text: Tom: Hi guys, how are you doing? How is France?
  Jimmy: Always good ;) you?
  Sammy: Fine, a bit of a mess here recently, but nothing really bad
  Tom: I've been following the protests in France recently
  Tom: but, honestly, I don't understand very well what it is all about.
  Theo: it was motivated by rising fuel prises and high cost of living
  Tom: Do you think it's populist?
  Tom: That's what they always say in media
  Theo: I'm not sure, they're demanding more justice, I can't see populists elements in it
  Jimmy: I really don't like the word populism
  Jimmy: I don't think it describes anything anymore
  Theo: I read a Guardian article about it some times ago, they tried to built a definition of it
  Jimmy: and how did they define it?
  Theo: <file_other> "Populism is usually described as a strategic approach that frames politics as a battle between the virtuous, “ordinary” masses and a nefarious or corrupt elite".
  Jimmy: Yes, but that's actually quite a lib-cons vision, because aren't we in a kind of struggle between an "elite" and ordinary people?
  Jimmy: with all the tax evaders, corporations, growing inequalities? 
  Theo: maybe you're right
  Jimmy: it's not surprising that people want a change
  Theo: The only stupid thing is that then they vote for Trump, Salvini and Orban
  Jimmy: Exactly, so maybe we should call "populism" all the parties, politicians, movements that promise to address the inequalities and problems, but actually make them worse or focus on even less privileged groups (refugees, unemployed, immigrants, minorities) and blame them for the problems... which of course makes problems only worse
  Theo: haha, that's a much better definition than that of the guardian, I think
  Jimmy: hahah, thanks
target: Theo explains to Tom that the recent prostests in France were motivated by high fuel prises and costs of living. Jimmy and Theo debate over the nature of the concept of populism.