cleon of Athens]] is remembered mainly for the brutality of his rule and his near destruction of Athenian democracy, resulting from his "common-man" appeal to disregard the moderate customs of the aristocratic elite.{{r|Signer|page=40–51}} Modern demagogues include [[Adolf Hitler]], [[Benito Mussolini]], [[Huey Long]], [[Father Coughlin]], and [[Joseph McCarthy]], all of whom built mass followings the same way that Cleon did: by exciting the passions of the mob against the moderate, thoughtful customs of the aristocratic elites of their times.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} All, ancient and modern, meet Cooper's four criteria above: claiming to represent the common people, inciting intense passions among them, exploiting those reactions to take power, and breaking or at least threatening established rules of political conduct, though each in different ways.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}▼

▲Demagogues have arisen in democracies from Athens to the present day. Though most demagogues have unique, colorful personalities, their psychological tactics have remained the same throughout history (see [[#Methods|below]]). Often considered the first demagogue, [[Demagogue#Cleon|Cleon of Athens]] is remembered mainly for the brutality of his rule and his near destruction of Athenian democracy, resulting from his "common-man" appeal to disregard the moderate customs of the aristocratic elite.{{r|Signer|page=40–51}} Modern demagogues include [[Adolf Hitler]], [[Benito Mussolini]], [[Huey Long]], [[Father Coughlin]], and [[Joseph McCarthy]], all of whom built mass followings the same way that Cleon did: by exciting the passions of the mobmasses against thecustoms moderate,and thoughtful customsnorms of the aristocratic elites of their times.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}} All, ancient and modern, meet Cooper's four criteria above: claiming to represent the common people, inciting intense passions among them, exploiting those reactions to take power, and breaking or at least threatening established rules of political conduct, though each in different ways.{{r|Signer|page=32–38}}

Demagogues exploit a perennial weakness of democracies: the greater numbers, and hence votes, of the lower classes and less-educated people—the people most prone to be whipped up into a fury and led to catastrophic action by an orator skilled at fanning that kind of flame. Democracies are instituted to ensure freedom for all and popular control over government authority. Demagogues turn power deriving from popular support into a force that undermines the very freedoms and rule of law that democracies are made to protect.{{r|Signer|page=38–40}} The Greek historian [[Polybius]] thought that democracies are inevitably undone by demagogues. He said that every democracy eventually decays into "a government of violence and the strong hand," leading to "tumultuous assemblies, massacres, banishments."{{r|Signer|page=38–40}}▼

▲Demagogues exploithave aoften perennial weakness of democracies: the greater numbers, and hence votes, ofexploited the lower classes and less-educated people—the people mostin pronesociety. toWhile be whipped up into a fury and led to catastrophic action by an orator skilled at fanning that kind of flame. Democraciesdemocracies are instituteddesigned to ensure freedom for all and popular control over government authority., Demagoguesdemagogues turngain power derivingby fromusing popular support intoto aundermine forcethose that undermines the verysame freedoms and rule of law that democracies are made to protectlaws.{{r|Signer|page=38–40}} The Greek historian [[Polybius]] thought that democracies are inevitably undone by demagogues. He said that every democracy eventually decays into "a government of violence and the strong hand," leading to "tumultuous assemblies, massacres, banishments."{{r|Signer|page=38–40}}

Whereas conventional wisdom sets up democracy and fascism as opposites, to ancient political theorists democracy had an innate tendency to lead to extreme populist government, and provided unscrupulous demagogues with the ideal opportunity to seize power. Indeed, [[Ivo Mosley]] argued that totalitarian regimes may well be the logical outcome of unfettered mass democracy.<ref>Ivo Mosley, ''Democracy, Fascism and the New World Order'', Imprint Academic (2003)</ref>▼

▲WhereasWhile conventional wisdom sets uppositions democracy and fascism as opposites, to ancient political theorists understood that democracy had an innate tendency to lead to an extreme populist government, and provided unscrupulousprovide demagogues with thean ideal opportunity to seizegain power. Indeed, [[Ivo Mosley]] argued that totalitarian regimes may well be the logical outcome of unfettered mass democracy.<ref>Ivo Mosley, ''Democracy, Fascism and the New World Order'', Imprint Academic (2003)</ref>

==Methods==

BelowThere are described a number of methodscommon by whichtactics demagogues have manipulatedemployed andthroughout incitedhistory crowdsto throughoutmanipulate historypublic sentiment and incite crowds. Not all demagogues use all of these methods, and no two demagogues use exactly the same methods to gain popularity and loyalty. Even ordinary politicians use some of these techniques from time to time; a politician who failed to stir emotions at all would have little hope of being elected. What these techniques have in common, and what distinguishes demagogues' use of them, is their consistent useintent to shut downprevent reasoned deliberation by stirring up overwhelming passion.<ref name="Gustainis" /><ref name="LomasRhetoric" />

