home  |  book  |

Anger and Politics Anyone for Tipping Points?

print view

Return to Self-Government

by Christopher Chantrill
September 12, 2004 at 3:00 am

|

IN THEIR EMERGING Democratic Majority, John Judis and Ruy Teixeira conjure up a future political coalition, an alliance between the progressive centrists and the traditionally marginalized that will take power from the present Republican majority.  They see the ranks of creative professionals and working women increasing and benefiting the Democrats. 

One hopes that they won’t, for the progressive vision goes profoundly against the grain of the American experiment.  The Union was intended, after all, as an experiment in self-government not an opportunity for an educated, progressive elite to save the poor and helpless from a fate worse than death.

Progressive elites seem to harbor a distaste for self-government.  You could tell that from the acid response among the chattering class to President Bush’s proposed “ownership society.”  On PBS after the president’s acceptance speech in New York Republican David Brooks was giggly with pleasure.  But Old Democrat Mark Shields was cranky and unbelieving.  To him it was all window-dressing, and anyway there wasn’t any money for major new programs.  And you can see why.  A nation of owners is a nation much less in thrall to government compulsion and expert supervision.  Why would progressive centrists encourage that?

It’s not surprising that the Mark Shields of the world remain in denial about the seriousness of the Bush agenda.  Thoughtful journalists successfully protect them from its corrosive pollution.  You could read The New York Times for months and months without reading much in the way of analysis of the president’s program.  A recent analysis of media bias found that mainstream media outlets cite Democratic-leaning political think tanks much more than Republican-leaning think tanks.  In fact, based on think-tank citations, they read pretty well like a Democrat making a speech in Congress. 

This careful screening of political ideas in the media has a consequence.  Liberals remain happily ignorant of the goals and the program of the political movement that has risen to power in the United States over the last twenty-five years—and they like it that way.  They hate Christian fundamentalists with a passion; they rail at tax cuts for the rich; they sneer at President Bush’s heartland persona; they defend the sanctity of Social Security and Medicare.  What else do they need to know about evil Republicans?

But suppose that the “ownership society” turns out to be a radical idea that captures the imagination of America’s voters?  What would happen then?  Maybe the United States would return to its roots in Anglo-American of self-government in which people are assumed competent to govern themselves unless proven otherwise and experts serve as advisers to the citizenry rather than their supervisors. 

It’s about time that top-down government got its comeuppance.  It has had an astonishing run.  Considering that it had its out-of-town tryout with the emergence of the big city political machine at the end of the Civil War, had a boffo run in the New Deal years of the 1930s, and then had a record-breaking return engagement in 1965 with President Johnson and his top-down Great Society, surely it’s time for American political theater to move on to something else.

Some Americans have always hated top-down government, for it undermines the ability of a competent people to provide for each other’s welfare.  Today, these people are called Republicans and they have learned to sing a new song of self-government to the American people, one that begins with a trenchant critique of top-down government: from its one-size-fits-all pension program to its one-size-fits-all education program.  It is to these Americans that the administration of George W. Bush wants to appeal with its “ownership society” program that pushes against the one-size-fits-all edifice with new symbols of self-government: tax advantaged savings accounts for pensions, education, and health care that assume that the average American is a self-governing actor capable of making responsible decisions about his life.

Democrats don’t believe the show will ever open.  Maybe they are right.  It’s hard to legislate political changes, and it will be especially hard to push against the great interests that have grown up in the years of Democratic ascendancy.  But maybe the Republican “ownership society” will create owners out of renters, employers out of employees, and rock-ribbed Republicans out of Democratic little people, just as the GI Bill and FHA home loans created Republican suburbanites out of Democratic urban working stiffs.

Maybe Democrats will wake up one day to a United States Senate with a comfortable Republican majority, a determined House of Representatives led by a former high school wrestling coach, and a reelected Republican President.  They will realize with horror that the Republicans have a mandate from the American people to implement change. 

Supposing all this happened on the morning of November 3, 2004?

Christopher Chantrill blogs at americanmanifestobook.blogspot.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


Racial Discrimination

[T]he way “to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,” Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300—301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District


Churches

[In the] higher Christian churches... they saunter through the liturgy like Mohawks along a string of scaffolding who have long since forgotten their danger. If God were to blast such a service to bits, the congregation would be, I believe, genuinely shocked. But in the low churches you expect it every minute.
Annie Dillard, Holy the Firm


Sacrifice

[Every] sacrifice is an act of impurity that pays for a prior act of greater impurity... without its participants having to suffer the full consequences incurred by its predecessor. The punishment is commuted in a process that strangely combines and finesses the deep contradiction between justice and mercy.
Frederick Turner, Beauty: The Value of Values


Pentecostalism

Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization


Living the Virtues

When recurrently the tradition of the virtues is regenerated, it is always in everyday life, it is always through the engagement by plain persons in a variety of practices, including those of making and sustaining families and households, schools, clinics, and local forms of political community.
Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue


Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph


Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self


Drang nach Osten

There was nothing new about the Frankish drive to the east... [let] us recall that the continuance of their rule depended upon regular, successful, predatory warfare.
Richard Fletcher, The Barbarian Conversion


Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America


Living Law

The recognition and integration of extralegal property rights [in the Homestead Act] was a key element in the United States becoming the most important market economy and producer of capital in the world.
Hernando de Soto, The Mystery of Capital


German Philosophy

The primary thing to keep in mind about German and Russian thought since 1800 is that it takes for granted that the Cartesian, Lockean or Humean scientific and philosophical conception of man and nature... has been shown by indisputable evidence to be inadequate. 
F.S.C. Northrop, The Meeting of East and West


Action

The incentive that impels a man to act is always some uneasiness... But to make a man act [he must have] the expectation that purposeful behavior has the power to remove or at least to alleviate the felt uneasiness.
Ludwig von Mises, Human Action


presented by Christopher Chantrill

 •  Contact