> "Lawrence Goodwyn, the leading historian of Populism"
>
> Yes, the leading historian according to Lawrence Goodwyn, not according to
> most contemporary scholars of populism. It is ridiculous to argue that
> anything bad can't be populist, or is "fake" populism. Tillman was a
> populist who used that as a way to spread White terror.
It depends upon your definition of populism. If one is speaking of the Historical Populists, referring to the agrarian insurgency of the late 19th century United States, then Goodwyn's interpretation has remained the dominant one in the historical profession for close to 30 years. If one is speaking of populism, a capacious category of marginal utility (in my opinion) used to describe the language or ideology of "common folk" who employ words like "people" and "elites," then you are correct. But Goodwyn never claimed to be writing about small-"p" populism.
mark