Sometimes, a statesman, the kind of politician genuinely concerned with good policy, may need to resort to demagogic tactics in order to thwart a real demagogue—to "fight fire with fire". A real demagogue uses these tactics without restraint; a statesman, only to avert greater harm to the nation. In contrast to a demagogue, a statesmanpolitician's ordinary rhetoric seeks "to calm rather than excite, to conciliate rather than divide, and to instruct rather than flatter."<ref name="Ceaser87" />

===Scapegoating===

The most fundamental demagogic technique is [[scapegoating]]: blaming the [[ingroups and outgroups|in-group's]] troubles on an out-group, usually of a different [[racism|ethnicity]], [[bigotry|religion]], or [[class conflict|social class]]. For example, McCarthy claimed that all of the problems of the U.S. resulted from "communist subversion." [[Denis Kearney]] blamed all the problems of laborers in California on Chinese immigrants.<ref name=Gustainis /> Hitler blamed [[Jews]] for Germany's defeat in [[World War I]] as well as the economic troubles that came afterward. This was central to his appeal: many people said that the only reason they liked Hitler was because he was against the Jews. Fixing blame on the Jews gave Hitler a way to intensify [[nationalism]] and unity.<ref name="Allport-scapegoat" />

The claims made about the scapegoated class are mostly the same regardless of the demagogue and regardless of the scapegoated class or the nature of the crisis that the demagogue is exploiting.{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} "We" are the "true" Americans/{{Zwsp}}Germans/{{Zwsp}}Christians/etc., and "they", the Jews/{{Zwsp}}bankers/{{Zwsp}}communists/{{Zwsp}}capitalists/{{Zwsp}}unions/{{Zwsp}}foreigners/{{Zwsp}}elites/{{Zwsp}}etc., have cheated "us" plain folk and are living in decadent luxury off riches that rightfully belong to "us". "They" are plotting to take over, are now rapidly taking power, or are already secretly running the country. "They" are subhuman, sexual perverts who will seduce or rape "our" daughters, and if "we" don't expel or exterminate "them" right away, doom is just around the corner.<ref name="Allport-points" />

===Fearmongering===

Many demagogues have risen to power by [[fearmongering|evoking fear]] in their audiences, to stir them to action and prevent deliberation. Fear of [[rape]], for example, is easily evoked. [["Pitchfork Ben" Tillman]]'s [[rhetoric]] was most vivid when he was describing imaginary scenes in which white women were raped by black men lurking by the side of the road. He depicted black men as having an innate "character weakness" consisting of a fondness for raping white women.<ref name="Dorgan-rape" /> Tillman was elected governor of South Carolina in 1890, and elected senator repeatedly from 1895 to 1918.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}

After the [[September 11 attacks]] in the United States, terrorism and national security became prominent political issues. After Democrats lost control of the Congress in 2004, former U.S. president [[Bill Clinton]] opined: "When people are feeling insecure, they'd rather have someone who is strong and wrong rather than somebody who is weak and right."<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/04/us/clinton-says-party-failed-midterm-test-over-security-issue.html |title=Clinton Says Party Failed Midterm Test Over Security Issue |author=Adam Nagourney |date=December 4, 2002 |newspaper=The New York Times}}</ref> The Clinton aphorism was later applied to describe why the political tactics of [[Donald Trump]] were successful, and how Democrats might do better in related elections.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/594023-the-allure-of-strong-and-wrong/ |title=The allure of 'strong and wrong' |author=Bill Schneider |date=February 13, 2022 |newspaper=[[The Hill (newspaper)|The Hill]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://crooksandliars.com/2019/05/john-heilemann-strong-and-wrong-beats-weak |title=John Heilemann Warns Dems: 'Strong And Wrong Beats Weak And Right' |author=Aliza Worthington |date=May 20, 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/11/opinion/democrats-biden-trump.html |title=Democrats Need to Stop Playing Nice |date=March 11, 2024 |author=Joe Klein |newspaper=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref>

===Lying===

WhileDemagogues any politician needs to point out dangers to the people and criticize opponents' policies, demagoguestypically choose their words for their emotional effect on the audience, usuallyoften without regard for factual truth or thefor realpotential severity of the danger.<ref name=Logue /><ref name=GilbertLying /> Some demagoguesDemagogues are opportunistic, monitoring the people and saying whatever currently will generate thecontroversy and mostspur "heat"public energy. Other demagogues may themselves be so ignorant or prejudiced that they sincerely believe the falsehoods they tell.<ref name=Gustainis />

WhenIf one lie doesn't work, thea demagogue quicklyoften moves on toadds more lies. Joe[[Joseph McCarthy first]] claimed to have "here in my hand" a list of 205 members of the [[Communist Party USA|Communist Party]] working in the [[United States Department of State|State Department]]. SoonThen, thishe becameannounced there were 57 "card-carrying Communists".{{Citation Whenneeded|date=July pressed2023}} to provideWhen theirpressed for names, McCarthy then said that while the records arewere not available to him, but he knew "absolutely" that "approximately" 300 Communists were certified to the Secretary of State for discharge but only "approximately" 80 were actually discharged. When called on that bluff, he said that he had a list of 81, which he would use in the following weeks. McCarthy never turnedfound up even onea Communist in the State Department.{{r|Luthin|page=282–283}}

===Emotional oratory and personal charisma===

Many demagogues have demonstrated remarkable skill at moving audiences to great emotional depths and heights during a speech. Sometimes this is due to exceptional verbal eloquence, sometimes personal charisma, and sometimes both. Hitler demonstrated both. His eyes had a hypnotic effect on many people, seeming to immobilize and overwhelm whomever he glared at.

