How to Deal with Populism

There is the matter that, even if these Trump supporters provided facts you wouldn't believe those facts anyway. You would attribute the facts they provided to different causes and interpret them in your own way to suit your world view. It's really a waste of time talking to each other. I've spent plenty of time arguing with people on the left. Facts and figures and citations stored on my phone (TO SHOW PEOPLE IRL) and all for nothing. Complete waste of time. The only thing that made a difference was arguing with a liberal friend about diversity. I was able to point out that he lives in the whitest building in the whitest part of the city. So harping on about diversity is hypocritical because when he had time to put his money where his mouth is he did the opposite (he is white). That was the only thing that even made him pause to think for a second. In my experience, no amount of facts, no amount of well meaning discussion has any point. Nobody on the left will agree with you, they won't see your point, they willfully choose to misunderstand your points, they misrepresent your arguments when they repeat them back to you. It is a futile waste of time to talk to each other. The issue will eventually be decided the way all such fundamental irreconcilable disagreements are decided, might will make right in the end.

Trump won due to resentment in Rust Belt states, where manufacturing jobs have declined. But immigration isn't the cause of those job losses. Automation has cost far more jobs.

A connection is seen between outsourcing and free trade deals, and that's a much better target. Now, it's arguable that free trade deals are economically beneficial, but they look bad. Trump gets that, and Democrats fell down in that regard.

But the anti-immigration scapegoating? That's not causality, that's scapegoating. Immigration is not the cause of the woes of the Rust Belt, but it gives them something to blame, and a populist leader can exploit that.

Is this post satire?

Your prescription for solving the problem is more or less identical to what Trump has stated he plans to do with respect to trade with China.

Yes, the author completely misses the core issue: when the populace at large gets tired of getting hammered with elitist & special-interest issues, to the point of being told to actively facilitate what is broadly considered distasteful, they start looking for someone who will restore the mundane norms they are comfortable with.

The following is a list of US populist complaints, which Trump successfully addressed. (Don't up/down-vote based on whether you agree or not with the issues of the list, which I may or may not, just note that the points are important to enough people to vote a Trump into office.) In no particular order...

Facilitation/celebration of LGBQT (most people aren't, and find differing sexualities repulsive). Demands for "safe spaces" while eliminating the only long socially established safe spaces: sexually segregated restrooms. Taking taxpayer earnings and spending them on advocacy of opposing views. Reducing a sense of safety vs crime, while seemingly protecting criminals (this issue dominated by the US "gun culture"). Laying blame/responsibility for environmental issues on those thinking themselves not guilty (say, global warming). Stifling parental preferences in education (Common Core, lack of school vouchers, absolute intolerance of anything hinting of Christianity). Broad/unrelenting accusations of whites & males as invariably & irredeemably sexist/misogynist/xenophobic/racist/etc (say, Hillary's declaration of 1/4 of Americans as "deplorables"). Incredible growth of national debt ($10,000,000,000,000 in last 8 years, doubling all previous debt) with prospect of populace having to pay it. Lack of jobs (need for jobs has far outstripped creation of jobs). Overwhelming regulations, making compliance & cost untenable. Abortion being considered, on the whole, inexcusable murder of children.

Understand that classic US culture is deeply rooted in individual liberty & rights. Basically, taking someone's money to make them pay for something they don't want angers them; they'll put up with a lot, but once "enough!" hits they're prone to taking dramatic steps to end the offense. Also note that the USA is huge, having a broad range of views from coast to coast; what Hillary offered was "coastal" culture, while Trump appealed to "heartland", and with the Electoral College deliberately biasing Presidential elections toward populist views, the large number of central states won the vote.

Feels like shallow reasoning to me to be honest. What can the author say about problem with 2nd/3rd generation of young immigrants' kids/large ghettos in Paris? Is it fictional problem? Probably not as my Parisian friends are saying and you can see burning cars from time to time. Police no-go zone seems to me like reasonable issue to be worried about. The problem imho is that the issue is not so close in time, but a bit further, 2+ generations (40y) from now. Similar to Rio de Janeiro favelas who is there to blame for all of the massive mess? Children don't choose where they want to be born. First immigrants are seniors/not here anymore. Politicians rotated dozen times.

In general I think that mass relocations of any kind for any reason are bad and should be throttled to sustainable throughput. This way churches, schools, hospitals and what not can keep up.