Monday.....Miscellaneous.....Intellectuals And Society (4)

Thomas Sowell leads off this chapter, Intellectuals and Social Visions, with the charge that everyone has a vision and intellectuals are no different. What that vision is, what theory and what hypothesis it leads to is the question. His answer is not pretty as he categorizes intellectuals as the anointed elite. He takes us back to the thinking, therefore the influence, of a number of people. Rousseau is representative of many who base their thoughts on the ingrained goodness of man and therefore social contrivances of all sorts are the source of our problems. Sowell labels these as holders of a constrained vision as opposed to those representative of a tragic vision who see barbarism always waiting in the wings. That old theological bugaboo shows up in Sowell's thoughts, is man essentially good...or bad. He describes the constrained vision as being held by one where personal exaltation (exists) resulting from those beliefs. The tragic vision merely holds to opinions that bring no such self aggrandizement. Another criticism of the intellectual is that they tend to argue without confronting the evidence. They might dismiss an opponent with the argument that there is no golden age to go back to, to avoid empirical evidences of successes in the past. The anointed, as he calls them, tend to consider opponents as unworthy. A Bertrand Russell quote is given as he commented on a middle-aged man who says with a sneer "Wars will never stop; it would be contrary to human nature." Russell's comment on this... it is quite obvious that the man who says this delights in war, and would hate a world from which it had been eliminated. On the other hand, an Edmond Burke quote is just one of a number of examples given from tragic vision which was more conciliatory, men may do the worst of things, without being the worst of men. We hear a lot today of how these New Progressives talk about man's various rights that are determined by a third party (them) with no mutual agreement from the parties involved in these ordained rights. There is a left-right dichotomy today according to the author and this part of the chapter is essential as he, clearly and concisely, does what Jonah Goldberg did in his book Liberal Fascism. He ties the Progressive Movement to the beginnings of Fascism. The evidence on this conclusion is weighty and the American public needs to be aware of this argument for it is the basis of much of the complaints against agendas on the front burner of our newspapers today. So what is this change that is being promoted today? Sowell explains how Progressives hold no patent on change, that progress in the mind of the Progressive is always assumed to be beneficial, without empirical evidence. As for the constrained vision of the left, the radical, the Communist, the totalitarian or the Fascist he writes, [their] vision is one of surrogate decision-making by those presumed to have not only superior knowledge, whether these surrogates are political leaders, experts, judges or others. Sowell contrasts the free market vision where the only commonality of purpose is among individuals and organizations, as opposed to Mussolini's vision in the motto everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State. Sowell contrasts the rhetoric vs the results of that rhetoric. The minimum wage or living wage is given as an example. The Progressive congratulates himself on defending the poor but ignores the empirical evidence that, according to Sowell, shows the misery that comes along with it. Sowell tackles youth and age and points out that generally knowledge and wisdom comes with experience, therefore age, and that to seek to indoctrinate the youth from the minds of the anointed is to ignore the benefits of this age and experience. Sowell concludes the chapter saying that Intellectuals deal in the abstract and fail to see the real people or the differing circumstances in different people, in different places, at different times. His last paragraph in the chapter is Empirical equality never has to be demonstrated in the world of contemporary intellectuals. Equality is the default setting by assumption and the burden of proof to the contrary is put on others.

My blog on April 22 of last year is on Jonah Goldberg's book Liberal Fascism.