Hitler usuallyoften began his speeches by speaking slowly, in a low, resonant voice, telling of his life in poverty after serving in World War I, suffering in the chaos and humiliation of postwar Germany, and resolving to reawaken the Fatherland.{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} Gradually, he would escalate the tone and tempo of his speech, ending in a climax in which he shrieked his hatred of Bolsheviks, Jews, Czechs, Poles, or whatever group he currently perceived as standing in his way—mocking them, ridiculing them, insulting them, and threatening them with destruction. Normally reasonable people became caught up in the peculiar rapport that Hitler established with his audience, believing even the most obvious lies and nonsense while under his spell. Hitler was not born with these vocal and oratorical skills; he acquired them through long and deliberate practice.<ref name="ShirerOratory" />

A more ordinary silver-tongued demagogue was the Negro-baiter [[James Kimble Vardaman]] (Governor of Mississippi 1904–1908, Senator 1913–1919), admired even by his opponents for his oratorical gifts and colorful language. An example, responding to Theodore Roosevelt's having invited black people to a reception at the White House: "Let Teddy take coons to the White House. I should not care if the walls of the ancient edifice should become so saturated with the effluvia from the rancid carcasses that a Chinch bug would have to crawl upon the dome to avoid asphyxiation."{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}} Vardaman's speeches tended to have little content; he spoke in a ceremonial style even in deliberative settings. His speeches served mostly as a vehicle for his personal magnetism, charming voice, and graceful delivery.<ref name=Strickland />

The demagogues' charisma and emotional oratory many times enabled them to win elections despite opposition from the press. The [[news media]] informs voters, and often the information is damaging to demagogues. Demagogic oratory distracts, entertains, and enthralls, steering followers' attention away from the demagogue's usual history of lies, abuses of power, and broken promises. The advent of [[radio]] enabled many 20th-century demagogues' skill with the spoken word to drown out the written word of newspapers.{{r|Luthin|page=309–314}}

Line 86 ⟶ 84:

Legislative bodies usually have sober standards of decorum that are intended to quiet passions and favor reasoned deliberation. Many demagogues violate standards of decorum outrageously, to show clearly that they are thumbing their noses at the established order and the genteel ways of the upper class, or simply because they enjoy the attention that it brings. The common people might find the demagogue disgusting, but the demagogue can use the upper class's contempt for him to show that he won't be shamed or intimidated by the powerful.<ref name=Ceaser87 />

For example, Huey Long famously wore pajamas to highly dignified occasions where others were dressed at the height of formality.<ref name="Signer-pajamas" /> He once stood "bukk nekkid" at his hotel suite when laying down the law to a meeting of political fuglemen.<ref name="Signer-nekkid" /> Long was "intensely and solely interested in himself. He had to dominate every scene he was in and every person around him. He craved attention and would go to almost any length to get it. He knew that an audacious action, although it was harsh and even barbarous, could shock people into a state where they could be manipulated."<ref name="Williams-audacious" /> "He displayed no … restraint, provingwas "...so shameless in his pursuit of publicity, and so adept at getting press coverage, that he was soon attracting more attention from the press and the galleries than most of the rest of his colleagues combined."<ref name="Brinkley-shameless" />

In ancient Greece, [[Aristotle]] pointed out the bad manners of Cleon more than 2,000 years ago: "[Cleon] was the first who shouted on the public platform, who used abusive language and who spoke with his cloak girt about him, while all the others used to speak in proper dress and manner."<ref name=Ceaser87 />

===Folksy posturing===

MostDemagogues demagoguesoften have mademake a show of appearing to be down-to-Earthearth, ordinary citizens just like the people whose votes they soughtseek. In the United States, many took folksy nicknames: [[William H. Murray]] (1869–1956) was "Alfalfa Bill"; [[James M. Curley]] (1874–1958) of Boston was "Our Jim"; [[Ellison D. Smith]] (1864–1944) was "Cotton Ed"; the husband-and-wife demagogue team of [[Miriam A. Ferguson|Miriam]] and [[James E. Ferguson]] went by "Ma and Pa"; Texas governor [[W. Lee O'Daniel]] (1890–1969) was "Pappy-Pass-the-Biscuits".{{r|Luthin|page=303–304, 306–307}}<ref name="Dykeman-folksy" /><ref name=Davis />

