[Peace-discuss] Does Cheney Make Obama Look Good Enough?

[C. G. Estabrook]

I don't think Palin was particularly ignorant (cf. Joe Biden, Dan Quayle).  She
just had to be, given her class background.

And I hate to tell you, John (actually I don't): your polyarchy credentials are
in order.  In the US, formal education is a class marker more than elsewhere. 
I'm afraid you can't be a man of the people whom you despise.   --CGE

John W. wrote:
> 
> On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 9:41 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu 
> <mailto:galliher at illinois.edu>> wrote:
> 
> I wrote
> 
> McCain was the best thing Obama had going for him during the campaign (altho'
> Palin helped by mobilizing class resentments that couldn't be admitted
> openly)...
> 
> 
> --and was asked about the meaning of the clause in parentheses. I meant that
> Palin's background allowed the soi-disant educated to look down on her.
> 
> Chomsky was asked about his assertion in his "Manufacturing Consent" that 20
> per cent of the population that goes to college and holds important positions
> within the capitalist democracy are the sections of the population that need
> to be brainwashed under freedom.
> 
> He replied, "The 20 per cent figure is not mine. It is a standard notion in
> political science called the 'political class,' the class that is actually
> active in public and economic affairs. This roughly constitutes about 20 per
> cent of the population. From the point of view of the propaganda or the
> doctrinal system they are a different kind of target than the rest of the
> population.
> 
> "Remember, the United States is not a democracy - and has never been intended
> to be a democracy. It is what is called in the political science literature a
> polyarchy. A polyarchy is one in which a small sector of the population is in
> control of essential decision-making for the economy, the political system,
> the cultural system and so on. And the rest of the population is supposed to
> be passive and acquiescent. They are supposed to cede democracy to the elite 
> elements who call themselves, rather modestly, the 'responsible men.' 'We are
> the responsible men and we take care of the affairs of the world.' The rest
> are sometimes called a 'bewildered herd' or a rabble or something like that.
> Actually, I am quoting Walter Lippman, the leading figure in U.S. journalism,
> and a leading public intellectual of the 20th century..."
> 
> The political class in America is taught to hate and fear the 80% as 
> uneducated, racist, religious, and proto-fascist.  (Tom Frank's "What's the
> Matter with Kansas?" is a sophisticated version of this teaching of contempt;
> it's been seriously challenged by various people, notably Larry Bartels.)
> 
> The liberal elite, which makes up a good bit of the political class, was
> shocked and appalled that someone who seemed to belong to the 80% -- and an
> attractive woman at that -- should dare to presume that she might run for
> national office.  So there was a great effort to denigrate her as
> "uneducated, racist, religious, and proto-fascist" -- regardless of her
> politics.
> 
> Among other things, the reaction reveled the fear among the liberal elite
> that the 80% might become politically active.  Don't they know their place?
> She and they belong to the "bewildered herd..."
> 
> Palin, whatever her politics, was a challenge to the polyarchy in a way that
> Clinton and Obama were not. That's where the rage and scorn heaped on her
> came from. --CGE
> 
> 
> 
> So it wasn't Palin's ignorance that appalled me?  Or maybe, since I'm not a
> member of the polyarchy, it doesn't matter what I think or why I think it?
> 
> You have a tendency to make simple things complex, Carl.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------