Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Steven's avatar

I'm glad to hear that your first foray into politics has worked out well for you.

I do find the "people versus the elites" framing interesting though when combined with the reference to the men as "class traitors". You've rather hit on something there. Society doesn't function without elites, it degenerate into chaos. We do need them, so it's not entirely surprising that even a movement nominally AGAINST "The Elites" is led by a man famous for his wealth and another famous for his family's deep political legacy, two men who are themselves indisputably "Elites". Pretty much all social conflicts manifest as intra-elite conflicts.

I worry a little that people lose sight of that. Ultimately, we are not, and cannot be, fighting against "The Elites", anymore than we can or should be fighting against "Capitalism" rather than specifically against "Crony Capitalism". For treatment of the body politic to succeed, we must not lose the ability to differentiate between that which is functional versus that which is corrupted and must be excised. There remains a real risk that the populist movement will become anti-intellectual, rather than merely holding failed intellectuals to account, become anti-expertise, rather than merely holding bad science and empty indoctrination up to the rigors of public debate, and becoming reflexively anti-elite to the point of being anti-meritocratic rather than merely demanding that "public servants" ACTUALLY serve the public. Those who move to abolish an aristocracy entirely too often historically find themselves creating anarchy or tyranny in its place, when what was necessary was only to weaken the aristocracy and impose accountability for their performance.

This is why I'm bothered by the description of Trump as a "class traitor" and "people versus elites" framing. The problem isn't that we have elites. People need them. The problem is that "The Elite" has become such a defined "class" with separate interests and culture from "The People" that we CAN frame them as opposed groups and call people "class traitor" and have that actually mean something. I expect a great many good things from this realignment and the next administration... But I'm not sure that I expect nuance. Even if we win, I'm not sure I expect the class divisions to be blurred as they need to be. A triumph of "The People" against "The Elites", can only be a pyrrhic victory if it doesn't lead to elevating elites who are FOR "The People" to replace those we tear down for their corruption. It's a failure if we don't restore a system where members of "The People" are able to rise into being Elites on their talents and accomplishments (and conversely, where elites who fail then fall into being regular people).

The election isn't over, so maybe I'm getting too far ahead of myself, worrying about the pitfalls of victory while the fight is still ongoing, but one Trump term already wasn't enough. We're going to need to look forward further than each next election and avoid making mistakes now that will cause problems later.

Expand full comment
PSweeney's avatar

This is gold, Leah, “Because history and logic both show that freedom is the precondition for truth to prevail—its guarantor, not its saboteur. History and logic both show that actual champions of truth and justice do not censor lies, they expose them. They do not seek to thwart the ability of citizens to access information, they protect it.”

Excellent article.

Expand full comment
14 more comments...

No posts