Georgia governor [[Eugene Talmadge]] (1884–1946) put a barn and a henhouse on the Executiveexecutive Mansionmansion grounds, loudly explaining that he couldn't sleep nights unless he heard the bellowing of livestock and the cackling of poultry.{{r|Luthin|page=303–304, 306–307}}{{r|Luthin|page=188–189}} When in the presence of farmers, he chewed tobacco and faked a rural accent—though he himself was college-educated—railing against "frills" and "nigger-lovin' furriners".{{Citation Heneeded|date=June 2023}} Talamadge defined "''furriner"'' as "Anyone who attempts to impose ideas that are contrary to the established traditions of Georgia." His grammar and vocabulary became more refined when speaking before aan cityurban audience.{{r|Luthin|page=197}} Talmadge was famous for wearing gaudy red [[galluses]], which he snapped for emphasis during his speeches.<ref name="Dykeman-folksy" />{{r|Luthin|page=184}} On his desk, he kept three books, whichthat he loudly proclaimed totold visitors were all that a governor needed: a [[bible]], the state financial report, and a [[Sears#Mail order catalog|Sears–Roebuck catalog]].{{r|Luthin|page=197}}

[[Huey Long]] displayedemphasized his common-peoplehumble roots by such methods as calling himself "The Kingfish" and gulping down [[pot likker]] when visiting northern Louisiana;. heHe once issued a press release demanding that his name be removed from the Washington ''[[Social Register]]''.<ref name="Dykeman-folksy" /> "Alfalfa Bill" made sure to remind people of his rural background by talking in the terminology of farming: "I will plow straight furrows and blast all the stumps. The common people and I can lick the whole lousy gang."{{r|Luthin|page=303–304, 306–307}}

===Gross oversimplification===

Demagogues commonly treat complex problems, which require patient reasoning and analysis, as if they result from one simple cause or can be solved by one simple cure. For example, Huey Long claimed that all of the U.S.'s economic problems could be solved just by "[[Share Our Wealth|sharing the wealth]]".<ref name=Gustainis /> Hitler claimed that Germany had lost World War I only because of a "[[Stab-in-the-back myth|Stab in the Back]]".{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} Scapegoating ([[#Scapegoating|above]]) is one form of gross [[oversimplification]].

===Attacking the news media===

SinceBecause factual information fromreported by the press can undermine a demagogue's spellclaims overand hisstanding or heramong followers, modern demagogues have often attacked itthe press intemperately. At times, callingdemagogues have called for violence against newspapers who opposed them,. Some have claimingclaimed that the press was acting secretly in the service of moneyed interests or foreign powers, or claiming that leading newspapers werehad simplya personallypersonal outvendetta to getagainst them. Huey Long accused the New Orleans ''Times–Picayune'' and ''Item'' of being "bought", and had his bodyguards rough up their reporters. {{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} Oklahoma governor [["Alfalfa Bill" Murray]] (1869–1956) once called for a bomb to be dropped on the offices of the ''Daily Oklahoman''. Joe McCarthy accused ''[[The Christian Science Monitor]]'', the ''[[New York Post]]'', ''[[The New York Times]]'', the ''[[New York Herald Tribune]]'', ''[[The Washington Post]]'', the ''[[St. Louis Post-Dispatch]]'', and other leading American newspapers of being "Communist smear sheets" under the control of the Kremlin.{{r|Luthin|page=309–314}}

==Demagogues in power==

Line 107 ⟶ 105:

===Establishing one-man rule, subverting the rule of law===

Once elected toIn executive office, most demagogues have often moved quickly to expand their power, both ''de jure'' and ''de facto'': by getting legislation passed to officially expand their authority, and by building up networks of corruption and informal pressure to ensure that their dictates are followed regardless of constitutional authority.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}

For example, within two months of being appointed chancellor, Hitler unraveled all constitutional limitations on his power.<ref name=mitchell /> He achieved this through near-daily acts of chaos, destabilizing the state and providing ever stronger reasons to justify taking more power. Hitler was appointed on January 30, 1933; on February 1, the [[Reichstag (Weimar Republic)|Reichstag]] was dissolved; on February 27, the [[Reichstag fire|Reichstag building burned]]; on February 28, the [[Reichstag Fire Decree]] gave Hitler emergency powers and suspended civil liberties; on March 5, new general elections were held; on March 22, the [[Dachau concentration camp|first concentration camp]] opened, taking political prisoners. On March 24, the [[Enabling Act of 1933|Enabling Act]] was passed, giving Hitler full legislative powers, thus ending all constitutional restraint and making Hitler absolute dictator. Consolidation of power continued even after that; see [[Early timeline of Nazism#1933|Early timeline of Nazism]].

Line 114 ⟶ 112:

===Appointing unqualified lackeys to high office; corruption===

AsDemagogues the preceding section illustrates, demagogues typicallyoften appoint people to high office based on personal loyalty without regard to competence for the office—opening up extraordinary avenues for graft and corruption. During "Alfalfa Bill" Murray's campaign for governor, he promised to crack down on corruption and favoritism for the rich, to abolish half the clerk jobs at the State House, to appoint no family members, to reduce the number of state-owned cars from 800 to 200, never to use convict labor to compete with commercial labor, and not to abuse the power of pardon. Once in office, he appointed wealthy patrons and 20 of his relatives to high office, purchased more cars, used prisoners to make ice for sale and clean the capitol building, and violated all the other promises. When the State Auditor pointed out that 1,050 new employees had been added to the state payroll, Murray simply said, "Just damned lies."{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}} For each abuse of power, Murray claimed a mandate from "the sovereign will of the people".{{r|Luthin|page=112–115}}

==Famous historical demagogues==<!-- Per discussion (see talk page) this article limits the listing of demagogues to historical examples. Contemporary (e.g., current) examples of demagogues will become historical eventually. Not now. -->

===Ancient history===

====Cleon====

The Athenian leader [[Cleon]] is knownoften cited as a notorious demagogue mainly because of three events described in the writings of [[Thucydides]]<ref name=Grant>Michael Grant, ''Ancient Historians'', [https://books.google.com/books?id=e4st2bdc8CQC&pg=PA98#v=onepage p. 98] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170118211536/https://books.google.com/books?id=e4st2bdc8CQC&pg=PA98#v=onepage |date=2017-01-18 }}, [https://books.google.com/books?id=e4st2bdc8CQC&pg=PA110#v=onepage pp. 110–111] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170119004832/https://books.google.com/books?id=e4st2bdc8CQC&pg=PA110#v=onepage |date=2017-01-19 }}. Barnes & Noble Publishing (1994). {{ISBN|1566195993}}</ref> and [[Aristophanes]].<ref name=Merry>Aristophanes, ''The Knights.'' [https://books.google.com/books?id=fBEWAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA5#v=onepage Here] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170119004809/https://books.google.com/books?id=fBEWAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA5#v=onepage |date=2017-01-19 }} is an old free version translated by William Walter Merry, Clarendon Press (1902). The translator says on p. 5:<br />"The picture of Cleon the demagogue has been painted for us in the comedies of Aristophanes, and in the graver history of Thucydides. On the strength of these representations, he is commonly taken as the type of the reckless mob-orator, who trades upon popular passions to advance his own interests."</ref>

First, after thea failed revolt by the city of [[Mytilene]], Cleon persuaded the Athenians to slaughter not just the Mytilenean prisoners, but every man in the city, and to sell their wives and children as slaves. The Athenians rescinded the resolution the following day when they came to their senses.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}

Second, after Athens had completely defeated the [[Peloponnesian League|Peloponnesian]] fleet in the [[Battle of Sphacteria]] and [[Sparta]] could only beg for peace on almost any terms, Cleon persuaded the Athenians to reject the peace offer.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}

Third, he taunted the Athenian generals over their failure to bring the war in Sphacteria to a rapid close, accusing them of cowardice, and declared that he could finish the job himself in twenty days, despite having no military knowledge. They gave him the job, expecting him to fail. Cleon shrank at being called to make good on his boast, and tried to get out of it, but he was forced to take the command. In fact, he succeeded—by getting the general [[Demosthenes (general)|Demosthenes]] to do it, now treating him with respect after previously slandering him behind his back. Three years later, Cleon and his Spartan counterpart [[Brasidas]] were killed at the [[Battle of Amphipolis]], enabling a restoration of peace that lasted until the outbreak of the Second [[Peloponnesian War]].{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}}

Modern commentators suspect that Thucydides and Aristophanes exaggerated the vileness of Cleon's real character. Both had personal conflicts with Cleon, and ''[[The Knights]]'' is a satirical, allegorical comedy that doesn't even mention Cleon by name. Cleon was a tradesman—a leather-tanner. Thucydides and Aristophanes came from the upper classes, predisposed to look down on the commercial classes. Nevertheless, their portrayals define the archetypal example of the "demagogue" or "rabble-rouser."<ref name=Merry />

Line 136 ⟶ 134:

[[Gaius Flaminius (consul 223 BC)|Gaius Flaminius]] was a Roman [[consul]] most known for being defeated by [[Hannibal]] at the [[Battle of Lake Trasimene]] during the second Punic war. [[Hannibal]] was able to make pivotal decisions during this battle because he understood his opponent. Flaminius was described as a demagogue by [[Polybius]], in his book ''[[The Histories (Polybius)|The Histories]]'' "...Flaminius possessed a rare talent for the arts of demagogy..."<ref>[[Polybius]], ''The Histories''</ref> Because Flaminius was thus ill-suited, he lost 15,000 Roman lives, his own included, in the battle.

