Skip to comments.The United States of Crybabies
Posted on 12/19/2016 10:25:09 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
The hyper-emotional reactions to Donald Trumps election occasioned much commentary about the state of Americas millennials. On college campuses across the country there were cry-ins, group primal screams, and designated healing spaces. The general mood was captured in a tweet from the student body president at American University: For those who viewed [the election outcome] as unfavorable, anger, sadness, grief, and frustration were brought to the fore. Its important to note that those feelings are valid and justified. People are scared and people are worried about their futures and their lives.
Critics derided these displays as the childish outbursts of pampered snowflakes. But such traumatized responses to the outcome of an election reflect a much larger cultural shift that has happened over many decades: the change from a tragic view of human life to a therapeutic one. This shift has troubling implications for our political and economic order.
Until the nineteenth century, the tragic understanding of existence was dominant. The ancient Greeks invented a literary genre to express this belief. Like the flawed heroes of Greek tragedy, humans are defined by the permanent, unchanging conditions of life. They are hostages to time, sickness, want, and death; to unforeseen changes and disasters; to a capricious, harsh natural world; and, most importantly, to their own destructive impulses and passions that their minds can only sporadically control.
A classic expression of the tragic vision can be found in Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War. Describing the horrors of the revolutions the war sparked throughout the Greek world, he writes, The sufferings which revolution entailed upon the cities were many and terrible, such as have occurred and always will occur as long as the nature of mankind remains the same, for war confronts people with imperious necessities and so proves a rough master that brings most mens characters to a level with their fortunes.
Similarly, Christianity put a flawed humanity at the center of its theology. Because of the Fall, we are all born prone to sin, incapable on our own of renewing our lost spiritual connection to God. As the most influential theologian of eighteenth-century America, Jonathan Edwards, put it, the innate sinful depravity of the heart and the state of mans nature, that disposition of the mind, is to be looked upon as evil and pernicious and tends to extremely pernicious consequences. Only salvation through Christ can create true happiness, that of the soul reunited with God. In the fallen world, however, the same tragic conditions of existence will continue until the second coming of Christ and the final judgment.
This belief began to weaken with the rise of science and the spectacular improvements of human life it occasioned, beginning in the nineteenth century. Advances in medicine, transportation, sanitation, and the production of food lessened and in some cases eliminated the perennial physical miseries of human existence like disease and malnutrition. This encouraged a belief that new knowledge and technologies could likewise be discovered to improve minds and social institutions as well. Human misery was now believed to spring not from our flawed human nature and choices, but from harmful beliefs embedded in religion, tradition, and unjust social and political orders.
Thus the therapeutic view was born, nurtured by the human sciences such as psychology and sociology, and confident that progress would eventually eliminate even our private psychic traumas and subjective discontents, the causes of which lay in the social environment and could there be uprooted. The philosopher and Social Darwinist Herbert Spencer articulated this optimism at the end of the nineteenth century: Progress is not an accident, but a necessity. Surely must evil and immorality disappear; surely must men become perfect.
In contrast, however, our political order as enshrined in the Constitution was built on the older tragic understanding of human nature. The Founders particularly feared how power might further corrupt an already flawed human nature. John Adams, in his influential 1787 study Defense of the Constitutions, acknowledged the possibility of generosity and kindness in men, yet every moral theorist will admit the selfish passions in the generality of men to be the strongest. There are few who love the public better than themselves . . . Self-interest, private avidity, ambition, and avarice will exist in every state of society, and under every form of government.
Nor could mans depraved nature be permanently improved. Driven by their flaws, people will always form what James Madison in Federalist 10 called factions based on mutual passions and interests, and thus will always strive to acquire more power at the expense of other factions. This tendency to aggrandize power, Madison says, is sown in the nature of man, never to be eliminated, but only controlled and limited by dividing, checking, and balancing the three branches of the federal government. In this way the freedom of the citizens could be preserved and tyranny avoided, the Founders most important goal.
Our free-market capitalist economic order likewise is grounded in a tragic view of life. Economist Joseph Schumpeter said the essential fact of capitalism was creative destruction. Economist historians W. Michael Cox and Richard Alm describe this process and its costs: lost jobs, ruined companies, and vanishing industries are inherent parts of the growth system. However, A society cannot reap the rewards of creative destruction, they continue, without accepting that some individuals might be worse off, not just in the short term, but perhaps forever . . . Capitalisms gain and pain are inextricably linked. As Cox and Alm point out, the improvements in transportation sparked by the internal-combustion engine, for example, destroyed whole industries such as carriage and harness manufacturers and blacksmiths.
Capitalism, then, reveals how inequalities in talent, brains, virtue, and luck lead to economic winners and losers. But a dynamic capitalism gives people the freedom and opportunity to rise as far as their abilities can take them, rather than being stymied by static castes, guilds, and classes.
In contrast, the rise of progressivism and collectivist economies in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries reflected the therapeutic vision of a world free of the tragic constants acknowledged by the Founders and free-market economies. In the late nineteenth century, the creation of human sciences persuaded the first progressives that human nature could be improved. In 1914, the progressive journalist Walter Lippmann discarded the idea that human nature is fixed. Rather, we must devise its social organizations, alter its tools, formulate its method, educate and control it. Such progress is now possible, Lippmann continues, because of the great triumph of modern psychology and its growing capacity for penetrating to the desires that govern human thought. The influential progressive theorist Herbert Croly likewise asserted that a better future would derive from the beneficent activities of expert social engineers who would bring to the service of social ideals all the technical resources which research could discover.
