What evidence is there in The Wizard of Oz that the Wizard doesn't relate to Populism?

Answer 1

The evidence tends not to present the Wizard as a believer in, or supporter of, Populism. For the Wizard of Oz seems more like a benevolent despot at best, a dictator at worst. He's the Supreme Ruler of the Emerald City. The people of Oz are used to absolute rule by hereditary monarchs. And there's no indication that the Wizard tampers with historical, traditional ways of governing, and getting things done, in Oz. Neither does he seem to rely on popular opinion, or on any form of political organization or judicial or legislative checks to executive powers. The descriptions in the book give the impression of rule from the top down. And the people just happen to be lucky that the Wizard makes advantageous, beneficial decisions that aren't based at all on their expressed choices or preferences. In fact, the book reveals that petitioners, residents, and visitors don't know what the Wizard really looks like, because he changes appearances and shapes with each audience. In fact, no one is encouraged to seek audience with the Wizard. Those that do end up waiting. And those that get in to the Throne Room are treated to humbling, terrifying sound and light shows. And they're required to do something in exchange for any services granted. The lack of an open interaction with his people, the distance between him and his people, and the decisionmaking without any political organization don't make the Wizard look at all Populist-friendly. The meeting of the people's needs fits in with Populist concerns over the welfare of farmers and workers. But the way in which the Wizard meets these needs aren't at all Populist-friendly. Where are the equivalents of the weekly radio talk, the town hall meeting, the regular press conferences, and the ambling about to get to know the constituency?