===Modern era===

<!-- DO NOT add [[:Donald Trump]] to this listing. The article talk page has several discussions on the issue. The consensus is to exclude Trump because of BLP and POV concerns. Only historical examples are listed.-->

Line 142 ⟶ 140:

[[File:Bundesarchiv Bild 102-13774, Adolf Hitler.jpg|thumb|upright|Adolf Hitler in 1927, rehearsing his oratorical gestures; photo by [[Heinrich Hoffmann (photographer)|Heinrich Hoffmann]], [[German Federal Archives|Bundesarchiv]]]]

The most famous demagogue of [[modern history]], [[Adolf Hitler]], first attempted to overthrow the Bavarian government not with popular support but by force in a failed [[Beer Hall Putsch|putsch]] in 1923. While in prison, Hitler chose a new strategy: to overthrow the government democratically, by cultivating a [[mass movement (politics)|mass movement]].<ref name="Shirer-noses" /> Even before the putsch, Hitler had rewritten the [[Nazi party]]'s platform to consciously targetappeal to the lower classes of Germany, appealing to their resentment of wealthier classes and calling for German unity and increased central power.<ref name="Shirer-platform" /> Hitler was delighted by the instant increase in popularity.{{r|Signer|page=143–148}}

While Hitler was in prison, the Nazi party vote had fallen to one million, and it continued to fall after Hitler was released in 1924 and began rejuvenating the party. For the next several years, Hitler and the Nazi party were generally regarded as a laughingstock in Germany, no longer taken seriously as a threat to the country. The prime minister of Bavaria lifted the region's ban on the party, saying, "The wild beast is checked. We can afford to loosen the chain."{{r|Signer|page=143–148}}

In 1929, with the start of the [[Great Depression]], Hitler's [[populism]] started to become effective. Hitler updated the Nazi party's platform to exploit the economic distress of ordinary Germans: repudiating the [[Versailles Treaty]], promising to eliminate corruption, and pledging to provide every German with a job. In 1930, the Nazi party went from 200,000 votes to 6.4 million, making it the second-largest party in Parliament. By 1932, the Nazi party had become the largest in Parliament. In early 1933, Hitler was appointed [[Chancellor of Germany|Chancellor]]. He then exploited the [[Reichstag fire]] to arrest his political opponents and consolidate his control of the army. [[Early timeline of Nazism#Nazi Revolution|Within a few years]], exploitingenjoying democratic support offrom the masses, Hitler took Germany from a democracy to a total dictatorship.{{r|Signer|page=143–148}}

[[File:HueyPLongGesture.jpg|thumb|upright=1.02|left|[[Huey Long]], governor and ''de facto'' dictator of Louisiana]]

====Huey Long====

Line 156 ⟶ 154:

In 1928, before Long was sworn in as governor of Louisiana, he was already supervising political appointments to ensure a loyal majority for all his initiatives. As governor, he ousted public officers not personally loyal to him and took control away from state commissions to ensure that all contracts would be awarded to people in his [[political machine]]. In a confrontation over natural gas with managers of the Public Service Corporation, he told them, truthfully, "A deck has 52 cards and in Baton Rouge I hold all 52 of them and I can shuffle and deal as I please. I can have bills passed or I can kill them. I'll give you until Saturday to decide." They yielded to Long—and became part of his ever-expanding machine.{{r|Luthin|page=247–248}}

When Long became a senator in 1932, his enemy, the lieutenant governor [[Paul N. Cyr]], was sworn in as governor. Long, without authority, ordered state troopers to surround the executive mansion and arrest Cyr as an imposter. Long installed his ally [[Alvin O. King]] as governor, later replaced by [[Oscar K. Allen|O.K. Allen]], serving as stooges for Long. Thus even in Washington, with no official authority, Long retained dictatorial control over Louisiana. When the Mayor of New Orleans, [[T. Semmes Walmsley]], began to oppose Long's extraordinary power over the state, Long exploited a subservient judge to justify making an armed attack on the basis of cracking down on racketeering. At Long's order, Governor Allen declared martial law and dispatched National Guardsmen to seize the Registrar of Voters, allegedly "to prevent election frauds." Then, by stuffing ballot boxes, Long ensured victory for his candidates to Congress. Long's own racketeering operation then grew. With his "trained seal" legislature, armed militias, taxation used as a political weapon, control over elections, and weakened court authority to limit his power, Huey Long maintained control in Louisiana in a manner arguably comparable to that of Hitler in Germany or Stalin in the Sovieta Uniondictator.{{r|Luthin|page=258–261}}

[[File:Joseph McCarthy.jpg|thumb|upright|Senator [[Joseph McCarthy]], an American demagogue]]

