Mark Rothko
Posted on 06/17/2006 5:56:58 PM PDT by TSchmereL
THE REVOLT OF THE ELITES: And the Betrayal of Democracy by, Christopher Lasch
Publisher: W.W. Norton & CO.
December - 1995
In this book, an American historian finds fault with the values and beliefs of America's professional elites.
Christopher Lasch argues that democracy today is threatened not by the masses, as Jose Ortega y Gasset argued in The Revolt of the Masses, but by the elites.
These elites - mobile and increasingly global in outlook - refuse to accept limits or ties to any nation or place. Lasch contends that as they isolate themselves in their networks and enclaves, they abandon the traditional middle class and betray our democracy.
The author traces how meritocracy - and its selective elevation of individuals into the elite class - gradually replaced the original American democratic ideal of general competence and respect for every man.
The author criticizes our elite class for valuing self-esteem over achievement. He sees self-fulfilment as a false remedy for deeper social problems, and he attacks the superior pseudoradicalism of the academic left.
He sees these Americans as apathetic about their common culture and ambivalent about arguing politics or voting.
The elites, having jettisoned the moral and ethical guidelines provided by religion, cling to the belief that through various sciences they can master their fates and escape mortal limits.
In pursuit of this illusion they have become infatuated with the global economy. Their revolt, the author warns, is diminishing what is worthwhile about American life.
1. There used to be the threat of communism and the revolt of the workers. Now the threat is a revolt of the elites.
1.1. Those who control the international flow of information, bankers, stockbrokers, executives, professors, government analysts, have lost faith in the concept of Western Civilization and of reason.
1.2. These behaviours and beliefs are more characteristic of the upper classes and represent the betrayal of the middle class and of the lower classes, but especially the middle class.
1.3. The middle and lower classes are much more socially and morally conservative than their would-be liberators from the upper class. The natural and reasonable conservatism of the middle and lower classes is not serviced by the media, who are controlled by elites. These elites believe that they know what is best for the masses.
2. The Decline of the Middle Class
2.1. The middle class is treated with scorn and derision by the new elites. Everything that is ugly in society is associated with the unenlightened middle class (i.e. homophobia, racism, retrograde attitudes towards women, etc.)
2.2. Lasch argues that the crisis in the middle class must be addressed for democracy to survive.
2.3. The middle class is the silent backbone of society, paying an ever-growing proportion of the national tax receipts and working longer hours. Meanwhile the welfare state generates complacency among the lower class and the upper-middle and upper class become more powerful and separate from those who surround them.
3. Who are the New Elites?
3.1. They are symbolic analysts. They live in a world of ideas, abstract concepts and symbols: the stockmarket, financial trends, technology, communications, universities, etc.
3.2. They participate in a market that is global in scope.
3.3. They have more in common with their counterparts in foreign cities such as London, Brussels, Hong Kong and Cairo than they do with the average people whom they see every day.
3.4. In these abstract circles, there exists the cynical idea that the circles of power in finance, government, entertainment and the academe become interchangeable.
3.5. This is product of the Meritocracy.
4. Lasch's Meritocracy
4.1. The meritocracy has many of the attributes of the aristocracy minus its positive traits.
4.2. No sense of social chivalry and noblesse oblige.
4.3. No sense of community and of place.
4.4. Symbolic analysts often feel that they are self-made people who owe all their privileges to their efforts and talent.
4.5. They tend to be transient and live in a community of contemporaries. They do not accept the generational transfer of wisdom, knowledge and values.
5. Meritocracy and Democracy
5.1. For Lasch, meritocracy is a parody of democracy.
5.2. It has brought on the collapse of public schools and an end to the notion of a common culture.
5.3. Educational reforms leave little possibility for outrage. Those who are left behind know that "they have had every chance to succeed."
5.4. The concept of an obligation to others is depersonalized in the meritocracy. The symbolic analysts who benefit from being elites feel for their fellow citizens but do little directly or physically to benefit their fellow citizens.
6. Democracy in the Age of Meritocracy and Globalization
6.1. In the borderless economy, money has lost its nationality. Thus, it is harder to pinpoint those who divert it away from the national popular interest.
6.2. A strong centralized government, run by a quasi-permanent bureaucracy reduce the possibility for protest, change and real representation.
6.3. A strong centralized government is supported by a media that is owned by and serves more and more, a class of symbolic analysts who are increasingly removed from the common culture.
7. Lasch's thesis is that the decline of democracy is closely linked to the decline of the middle class and a move away from argument, discussion, freedom, individuality and a common culture.
