Liberals anti-democratic and always have been
by Melvyn L Fein
March 16, 2014 09:46 PM | 1309 views | 3 3 comments | 31 31 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Every now and then I read a book that alters my perspective. Fred Siegel’s “The Revolt Against the Masses: How Liberalism Undermined the Middle Class” is such a work. It makes it clear that liberals have always been vociferously hostile to democracy.

While I have long realized that the “Democratic” Party is misnamed, how far its roots lie from the egalitarian traditions of the United States came into much sharper focus. Liberalism is — and was — a program designed by elitists for elitists. It never was for, or appreciative of, the little guy.

Although I have a fairly large vocabulary, Siegel uses a word with which I was not familiar. It is “clerisy.” According to the dictionary, this is a synonym for the literati. This is also the clique that Siegel identifies as having launched and kept liberalism afloat.

From its beginnings a century ago, modern American liberalism has been dedicated to promoting literary causes. Its chief proponents were self-styled intellectuals who deemed themselves superior to the common ruck. Convinced they were smarter, kinder and more sophisticated than ordinary persons, they could afford to look down on them.

But more than this, they had to persuade themselves that they were not really snobs. As a result, they styled themselves as knights errant on the mission to save humanity from its own defects. They, albeit highbrows, would lead the lowbrows into a brave new world of gentility and equality.

Of course, they did not really mean this. Utterly convinced of their own superiority, they were certain ordinary people could not govern themselves. These boobs could not tell the difference between a Kandinsky and a toad, and therefore, they could not be trusted to make important decisions.

No, the clerisy would have to make the decisions — even for the personal lives of those they were destined to govern. Persons of lesser ability would have to defer to their betters so that they could be saved from themselves. Indeed, if these fools had to be manipulated into complying, it was for their own good.

Isn’t this what Barack Obama and his merry band of pseudo-democrats are attempting to do? Don’t they habitually assure us that Obamacare will rescue us from the mean-spirited insurance companies? Aren’t they confident our nation’s hegemonic ambitions must be thwarted lest we corrupt the rest of the world?

And if we are not in favor of these things, they must persuade us to go along. Should this require lies, lies will be told. Should it entail misdirection, red herrings will be trotted out. Should the truth lead people to come to the wrong conclusions, it will be withheld from them.

Why not? Ordinary Americans are regarded as so dim that these forms of manipulation will slide by them. Obviously, young women can be persuaded that conservatives hate them by repetitively making unsubstantiated charges of a “war against women.” Clearly, the poor can be rallied to legislation that will make them poorer if offered a few small bribes.

Hence we witness the New York Times, the bastion of elite Liberalism, a newspaper that prides itself on providing “all the news that’s fit to print,” deciding not to cover the IRS scandal. Ordinary people surely cannot be trusted with knowledge of how Lois Lerner plotted to deny tax relief to conservative organizations; ergo memos that reveal this are omitted.

Then there is Harry Reid, who tells the masses that accusations Obamacare is hurting people are all lies. Or Nancy Pelosi, who opined that if we were to find out what Obamacare contained, Congress would first have to pass it —naturally assuming that average Americans would never read the bill.

As for the president himself, he believes that his rhetoric can always get him out of a bad scrape. Given the right honeyed words, and the appropriate cadences, voters can even be persuaded that Obamacare is working. Failing that, he can divert attention with lurid tales about why the climate-change sky is falling.

Melvyn L. Fein Ph.D. is professor of sociology at Kennesaw State University.

Comments
(3)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Kevin Foley
|
March 17, 2014
Only Mel Fein could come up with such a preposterous, fact-free argument. American liberalism has stood up to the conservative politicians who work for the 1%, not the other way around.

Thanks to liberalism, countless elderly have avoided poverty thanks to Social Security, which was fought tooth and nail by conservatives. Thanks to liberalism, countless families have been saved from financial ruin thanks to Medicare, passed only after a bitter battle with conservatives.

Thanks to liberalism, the Affordable Care Act is providing healthcare to uninsured Americans.

Thanks to liberalism, the slaves were freed, women got the right to vote, Americans got a 40 hour work week and safe work places, the Civil Right and Voting Rights Acts were passed.



Conservatives stood in the way of all of these reforms. More recently, conservative policies brought about the Bush Recession, which Obama’s liberal policies have mitigated despite conservative efforts to prolong the economic recovery.

Conservatism is the enemy of the middle class and working poor in this country. Not the other way around.

Victor Atkins
|
March 21, 2014
Tell me more about how the Liberals / Democrats freed the slaves. I never knew that.

Harry F. Hagan
|
March 17, 2014
"Liberalism is — and was — a program designed by elitists for elitists. It never was for, or appreciative of, the little guy."

This is it in a nut shell. Liberalism is a big bed full of strange and disparate people, but only two classes: the "intelligentsia"--Hollywood, academics, big gov types--on one side, and their willing, unsuspecting, useful idiots on the other. The elite know why they're in ostensible collusion with the hoi polloi, but the ignoratti hang on just for the free ride. But then there are the others who think they're in with the "in" crowd, but really are not. They're the dupes who will quite soon find themselves to be among the targets they thought were restricted to conservatives.

Liberalism is all about control of the masses by the few. It's a toxic and fatal brew, like the Jonestown cocktails, but disguised as nectar.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides