You’re Going to See this Again

Probably in an upcoming √úberpost. Quote of the fucking YEAR:

What if democracy is merely the politic or superstructure of a particular cultural stage? Simple mass literacy in that case, continuing advances in teaching and learning in secondary and post-secondary levels will necessarily upset democracy in the places where it first appeared. Secondary education and especially higher education will introduce the notion of inequality into the mental and ideological organization of developed societies. After a brief period of hesitation and scruples the more highly educated end up believing they are truly superior.

In developed countries, a new class is emerging that comprises roughly 20% of the population in terms of sheer numbers, but controls about half of each nation’s wealth. This new class has more and more trouble putting up with the constraints of universal suffrage. It is a surprising return to the world of Aristotle, in which oligarchy may replace democracy at the very moment when democracy is beginning to take hold in Eurasia, it is weakening in those places where it was born.

These are indeed curious democracies, in which the political system pits elitism against populism and vice-versa. And although universal suffrage persists in theory, the elites of right and left close ranks to block any reorientation of economic policies that would lead to greater equality.

The common understanding among the elite, reflection of a common superior language among them prevents any correcting of the political system facade when universal suffrage would suggest the possibility of crisis.

Emmanuel Todd, After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order, (2001)

Man, did he nail THAT.

(This was transcribed from this YouTube video. All errors are mine. I have the book on order, but it won’t be here for a week or two.)

3 thoughts on “You’re Going to See this Again

  1. I still think Thomas Sowell explains it better, and had the professional left pegged in 1995 when he released “Visions of the Anointed.”

    All I see self styled progressives do anymore in policy disagreements is cast moral aspersions. Not one of them can argue for or against any set policy on merits. They always resort to moral arguments, and at all times seek to maintain their moral virtue by attacking the moral agency of their opponent via morally loaded labels.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *