Public Discourse

I remember when public “discourse” was one long hymn of praise to the liberal intelligentsia. Academics, television networks, scriptwriters, rock stars, pop artists of all descriptions, serious artists even more so, The New York Times, The Washington Post, both NEA’s, Publishers Weekly, Jane Fonda, Norman Lear, Gloria Steinum – all swelled the chorus. We discovered how persecuted they had been, but now how gloriously triumphant. We discovered again and again how caring they were, how thoughtful, how useful, how important, in nobility of spirit how like the angels, in wisdom how like the gods! What joy it is to scorn them for the parasite class we now know them to be.

Poisoned

The world has been poisoned twice.
First by the idea of a punishing god - a god who drowns us, burns us, inflicts plagues on us, even throws hailstones at us (see Joshua) - a god who likes nothing as much as the sound of weeping - a god who makes frequent use of a "terrible swift sword" - a god who scourges whole nations. The ancient Jews thought up the idea, they elaborated upon it in their sacred scriptures: the books of Joshua, Lamentations, etc. Their god at his worst is intolerant, legalistic (see Deuteronomy), racist (see 2 Samuel 1-15) - really a monster raging in the sky, lit by lightning, a danger to the earth.
Christianity has progressed beyond this primitive idea. Jesus proclaimed a gentle God, a loving father who forgave over and over again. Tragically, there are those within the faith still in thrall to the punishing god, still eager to chastise in his name.
Second by "Modernism" (self-glorification and self-destruction). Modernism can best be understood by reading such works as James Joyce's Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (the Bible of Modernism, wherein the title character tries to avoid entanglement in the "nets" of religion, family, and nationality).
Modernists disdain traditional societies, some of them ancient, from Mexico to France to Thailand; disdain the values associated with these societies such as honor, loyalty, detachment, duty, compassion (values which generally involve a higher power or some form of self-sacrifice). As a substitute Modernists propose talk shows for the lower class, the Guggenheim for the upper class, and a low-birth rate for everyone - depression too, for the Modernist ridiculous moments of optimism (the October Revolution, Woodstock) only rarely interrupt long decades of despair.
Where did Modernism come from? It started in the 1700s. Large numbers of peasants, no longer needed on the land, migrated to the cities. There the peasants met artists and intellectuals, workers and thieves, Gypsies and Jews. Amidst this jumble, in the free city air, arose a cosmopolitan culture sometimes crass, sometimes exquisite, that some found liberating. What could be more pleasurable than negotiating a tradition-bound society, oneself unbound by any tradition? What could be more enjoyable than traversing the provinces, ridiculing the curious inhabitants thereof, taking advantage of every sod-headed lump you meet. It is the thrill of the imperialist or of the urban adventurer - the gangster, the sophisticate. Unfortunately it is a thrill at the expense of the majority.
Both these poisons are often detected together. Both punishment and crime, both the police state and social disintegration, both the harshest retribution and the vilest sin. And so many have a taste, a hunger, for both. Think of the celebrity-criminals, or criminal-celebrities, or celebrities playing criminals, etc. Think of the ritual sacrifice of such people on tv. Ponder the symbiotic relationship between the authorities and the outlaws. The problem is: we are addicted to the drama of sin and punishment.

Mother of All Establishments

The ruling class, the elite, the creme de la creme, the establishment - the mother of all establishments in fact - what is it like? Its wit tends to be both dry and acerbic. Its city is New York. Its profession is attorney. Its object persuasion. Its manner cool. Its clothes black. Its heroes Kennedys. Its music is mostly jazz standards I think. Its passion is film, or maybe dating. (Though I doubt their self-conscious coupling deserves the name of passion.) Its ethnicity is mixed, but the Anglo-Saxon and Jewish elements predominate. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_14_49/ai_59451091 Its politics are moderate but liberal on certain social issues like abortion.
Many minor-league establishments send their best players to the big leagues. The ultimate establishment draws from corporate CEO's; judges; college presidents; the highest ranks of the military; union bosses; partners in prestigious law firms; titans of finance; media royalty; upper echelons of the ever-spreading government bureaucracies; nabobs from the political world - governors, senators; successful entertainers of all kinds- talk show hosts, rap artists, journalists. Powers from other nations are included: prime ministers, despots, treasury secretaries, generals, top smugglers and rights activists. The distillation of all these subsidiary elites, everyone from bankers to performance artists, physicists to film stars, mayors who've clawed their way up from the streets alongside the residue of the most aristocratic families - are all blended together to create the mother of all establishments.
Don't confuse the ultimate establishment with the penultimate establishment. The penultimate establishment consists of conservative Republicans picked to play the role of the ultimate establishment. They are the designated target, the Simon Legree at whom we are directed to hiss. They, very visibly, perform the disagreeable but necessary tasks of Power. They are the millionaires who keep the economy moving, the generals who keep the armies moving. They are the father figures who can, eventually, be safely discarded.If you think these Republicans are in fact the ultimate establishment they are supposed to be you are wrong: 1) Conservative Republicans always lose the bitter battles over social policy - the struggles over segregation, abortion, feminism, gay rights, etc. 2) The supreme establishment would never, at least visibly, ally itself with the rich or the military. The rich are wildly unpopular (They like escaping their tax obligation as much as cutting badly-needed services to working people.) The military commanders may be popular domestically, but they are hated abroad. The supreme establishment instead derives power from pretending to battle these dangerous forces. 3) Businessmen are ruled by the market, by the desires of consumers. The government, in contrast, can do whatever it wants - it can arrest you; jail you; take your house, your children, all your money.
The era of this ultimate establishment is nearly over. Soon they and their urbane vanities will disappear. Then I think people will wonder how so few ruled over so many for so long.

Authoritarian Personality

The authoritarian impulse is in the DNA of liberals.
These our rulers have formed a population of degraded individuals amenable to control: ignorant and proud of their ignorance, over-stimulated, dazed, celebrity-obsessed, self-obsessed, isolated from family and community, atomized, cynical, servile, conditioned to accept distant authority, conditioned to accept harsh punishment – sometimes inflicting such punishment on themselves, dissolute, fearful, debt-ridden, dependent. Now we are all 15-year-old boys.
Furthermore, our rulers have divided us – by gender and ethnicity. Multinational empires have been created. Hostility between the various ethnic groups has been fostered. The native population has been thinned out - feminism and abortion are essential tools to this end. Also child rearing has been made as burdensome as possible. Immigrants have partially replaced the original population.
The new man formed by all these efforts is suited to life in a police state, an empire.