The practical means for achieving this transformation were set out by Woodrow Wilson, who felt the Constitutions balance of powers was made obsolete by this new knowledge. Government must now follow the Darwinian principle, he wrote, of organic development guided by the rationally organized improvement of people and society. This requires a more powerful executive branch overseeing a centralized network of bureaus and agencies of skilled, economical administration comprising the hundreds who are wise who will guide the thousands who are selfish, ignorant, timid, stubborn, or foolish, wrote Wilson. Technocrats will replace the diverse people and the sovereign states as the primary determiners of public policy and action. Discarded was the Founders distrust of concentrated power whether wielded by the majority or by an elite no less vulnerable to the encroaching nature of power that necessarily diminishes political freedom.
Similarly, the idea that all problems can be solved by knowledge and technology would not accept as inevitable the necessary costs of capitalisms creative destruction. In Marxist, socialist, and progressive economic theories, equality of opportunity was inadequate. Now equality of outcome was demanded, for no one should be left to feel inadequate or inferior to those of greater talent or luck who unfairly monopolize wealth. Government began to interfere in the market, attempting to control its workings through laws and regulations in order to create more egalitarian outcomes and eliminate the various and unequal distribution of property, as Madison described what we call income inequality. But our complaints about income inequality spring not from the tragic reality that some people are not as smart, hard-working, or lucky as others, but from unjust economic and social structures. These need to be corrected by the technocratic elite through coercive federal agencies and their rules.
The trend over the last century has been away from the Constitutional order and the free-market economy. Ironically, despite greater regulations and dirigiste policies that have inhibited growth, enormous wealth has still been created and distributed, and new technologies developed. Unfortunately, this improvement fosters the illusion that we have transcended the tragic constants of human history, and now can afford to believe that even greater improvement should take place. Today, being well-fed, entertained, healthy, and free to an extent unprecedented in history is not enough. We must always be happy and pleased with ourselves, our lives free from challenge and strife and anything, including the consequences of our own free actions, that disturbs our self-regard. If we arent, then we look to government power or psychological interventions to correct this injustice.
The snowflake phenomenon on our college campuses is just one example of this widespread belief, the malign effects of which extend far beyond the millennial generation. Apart from the damage to our characters, autonomy, freedom, and sense of responsibility for our actions, the therapeutic vision runs counter to the foundations of our political and economic order. We can see the cost to the former in the reduction of our freedoms caused by political correctness and the laws defending the sensibilities and feelings of protected classes. The anxiety not to cause offense leads to censorship both formal and internalized, which compromises our First Amendment right to free speech without which a democracy cannot function. And the demand to meet ever escalating standards of well-being and comfort by redistributing wealth has contributed to sluggish economic growth, the unsustainable expense of social welfare entitlements, and the $20 trillion in debt on track to bankrupt the country.
The question we all face is whether the people and their elected leaders can turn back from a failing therapeutic utopianism, and accept once again the tragic limits to human existence that the foundations of our political and economic structures once acknowledged.
Public University (Kentucky) Punishes Professor For Sex Crime Because He Sang A BEACH BOYS SONG
Human life was tragic for thousand of years because older beliefs, while they provided social stability and spiritual solace, also inhibited progress. Without the ability to think outside the box, no real improvement in the human condition is possible.
No one wants to live in the Middle Ages. But its also clear that progress bereft of a moral and intellectually solid foundation will be a dead end. We must find a way to balance the two. Otherwise we will not find happiness in our short lives upon this earth.
We can make people’s lives less wretched.
But we can’t remove the evil from the human heart. What happened in Turkey and Germany is an object lesson in the reality of human imperfection.
Without laws and morality, we cannot temper the savage passions of man. And while allowing for kind and decent people, not every one is of this disposition.
Human nature cannot be made perfect without abolishing humanity itself. Our strengths and weaknesses make us who we are.
I’m a Wenderian - the thought goes back to the greatest lyric German poet Rainer Maria Rilke - that if we were like angels, we would fall short of everything human and be crushed beneath the siren song of an impossible perfect order. Nothing like this can exist in our world.
For me, Wim Wenders “Wings Of Desire” is the most profound German film I ever seen about an angel who comes to realize lowly humanity with its joys and sorrows is better than the unchanging perfection of heaven. And he becomes mortal to experience love.
Of all the things evident in our fallen world, being human is the greatest privilege God has bestowed on us. Let’s not relinquish it.
Ironic that imperfection is a virtue.
Had he lived long enough, no doubt Rilke would have rejected Hitler’s irrational desire for human perfection.
I’ll look out for the film. Thanks for mentioning.
Late Peter Falk starred in it.
Both Nazism and Communism sought to perfect man.
At enormous cost in human suffering. Islam has the same ambition.
Its hard for us to accept perfection isn’t possible.
History is a good teacher about our limitations and we’re happier if we manage to strive for what is good not for what is perfect.
United crybabies. conmen, criminals, Clintons, collectivists, democrats, dysfunctional, deceivers, liars, losers, morons, marxists, socialists, scumbags, tyrants, totalitarians and any other catch-all degenerates of America.
What do they call a basement with liberals in it?
A “Whine Cellar”!
They must be stopped from crying and not having hope.
bfl8r. Re read slowly.
In the past I’ve referred to the “three prides” that were the bane of the 20th century. Nazism was “pride of blood”, Communism was “pride of intellect” and Islam is “pride of spirit”. The first was vanquished at great cost. The second was transformed into modern liberal statism but is far from vanquished. The third is the current focus of most of the strife in the world.
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.