Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Contempt for the Governed; Conceit of the Governing Elite
Eeek! A productive citizen!
I don’t have much to add, but if you haven’t read Donald Trump is Right About One Thing: Our Experts Know Nothing, I want to make sure you don’t miss it. It’s by Michael Ginsberg at The Federalist, and although it’s a little long, it’s worth every moment of your time.
My resentment, long in remission, came back and crystallized in the following thought: Americans are governed by politicians who see fit to reimagine entire sectors of our economy and, indeed, our lives despite having little, if any, experience in the areas of life they seek to reform wholesale. This means Americans, seeing the failures of government from Obamacare to the Veterans Affairs, from the Environmental Protection Agency dumping toxic materials into a Colorado river to the Dodd-Frank regulations strangling local community banks, have had just about enough of their credentialed but utterly inexperienced supposed betters reordering their lives and livelihoods.
More:
Even a casual listener can hear the lack of experience every time Hillary Clinton or other Democrats start talking about the economy or business. They talk about how they will force businesses to share profits with employees. They talk about how unions are essential to the growth of the middle class. They talk about how employers should pay a higher minimum wage. They are happy to stick their hands in companies’ profits. Yet they speak from having absolutely no experience ever having run a company. They have never had to meet a payroll or make business decisions. They view businesses as bottomless pots of money they can simply raid to provide more goodies for one favored group or another.
I’m hoping to put together a post about reasons to vote for Trump not directly related to Clinton’s deficiencies. For now, though, I’ll say one of the things that I like best about voting for Trump is the precedent it sets for electing someone from among the governed, rather than the governing elites.
Published in General
Yup!
WC, you are properly braced for incoming snark pondering the existence, nature, and mating call of the supposed elite, yes?
I agree with the author completely in his diagnosis of the disease affecting modern productive life in America.
Great piece.
This argument about progressivism and experts is largely correct. But I see no connection b/w that and voting for Trump. He’s a corrupt insider with no apparent abiding political principles who knows nothing and cares not a whit for the Constitution.
This is the populist siren song. It is not an unqualified good. It may be good and it may well be the medicine we need right now. But please bear in mind that it’s the same pitch that charlatans like Huey Long made: Every man a king, but no one wears a crown.
The country would be better governed if our elected officials were not overwhelmingly career politicians. With no disrespect intended towards the legal profession, it would also be helpful if fewer officials were attorneys. I’d like to see political figures drawn from a more representative cross section of occupations for much the same reasons as cited in the excerpt.
These constitute necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for better government. And while Mr. Trump imperfectly fills the bill for being from among the governed, he still belongs to the elites inasmuch as those are the people with whom he associates. Need I remind you that the Clintons attended his wedding? They didn’t come to mine. (In all fairness, they weren’t invited.) Mr. Trump is hardly removed from the power elites.
Experts is such an unfortunate term here, credentialed aristocrats strikes far closer to the mark.
Thanks for the link! I find the author simpatico in many respects.
I get your distinction but there’s something to be said for the idea that experts are problematic because they are too narrow. So it’s both: credentialed aristocrats and experts with blinders.
I like Peggy Noonan’s concept of “The Protected” governing the rest of us who are so not-protected. Just you try not paying your tax bill for a while. So Charlie Rangel didn’t pay his? Too bad!
Victor Davis Hanson has been harping on this theme in his writings and podcast, which I heartily recommend, btw. It goes beyond not getting pinched for breaking the law (like Hillary). The elites do not have to suffer the disastrous consequences of their misguided policies. They are protected by private security, receive concierge healthcare, etc. This is the wellspring of much of the populist anger, which is well justified.
The trouble is that when the townspeople get out the pitchforks and torches, weird and unpredictable things can happen. On the other hand, sometimes pitchforks and torches are the only way forward and some heads have to end up on sticks. For the darker side, consider the example of the French Revolution.
Yes, well, I hope to make it clear that I favor the precedent, not the particular in the case of Trump. I remember back in the days of Hillarycare, people were pretty miffed* that she excluded anyone actually practicing medicine from her policy-making meetings. It was a big deal to the American public and damaged the chances of Hillarycare passing.
Since then, though, it seems people have fallen under the spell of credentialed elites. As if they have even the vaguest idea how to effect positive changes in complex systems….
*Mr. (Dr.) Trink, Trink, Mr. C and I actually ended up soaking in a hot tub with one of the lawyers attending a Hillarycare session in Santa Fe. In one of my less politic moments, I actually said, “Ew, soaking with the enemy!” after introductions were made.
You’ll have my back?
Thank you for alerting me to the essay. I read and enjoyed it.
For months I have been annoyed at the regular references here and elsewhere to Mr. Trump as a “con-man.” Trump has had his failures and his public persona does have an element of the carnival barker and self-promoter; but a confidence man? I think not.
