In **6,000 BC Britain**, or anywhere in the Mesolithic world, the concept of a “populist” as we understand it today — a political figure mobilising popular opinion — **did not exist**, because societies were small, mobile, and organised as **hunter-gatherer bands** rather than hierarchical states. Here’s how someone who tried to act as a “leader of the people” or influence group decisions might have been treated: 1. **Influence was informal:** Leadership was typically based on **skill, wisdom, or generosity**, not formal authority. A person who tried to dominate or sway others beyond their capabilities would be challenged socially. 2. **Consensus enforcement:** Decisions were usually **group-consensus-based**. If someone tried to impose their will, the group could **ignore them, ostracise them, or leave them behind**. Survival depended on cooperation, so social enforcement was strong. 3. **No formal punishment:** There were no courts or prisons. “Consequences” for overreach were **loss of social support, exclusion from hunts, or banishment from the band**, which in a hunter-gatherer context was often fatal. 4. **Respect earned, not claimed:** Charisma or persuasion could give someone temporary influence, but it had to be continually **proven useful** to the group (e.g., leading a successful hunt, resolving conflicts). Otherwise, the group **reverted to egalitarian norms**. ✅ In short: a “populist” in 6,000 BC would not be formalised as a leader; if they tried to assert themselves beyond what the band considered acceptable, they’d be **socially checked** — ignored, challenged, or possibly exiled. If you like, I can draft a **brief Obsidian-ready note** summarising this scenario for your 6,000 BC timeline. `Concepts:` `Knowledge Base:`