The Clear Thinking blog is on hiatus and will return with new posts on July 18, 2011. Meanwhile, please enjoy this re-post of the “Dissecting progressive arrogance” series.
By Chuck Rogér
Yesterday, we examined part of a Financial Times piece and found progressive arrogance only two paragraphs into the article. We’ll return to that piece later this week. But today, let’s introduce another exhibit.
In an article titled “A dramatic shift in West Virginia,” Clive Crook (yes, him again) discusses the race for the U.S. Senate seat vacated when Democrat icon Robert Byrd died in June. This time, progressive arrogance rears its enlightened head in the very first paragraph, in which Crook declares that there “should not have been” a battle for the seat that was “owned” by Byrd.
Crook pays homage to the memory of Byrd, who “harvested federal subsidy with legendary dedication.” Our writer swoons over the way that Byrd “boasted about” his ability to bring home the federal pork. Other politicians, in Crook’s estimation, show “lesser mettle,” in that they fear bragging about using money confiscated from taxpayers all over America to fund local, ego-motivated projects.
Behold the conceit in the progressive psyche.
Progressives see themselves as sitting atop Mount Olympus and wielding wisdom turbocharged by omnipotence. The wealth of the masses is meant to be redistributed to people who really need the money. And the perfect candidates for deciding how the redistribution should proceed are indeed the wise, Olympian power-players.
In the race for Byrd’s seat, polls show Republican John Raese and Governor Joe Manchin, a Democrat, neck-and-neck. In Crook’s judgment, Manchin should be the automatic shoo-in to replace “Prince of Pork” Byrd. But the contest is too close to call. Crook declares that the closeness means that “something even odder is going on” than, for instance, Republican Scott Brown winning late progressive icon Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat.
So there it is again, the condescension toward people who don’t accept progressivism. Crook is flummoxed by voters who “aim to stop Barack Obama in his tracks…”
Here’s some perspective. Clive Crook is a Brit living in America since 2005. He reports for Financial Times from Washington, D.C.
What a distorted picture this guy is forming. Crook’s material, written within his perch amongst inside-the-Beltway Ruling Class zombies, reveals a cluelessness into who Americans really are. This behavior mirrors that of the mobs that we refer to as “Congress,” the “President” and his “administration,” and the “Judiciary.”
There is a major learning in today’s post.
Progressives throughout government, academia, Hollywood, the “artist” community, and the media all share an intellectually crippling trait–the inability to accept that our country’s founders designed our government the way they did.
Crook’s comments reflect progressives’ frustration with the robustness of our democratic republic. The shrieking cry goes something like this: “Why… really, just why can’t we make the stupid people do what we want them to do? Why can’t we make the dimwits accept ‘transformation’ that we, the infallible progressive intellects, know to be good for them?”
When Americans go to the polls and reject progressive wisdom, progressives become incensed. We are seeing this behavior now. Obama grows shriller as it becomes clearer that voters are about to tell him to stuff his transformation. Look for The One to try other “methods” to implement the rest of his agenda. American progressivism has reached a fever pitch and the herd of rabid dogmatists will not dissipate soon, and will never go quietly.
As real Americans voice more and more disapproval over the herd’s agenda during the next two years, it will be fun to dissect the rants, the puzzlement of ideologues like Clive Crook, Barack Obama, and many, many other increasingly desperate people looking to take desperate measures.