The Lost Art of Argument
8. For many years we have been regaled with the benefits of the communications revolution. Lasch contends that all is not as rosy as it would seem.
8.1. The post-industrial economy puts a focus on the interchangeability of employ for the majority of non-symbolic analyst work.
8.2. A growing concentration of non-union labour-intensive parts of the economy.
9. Why is this happening?
9.1. We tend to blame the schools, but this is fallacy in Lasch's eyes. Instead Lasch says that it is the general decay of public debate that has caused this.
9.2. What democracy depends on is not information, but informed, rigorous and reasoned public debate.
9.3. The only way that we know that we know something is by subjecting our ideas to the test of public controversy.
9.4. Lasch thinks that an example of this decline in public debate is the way televised political debates have changed. The corporate media demand certain types of politicians.
10.Government, Media and Meritocracy
10.1. The corporatization of the media has brought about the incorporation of corporate methods in governance. Technocracy is the result.
10.2. Democracy requires the broad discussion of issues. This is difficult when discussion is discouraged. Lasch says that the written word is a poor substitute for oral argument.
11.The author notes the rise of "Public Relations and Advertising" and its negative effects on the democratic exchange of ideas.
12. The author laments the loss of "the ability to follow an argument, grasp the point of view of another, expand the boundaries of understanding, and debate alternative purposes that might be pursued."
The elites have been more cosmopolitian since rocks cooled. Beyond that, the list strikes me as unduly pessimistic, and paranoid, with the paint brush so broad, that it reminds me of that celebrated modernist painter (the name of which escapes me in a senior moment) who painted broad lines of color, and the congnescenti called it art.
" corporate media demand certain types of politicians."
He may have something here.
Would Grover Cleveland ot Harry Truman make it today?
I always feel that the RINO Mitt Romney may run on his telegenic good looks. He is my absentee governor---too busy for the state business.
The problem is, they really are a meritocracy.
Anyone with any sort of talent and drive can join them and get rich. This sucks potential leaders out of the middle and lower classes, leaving them stuck at the bottom.
Capitalism is a highly successful form of economic organization, but it can have negative social consequences.
Well, they tend to be secular, which has a positive correlation with education, but the rest is simply silly. Granted, one must define "American values." They can be defined in a way, that makes the conclusion ineluctible by the definer.
This j"accuse might be of interest to you.
Yes. There are rewards to being selfish. But those rewards are hollow.
Capitalism, like any economic system, is imperfect. But that does not mean you scrap it. You have laws that protect individuals from the greed of others.
Just as we have rules for our capitalistic economy, we also have to have rules for our elites. They have to be smacked down from time to time to remind them not to get above their raising. I think that is what we are going through right now in this country. We are not going to let these elites change the rules of our society to suit themselves. We will remind them where they came from and who is raising the children.
I challenge you to show me "positive correlation" between being an atheist and being "educated."
We don't have to engage in a game of semantics with you. We know what American values are, as well as you.
One of the most important American value is the recognition of a power higher than and outside oneself. This is the primary value that our modern elites reject.
Lasch was an interesting character, I've read some of his earlier stuff and it's worth the slog. Haven't read this one though. I've a friend who was did a PhD with him in the '70s.
Here is a good example of the midset of our modern elites:
“The entire country may disagree with me, but I don’t understand the necessity for patriotism,” Maines resumes, through gritted teeth. “Why do you have to be a patriot? About what? This land is our land? Why? You can like where you live and like your life, but as for loving the whole country ... I don’t see why people care about patriotism.”
The Telegraph interviews the Dixie Chicks, and singer Natalie Maines
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2006/06/15/bmdixie15.xml
The Kennedy family, John Kerry, Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, Alex Baldwin,
A MERITocracy, how does that work again?
Read Michelle Malkin's: Dixie Chicks "Question Your Patriotism" http://michellemalkin.com
The top 10% of the US population in income and education.
They are mostly professionals who work 60 hours a week to make between $150K and 500K a year. There are 30 million of them.
I don't consider pop stars to be a part of the American elite in the sense that the author is using the term.
Oh, for a bit I was worried there, that let's out everyone on my list.
Of course they are elites, and they are so in the sense that the author uses the term.
They are professionals. They were elevated to their status as elites through a system of award for their professional achievement. They are elites.
Money can't dodge the arms of revolt from the masses. Screw the elites. If they want to spend their money on foolish dreams, let them. Truth wins. There is way to much information for an elite to take over like Mao or Lenin.
Sounds like a bunch of Randians to me.
Mark Rothko
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.