====Joseph McCarthy====

[[Joseph McCarthy]] was a [[U.S. Senator]] from the state of [[Wisconsin]] from 1947 to 1957.<ref>[[Richard Rovere|Rovere, Richard]], ''Senator Joe McCarthy'', Methuen Books (1959); reprinted by the University of California Press (1996). {{ISBN|0520204727}}.</ref><ref name=Wicker>[[Tom Wicker|Wicker, Tom]], ''Shooting Star: the Brief Arc of Joe McCarthy,'' Houghton Mifflin Harcourt (2006) {{ISBN|015101082X}}<br />"Joe McCarthy may have been the most destructive demagogue in American history." p. 5<br />"McCarthy's Senate colleagues voted sixty-seven to twenty-two to censure him for his reckless accusations and fabrications." back cover</ref><ref>[[Haynes Johnson|Johnson, Haynes]], ''The Age of Anxiety: McCarthyism to Terrorism,'' HoughtinHoughton Mifflin Harcourt (2006). {{ISBN|015603039X}}<br />"Joe McCarthy was a demagogue, but never a real leader of the people." p. 193<br />"McCarthy represented what Richard Hofstadter called 'the paranoid style of American politics.'" pp. 193–194<br />"While he never approached the importance of a Hitler or a Stalin, McCarthy resembled those demagogic dictators by also employing the techniques of the Big Lie." p. 194</ref> was a [[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] from the state of [[Wisconsin]] from 1947 to 1957. Though a poor orator,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://hnn.us/articles/7603.html|publisher=History News Network|title=What Qualifies as Demagoguery?|access-date=2009-03-24|archive-date=2013-07-25|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130725015101/http://hnn.us/articles/7603.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=The Eisenhower Years|publisher=Infobase Publishing|author=Mayer, Michael|year=2007|quote=Unlike most demagogues, McCarthy did not give stem-winding, highly emotional speeches. Rather, he spoke in a monotone, even as he made his most outrageous charges. The delivery lent credence to his accusations, in that they seemed to be unemotional and therefore "factual."}}</ref> McCarthy rose to national prominence during the early 1950s by proclaiming that high places in the United States federal government and military were "infested" with [[communists]],<ref>{{cite book|title=Rhetoric and Civility: Human Development, Narcissism, and the Good Audience|publisher=SUNY Press|author=Harold Barrett|year=1991|isbn=978-0791404836|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=NJyRqw8JIJUC&pg=PA108 108]}}</ref> contributing to the [[Red Scare|second "Red Scare"]]. Ultimately, his inability to provide proof for his claims, as well as his public attacks on the [[United States Army]],<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Have_you_no_sense_of_decency.htm |title=Have You No Sense of Decency? |publisher=[[United States Senate]] |access-date=2017-01-07 |archive-date=2020-12-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201203150027/https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Have_you_no_sense_of_decency.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> led to the [[Army–McCarthy hearings]] in 1954, which in turn led to his [[Censure in the United States|censure]] by the Senate and fall from popularity.<ref name=Wicker />

<!-- DO NOT add [[:Donald Trump]] to this listing. The article talk page has several discussions on the issue. The consensus is to exclude Trump because of BLP and POV concerns. Only HISTORICAL examples are listed.-->

▲== GoodPositive demagoguery ==

▲=== Tactical demagoguery ===

▲Some scholars have challenged the consensus that demagoguery is necessarily a bad form of leadership and rhetoric. In ''Demagogues in American Politics'', for example, Charles U. Zug argues that demagoguery can be legitimate and even good if integrated into a broader strategy for political reform and if coupled with a robust rationale for political change.<ref name="zug">{{Cite book |last=Zug |first=Charles U |title=Demagogues in American Politics |date=2022-10-18 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-765194-0 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Constitutionalist |first=The |date=2022-10-03 |title=Demagogues in American Politics |url=https://theconstitutionalist.org/2022/10/03/demagogues-in-american-politics/ |access-date=2023-01-12 |website=The Constitutionalist |language=en-US}}</ref> Zug contrasts classical or traditional approaches to demagoguery, which assume that demagogues are motivated by vicious intentions (such as an unrestrained desire for power), with a modern approach that focuses on the external words and deeds that demagogues use to advance political goals.<ref name="zug"/> Relatedly, as Princeton Classicist Melissa Lane has argued, in [[Pre-Socratic philosophy|pre-Socratic]] antiquity demagogues were originally viewed as neither inherently good nor inherently bad, but rather as advocates for the common people (as opposed to the oligarchs).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lane |first=Melissa |date=2012 |title=The Origins of the Statesman?Demagogue Distinction in and After Ancient Athens |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/LANTOO-3 |journal=Journal of the History of Ideas |volume=73 |issue=2 |pages=179–200 |doi=10.1353/jhi.2012.0020|s2cid=153320811 }}</ref> Zug has argued that conceiving of demagoguery as an inherently negative practice incentivizes political actors to weaponize the label "demagogue"; as a consequence, otherwise innocent victims--suchvictims—such as the supposed leader of [[Shays' Rebellion]], [[Daniel Shays]]<ref>{{Cite book |last=Beeman |first=Richard |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Yz_68SNGKuMC&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&hl=en |title=Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution |dateyear=2010-02-09 |publisher=Random House Publishing Group |isbn=978-0-8129-7684-7 |pagespage=17 |language=en}}</ref>--can—can be inaccurately branded as vicious, unscrupulous leaders.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Zug |first=Charles U. |date=2021-09-01 |title=Creating a Demagogue: The Political Origins of Daniel Shays’sShays's Erroneous Legacy in American Political History |url=https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/716687 |journal=American Political Thought |language=en |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=601–628 |doi=10.1086/716687 |s2cid=243849281 |issn=2161-1580}}</ref>

