In his final speech to the United Nations General Assembly, US President Barak Obama “hailed progress on the world stage while warning against the perilous forces that seek to dismantle peace and prosperity” – reported Willa Frej reporter for The Huffington Post.
Obama warned against ‘Aggressive Nationalism’ And ‘Crude Populism’. “We can choose to press forward with a better model of integration, or we can retreat into a world sharply divided and in conflict,” he said. That statement, and a number of others Obama made before the U.N. ― grouping “aggressive nationalism” and “crude populism” into the same category as religious fundamentalism ― could be interpreted as swipes at U.S. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. Read further here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/barack-obama-unga-speech_us_57e0453ee4b04a1497b60ce3 These days one comes across such terms in the mainline press quite often, i.e., ‘aggressive nationalism’ and ‘crude populism’. The internet tells me the meaning of ‘populism is: “At its root, populism is a belief in the power of regular people, and in their right to have control over their government rather than a small group of political insiders or a wealthy elite. The word populism comes from the Latin word for "people," populus.” - - https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/populism Could it not be that the regular people are not happy with what their political insiders and/or wealthy elite are doing to them and are rebelling? As for ‘nationalism’, whether ‘aggressive’ or not…noun: nationalism patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts, "an early consciousness of nationalism and pride"synonyms: patriotism, patriotic sentiment, allegiance/loyalty to one's country, loyalism, nationality… C. H. Douglas in an address “at the Central Hall, Liverpool, on October 30th, 1936, “The Tragedy of Human Effort,” noted that biologist Dr. Tudor Jones, stated that there is no evidence whatever to suggest that the human being of the present day is in any essential cleverer or more able than the human being of six or seven hundred years ago. Douglas continued: “I am particularly interested in this, because I have recently had access to some charters and other similar documents affecting the affairs of Scotland from the thirteenth to sixteenth centuries, which seem to me to possess an understanding of the realities of statesmanship at least as great as is evidenced at the present time. I am confident that the principles which ought to govern the management of the affairs of this world have been available for many centuries, and have been obscured to such an extent that the community's intelligence upon such matters is probably less now that it was a thousand years ago.” “For this reason” he continued, “I trust you will bear with me if I endeavour to put to you my own understanding, in modern language, of these ideas.