There is a new buzz-word at the BBC. It's been bandied about on countless programmes and dominates the pages of the Left-wing papers. The 17 million-plus Britons who voted to leave the EU are described as part of a 'populist' revolution.

When the American public voted for Donald Trump to be their next President, the BBC and other media likewise described it as a triumph of populism.

This week, after the Italian people voted a resounding 'No' in a referendum that led to the resignation of their pro‑EU Prime Minister Matteo Renzi — a result that has shaken Brussels to its foundations — liberal commentators called it a victory for populist parties.

The term populism is being used by the BBC as a sneering, pejorative term to describe the extraordinary social phenomenon sweeping both Europe and the U.S

The dictionary definition of populist is a politician or other person who claims to support the interests of ordinary people.

But, make no mistake, it is now being used as a sneering, pejorative term to describe the extraordinary social phenomenon sweeping both Europe and the U.S. as millions and millions of people express their anger at the ballot box over the indolence, corruption and complacency of their nation's political elite.

People who European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi arrogantly warned last week were a danger to Europe's future, as he talked darkly in an interview about counter-terrorism and border protection, and how populism was wrecking Europe's ability to respond to immigration.

After the Italian people voted a resounding 'No' in a referendum that led to the resignation of their pro‑EU Prime Minister Matteo Renzi — a result that has shaken Brussels to its foundations — liberal commentators called it a victory for populist parties

People about whom Tony Blair is now so concerned that he has decided to set up a new institute specifically to counter the 'explosion' in populist movements across Europe.

And let's not forget Jeremy Corbyn who on Saturday issued a call to arms to fight the 'populist Right', whose parties were 'political parasites' which were 'feeding on people's concerns'.

In all of these cases — and many, many more besides — the way the words populist and populism are used implies menace, accompanied by a hint of demagoguery and an insidious suggestion that the voters defying the West's governing classes have racist sympathies.

Dismissive

To liberals, the word populist indicates these voters are vulgar, ill-informed and under-educated. It suggests a lumpen mass of people — quite different, of course, from the well-informed and well-heeled commentators and political leaders who feel something has to be done about unsavoury views of the general public.

And while Left-wing movements such as Podemos in Spain and Syriza in Greece are occasionally described as populist, the term is almost invariably used to defame the Right.

Imagine if, in June this year, a majority of the British people had voted to remain in the EU rather than leave it. Would the BBC in its wisdom have been described this as a 'populist' reassertion of European power?

If Hillary Clinton had been voted into the White House as President by the American public last month, would her victory have been dismissed as a 'populist' uprising?

If Hillary Clinton had been voted into the White House as President by the American public last month, would her victory have been dismissed as a 'populist' uprising?

Would it have been a victory for populism if the Italian public had 'behaved' and voted as their Prime Minister had asked them to last Sunday? No — all of these things would have been reported as sensible and appropriate responses of a sensible and well-informed voting population.

Though rarely overtly expressed, that is the view of those who throw around the 'p' word. They believe that there is a respectable way of thinking — and then a populist, unacceptable way of thinking.

Historically one of the most defining aspects of populism has been a politics which sees the people in one corner, and the elites — especially the political elites — in another.

Populist movements have almost invariably concerned themselves with the difference between the gilded lives of those in power and the struggle of the people they were meant to represent.

The reason the word populist has especially dark connotations today, however, is that it is so often associated with the rise of fascism in Europe — when megalomaniac dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini climbed to power using crowd-pleasing soapbox oratory during the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s.

This is why it is so insidious when politicians and media outlets such as the BBC use the word populist with such abandon to smear views with which they disagree.

It is a play on language that repeatedly suggests it is the people, rather than the political Establishment, who are wrong.

People about whom Tony Blair is now so concerned that he has decided to set up a new institute specifically to counter the 'explosion' in populist movements across Europe

Forget that it was the same Establishment which tried to terrify the voters, with its Project Fear, into staying in the EU.

By dismissing the Brexit vote as 'populist', the Remain camp insinuates that a majority of the British people were in some way gulled into voting the way we did. It suggests that we are malleable, easily-manipulated fools who fell for the sinister charms of Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove.

This is not just nonsense, but sinister nonsense.

Not merely because it insults the general public, but because it stops those who level the claims from ever trying to understand the public at whom they are sneering.

If a majority of voters in a country feel a certain way about something, then it is wise — especially if you are a politician — to at least consider the possibility that the public are right.

Instead of pretending the electorate has been lobotomised by brilliant but dangerous demagogues, it is far wiser to address its genuine concerns.

If you dismiss Donald Trump's success in the U.S. elections as a triumph of populism, you ignore a whole range of reasons behind his victory last month.

Insidious

You ignore the American public's loathing for Hillary Clinton and the corrupt and complacent political elite she represents. An elite, moreover, whose liberal assumptions sometimes openly deplored many of the basic principles — patriotism, belonging, community and job security — on which Western democracies were built.

To dismiss the popular revolution in both America and Europe as populism is to ignore the fact that millions of ordinary people are furious at having seen their incomes fall in real terms while the pay gap between the haves and have-nots has widened to record levels.

It is to ignore the valid and very genuine concerns that the line between legal and illegal immigration is everywhere being blurred, and national identity is being compromised — as was made so abundantly clear, in Britain's case, by the social cohesion tsar Louise Casey this week in her report on the terrifying level of segregation in many of Britain's immigrant communities.

These are not small issues, and it is utterly wrong — and deeply misguided — to dismiss those who are concerned about them as though they suffer from some sort of delusion or mania.

The truth is that it is our political elites and their acolytes in the Left-wing media who are suffering from a delusion.

Desperation

How can they fail to see the disconnect between ordinary people and the governing class in Western democracies?

Why do they not understand the deep anger over the way the people's views are held in contempt by politicians who ignore them?

Yet people such as European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker simply carry on as before, ignoring the earthquake beneath their feet, blaming Brexit on '40 years of British lies' and saying that it showed 'something is wrong in Britain'.

This unelected buffoon glides through his well-paid career as he lectures and berates the general public for daring to make democratically-based decisions. And when millions of us express our disdain for this Eurocrat, we are dismissed as 'populist' rabble-rousers.

To disregard the concerns of the public is a serious mistake for any politician. They may be able to ignore it for a time, but at some point the people will be heard. Using words like 'populist' to insult the public is just a desperate final attempt to put off the inevitable.