I’ve read my Thomas Mann, my Herman Melville and my Mark Twain – I know what a con-man is and what he isn’t. Felix Krull and the others took money and delivered nothing in return. That was the sum of their “careers.” (I know, that actually sounds just like the career of a contemporary Democrat, perhaps Hillary Clinton.)
One thing these con-men did not do is conduct transactions which left behind them towering skyscrapers, world class hotels and resorts and premier golf clubs. Real things. Con-men don’t. Look it up and you’ll see.
Trump has left such things in his wake. Care to go ice-skating in New York City sometime?
Now, folks may feel they can call Trump a con-man because they don’t believe he’s really going to build a wall or do any of the other things he says he’s going to do. But that is speculation. It is not a fact.
Until Trump actually disappoints it is more honest, given his business history, to withhold labeling him a confidence man. I think Ginsberg would agree.
Speaking of the French, I thought as I was composing this post about how Harvard and Yale have become the American Grandes écoles. This practice of training up the intellectual elites to run the country hasn’t worked so well for the French either. It’s all built on the conceit that the smartest, best-educated people have enough information to improve complex systems by manipulating policy. And it’s singularly un-American.
It makes you wonder how we got here? How did progressives pull off such a radical change in attitudes in such a short time — just over 20 years since Hillarycare went down in flames?
Great article. There are many aspects that we can criticize the government with and I think this should be near the top of the list. The issue is how can they not see that $20 Trillion dollars in debt is the measure of rank incompetence and a dysfunctional psychological imbalance. How can they get up in the morning and look themselves in the mirror? Seriously. These people are completely incompetent, it’s easy to measure the level of incompetence and yet we don’t talk about this aspect at all. We should.
Hmm… the resentment he describes in his youth… my family is an engineering family, so of course I was taught that things are better to build than words, too… Was surprised to learn that Ivy-League engineering students didn’t start their weekends on Thursdays, since from what I knew many did…
I had resentment like that once and it cooled… may not come back…
Returning to a resentment of his youth in order to describe a current grievance might have mixed results as far as taking the grievance seriously… the grievance he describes should be taken seriously, but mixing it in with something more juvenile undermined the writing for me…
I don’t think he is a con man. However, I’m not sure he’s had much direct involvement in the construction projects his company has built.
Funny you should mention this because it is a theme that is touched upon in a book I just finished: Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein. Even though it is a scifi book aimed at younger folks, it is chock-full of political philosophy and ideas for good governance. Heinlein mercilessly heaps scorn on the idea that the smartest and best-educated are the right people to be political leaders.
Cutting to the chase, the premise of the book is that anyone can sign up for Federal Service at age 18 for at least two years. This is often, but is not necessarily, military service. Only individuals who have completed Federal Service are full citizens and eligible to vote. Other residents enjoy most of the benefits of citizenship but cannot vote or hold political office. Heinlein makes an interesting case for this.
As an aside, Heinlein did a “This I Believe” segment for Edward R. Murrow. It resonates with me. You can also read the transcript if you prefer.
N.B.: A movie was made of Starship Troopers that turns the book’s premise on its head. It’s awful.
I should clarify. I’m sure he knows the construction industry inside out.
How would that distinguish him from most politicians? They all break promises.
Sound familiar? I haven’t seen Mr. Obama repeatedly called a con man in these environs. Socialist, bad president, divisive, yes. Con man, not so much.
Yeah, I didn’t get that either. School was much less intense than work is.
I also never felt that burning resentment of the social science students. Mostly, I viewed them with disdain. And that was before Transgender Latino Studies majors existed. Can’t imagine what I’d think of the academy now. Feeling lucky I got out while I still could.
Interestingly, that’s exactly what Dinesh D’Souza calls all the leftists and Democratic politicians. They are all con men trying to steal America.
Wait… how is Trump in the former class rather than the latter? How many working stiffs have the Clintons attend their wedding?
In his particular case, he’s the one paying the bribes instead of the one receiving them. WC never said working stiff.
I both see your point and hope you realize that this is not convincing in the slightest.
Watch this clip…
The fact that Rodney associates with all sort of unsavory types like Mafia, Teamsters and politicians doesn’t make him one of them.
One compelling data point is the bipartisan horror at his gauche presence affored neither Obama the Destroyer nor Hillary the [expletive] of Benghazi.
How many Americans has Trump killed? Yet some cannot rouse themselves to make a distinction.
Some confusion, the governing elite know they know nothing, but they recognize the advantages of perch, leverage and connections. Experts in contrast are credentialed technical types who think they know far more than they do or could know. Both suffer hubris and are parasitical but the latter are essential to the governing myths the former use to extract rents from the mass of people who actually do things that matter.
I love this scene, one of the best real-world vs. theory clashes on film.
Rodney doesn’t even mention one of the dumbest things. On the still for the video, you can clearly see that he has factored in $6.8M for the land, but then he asks the class where should we build. Typically, that’s going to have some impact on the price of the land.