▲=== Demagoguery in constitutional office ===

▲Zug also argues that demagoguery takes on different meanings when deployed by public officials in different institutions; for example, American federal judges should be scrutinized more carefully for using demagoguery than should legislators, since the act of judging well--iwell—i.e., adjudicating legal disputes--doesdisputes—does not require direct appeals to the public.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Zug |first=Charles |date=2021-02-18 |title=Rhetorical Duty and the Constitutional Order |url=https://theconstitutionalist.org/2021/02/18/rhetorical-duty-and-the-constitutional-order/ |access-date=2023-01-12 |website=The Constitutionalist |language=en-US}}</ref> In contractcontrast, being an effective [[member of Congress]] requires advocating for a constituency and getting (re)elected; and these responsibilities in turn require direct public appeals, and sometimes, demagoguery.<ref name="zug"/>

==See also==

Line 179 ⟶ 185:

* [[Narcissistic leadership]]

* [[Ochlocracy]]

* [[Pied Piper]]

* [[Social dominance orientation]]

* [[Strongman (politics)]]

* [[Toxic leader]]

* [[Populism]]

{{div col end}}

Line 223 ⟶ 231:

<ref name=LomasRhetoric>Lomas, Charles W. (1961). "The Rhetoric of Demagoguery." ''Western Journal of Speech Communication,'' vol. 25, no. 3., p. 160.</ref>

<ref name=ShirerOratory>[[William L. Shirer|Shirer, William]]. ''William Shirer's Twentieth-Century Journey: 1930–1940: The Nightmare Years,'' [https://books.google.com/books?id=oR_IAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT160&dq=shirer%20twentieth%20century%20hitler%20eloquence+twentieth+century+hitler+eloquence&pg=PT160#v=onepage&q=shirer%20twentieth%20century%20hitler%20eloquence&f=false vol. 2] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170118193641/https://books.google.com/books?id=oR_IAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT160&dq=shirer%20twentieth%20century%20hitler%20eloquence&pg=PT160#v=onepage&q=shirer%20twentieth%20century%20hitler%20eloquence&f=false |date=2017-01-18 }}.</ref>

<ref name="GilbertLying">{{cite journal | title=Dictators and Demagogues | date=Summer 1955 | author=Gilbert, G.M. | journal=Journal of Social Issues | volume=11 | issue=3 | pages=51–52 | quote=[A demagogue's] behavior is guided more by its potential effect in beguiling public opinion than by any scrupulous regard for the truth, for basic social values, or for the integrity of the individual in his person, property, livelihood, or reputation—his assertion of patriotic and pious platitudes notwithstanding.| doi=10.1111/j.1540-4560.1955.tb00330.x }}</ref>

Line 237 ⟶ 245:

<ref name=Davis>Davis, David Martin (2016). "Texas Matters: Pass the Biscuits, Pappy", [http://tpr.org/post/texas-matters-pass-biscuits-pappy-part-two part 2] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160821040845/http://tpr.org/post/texas-matters-pass-biscuits-pappy-part-two |date=2016-08-21 }}. Texas Public Radio, April 18, 2016.</ref>

<ref name="Allport-scapegoat">[[Gordon Allport|Allport, Gordon Willard]]. ''The Nature of Prejudice, 25th-anniversary edition'' (1979), [https://books.google.com/books?id=q2HObxRtdcwC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA420 p. 420] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170118185048/https://books.google.com/books?id=q2HObxRtdcwC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA420 |date=2017-01-18 }}. Basic Books.</ref>

<ref name="Allport-points">[[Gordon Allport|Allport, Gordon Willard]]. ''The Nature of Prejudice, 25th-anniversary edition'' (1979), [https://books.google.com/books?id=q2HObxRtdcwC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA414 p. 414] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170118184908/https://books.google.com/books?id=q2HObxRtdcwC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA414 |date=2017-01-18 }}. Basic Books.</ref>

<ref name="Williams-audacious">T. Harry Williams (1970). ''Huey Long'', p. 37, quoted in {{cite book | title=Demagogue: The Fight to Save Democracy from Its Worst Enemies | publisher=Macmillan | author=Signer, Michael | author-link=Michael Signer | chapter=Part II, Demagoguery in America | year=2009 | page=[https://archive.org/details/demagoguefightto00sign/page/112 112] | isbn=978-0230606241 | chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/demagoguefightto00sign |url=https://archive.org/details/demagoguefightto00sign/page/112 }}</ref>

Line 271 ⟶ 279:

* {{cite book |last1=Roose |first1=Joshua M. |title=The New Demagogues: Religion, Masculinity and the Populist Epoch |date=2020 |publisher=Milton: Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-0429775253|oclc =1202454249}}

* {{cite book |author1=Stressguth, Thomas |title=Hatemongers and Demagogues (Profiles) |date=1995 |publisher=Oliver Press |isbn=978-1881508236 |url=https://archive.org/details/hatemongersdemag00stre|oclc=1035145406}}

* Zug, Charles U. (2022). ''Demagogues in American Politics''. New York: Oxford University Press. {{ISBN |978-0197651957}}, {{OCLC|1319827145}}.

==External links==