Moral Zeitgeist or Trickle-Down Politics
When considering whether many businessmen and, more importantly, politicians may have more Objectivist-/capitalism-friendly leanings than is currently the fad and whether few of them could speak out concerning these leanings, I had a thought:
Theory 1: The so-called Founding Fathers were some of the intellectuals of their day. They were much more highly-educated than the populace-at-large, and assembled the Constitution in such a way as only to need to appease other intellectuals/politicians of similar leanings. The populace itself was simply expected to react, knee-jerk style, to the tyranny of an absolute monarchy, and approve of said Fathers’ founding laws. The ideals and reasoning behind the ideals of capitalism, limited government, and separation of church and state had not reached the level of zeitgeist in the populace but had many followers in levels of politics and academia.
Theory 2: Classical liberalism was the zeitgeist of the day. The populace, while perhaps not interested in all its reasons, embraced these principles on a common sense level. The politicians and other intellectuals simply led the charge to formalize what the people already wanted.
If the former is the case, I doubt whether such a thing could happen again. For the better, I think, we have shed ourselves of the need for unquestioned leadership from an intellectual class. However, no small group of intellectuals could, again, lead an entire fledgling nation into either rebellion or novel and radical directions.
On the other hand (theory 3?), perhaps history is full of events that spur the zeitgeist on to new things. It’s not gradual evolution of ideas (though that does happen) but punctuated, dramatic cataclysms of popular thought that cause events like this to happen. For instance, perhaps while the ideas of Voltaire and Montesquieu were brewing and trickling from the intellectuals to the commoners, the colonies’ rebellion against Britain was what crystallized those ideas in the masses. It took such a dramatic turn of events for the masses to embrace new and radical ideas.
If that’s the case, I wonder what leaf we’ve turned since 9/11. Will history show that the masses embraced a new kind of imperialistic xenophobia? Will it tell how we abandoned long-held principles like the sanctity of habeas corpus, trial by jury, and human rights in general? Or will those merely be tittles in the text, after which the populace awoke from its deliberate slumber, realized that the cost of absolute security is tyranny, and demanded justice—not vengeance—for the accused and liberty for the law-abiding?
The least likely possibility is, I think, that history will say we went about our merry ways while nothing changed.
3 Responses to “Moral Zeitgeist or Trickle-Down Politics”
By the matthew show on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
I think that one of the hardest things for future historians to do is not be conspiracy theorists. Time will tell whether or not restraint on that front is necessary, but it all looks rather tidy even from six years’ distance.
Step 1: In the late 1970s, the entry of highly organized Christian fundamentalists into the media and government kicks off the conventional wisdom whispering campaign that America’s great nation status is on the wane, and who’s to blame? Intellectuals. And following the 1960s, intellectual now equals dirty hippie.
Step 2: The Reagan era, where deliberative thought is further eschewed and things like the welfare queen myth are invented. Reagan’s people promote the idea that being “soft” on foreign threats leads to things like the Iran hostage situation (Carter was the Weak Liberal posterboy), and Reagan’s pumping up of the godless Soviet Union’s contrast to our godly goodness (and therefore inherent rightness) increases the nationalist streak. Intellectual (read: Hippie) tendencies are passe in the face of the new Alex P. Keaton generation of young conservatives, who organize under the aegis of the established Christian political movement and push it even further mainstream.
Step 3: The Gulf War introduces the idea that war is no longer a horrible, bloody slog, but is instead a finely tuned surgical procedure. The hippies’ objections look ever sillier, and as distance from Vietnam increases, the memory of the national trauma of war fades. The absence of a draft during that war produces a generation of middle classniks who believe that the necessary procedure of war is something fought by other people, thus making support of such activity far safer to be vehement about.
Step 4: Aforementioned Christian wingnut movement begins buying up media at a rapid clip, helped in no small part by Clinton’s bungling 1996 Telecommunications Act, permitting a single company to own way more stations in a market than they ever have before. Cue Rupert Murdoch’s entrance, the Crossfire style of “debate”, and the rise of right-wing politics as schoolyard entertainment, wielded with the greatest success by Rush Limbaugh and aped by countless wannabees nationwide. Limbaugh and his ilk successfully make “liberal” a dirty word, and equate intellectualization of issues with dirty liberal hippies, embodied by the non-inhaling draft-dodging preznit of the time, who is nonetheless roundly criticized for bombing bin Laden’s headquarters following the African embassy attacks.
Step 5: With “intellectual” now meaning “liberal” now meaning “dirty hippie”, measured arguments become marginalized in media, replaced by bloviating carnival barkers puveying nationalism (which somehow also encompasses free market capitalism and fundamentalist Christianity) as the only remaining Serious ideology, in the face of the proven irrelevance of the dirty hippie.
This is the lead-up to 9/11 as we now know it. Were I a conspiracy theorist (and whether I am depends entirely upon the day), I would add more steps:
Step 6: The Project for A New American Century is formed in 1997, creating a framework and funding for neocon ideology. A PNAC piece published in 2000 argues for occupation of Iraq, but recognizes that such a move would not be widely accepted in the absence of “another Pearl Harbor.”
Step 7: The Cheney Administration, chock full of PNAC veterans, gets word that bin Laden is preparing to attack the U.S., and politely (perhaps hopefully) ignores the threat.
Step 8: We get our new Pearl Harbor.
Step 9: The nationalist machine, built lovingly over the past 3 decades, kicks into swift action, and tyranny becomes patriotism.
By the matthew show on Oct 11, 2007 | Reply
What I left out of the above timeline, of course, is the eclipsing of small business and local economy by corporate globalization. That timeline roughly follows the one above, and increasingly leads to the idea that the individual no longer has any say whatsoever in the workings of the country. These selfsame global corporations have provided a vent, though, via the wingnut media call-in shows and blogosphere. As the sense of personal impotence grows, notice the rise in pitch and fever of the shouting in those arenas. Those who actually have the power feel no threat, and are in fact making money off public discontent and redirecting it toward the dirty hippies and random Middle Eastern countries, the same ones they trade stocks and bonds with.
In the Revolutionary War era, the idea of the self-contained man pioneering and determining his own destiny had deep resonance. That dream is largely dead for the bulk of the populace. The dream is now to attach yourself to the most bulbous corporate teat you can find, and hopefully suck enough out of it to live past retirement age. Obviously this is a generalization, as there are certainly people who are seeking a better life than that. But I think it’s the current zeitgeist, and it’s pretty ugly.
By MochaLab on Oct 13, 2007 | Reply
damn…
For dean, i agree with parts 1 and 3.
For matthew, i agree with pretty much everything except the conclusion that the current zietgeist isn’t doomed. It’s day is almost over. What is coming up next to replace it is the speculation.
But with the rise of personal power of both expression and new economic models on the internet, a lot of corporate models are doomed. As is anything ever being secret again. As well as attention spans lasting more than 5 minutes.
The neocons are dying and the pendulum will swing the other way for a while before the next conservative wave is born.
The greatest actual fear i see is the middle east. How this ends will determine whether Ragnarok & Roll will be holding a great concert on a planet near you…