Monday, January 2, 2017

A Tale of Many Elitisms - Conclusion: A Game of Thrones


Power resides where men believe it resides. It’s a trick, a shadow on the wall. And a very small man can cast a very large shadow.” —

 Lord Varys, in George R. R. Martin’s “A Song of Fire and Ice”

In the 3 previous posts of this series on elitism, we have explored 3 different elite groups in American society: a self-righteous religious elite, a self-serving plutocratic elite, and a self-sabotaging intellectual elite. The direction the future history of this country will take will depend on how these groups interact with one another.

Throughout most of recorded history, complex human societies have been ruled largely by monarchs or dictators, who rose to power through military prowess and/or intrigue and passed power down to their descendants or to hand-picked successors. These aristocracies formed military/plutocratic elites which held both the power of arms and that of money. The only notable exceptions were Athenian Democracy and the Roman Republic. Both eventually were replaced by tyrannies.

In the classical world, rulers were often also intellectuals. Scions of powerful Greek and Roman families were sent to be instructed by the greatest teachers, and were in fact much better educated than most of their subjects. Alexander the Great was not just a great military leader. He was a pupil of Aristotle, one of the greatest minds of all time. Julius Caesar wasn’t just a general and a dictator. He was one of the finest writers in all Roman history, and his diaries describing his military campaigns are early examples of anthropology. Instead of mocking or reviling the populations he conquered, Caesar meticulously described their societies, traditions, languages and lifestyles in a concise, scientific, dispassionate style.

Roman elites were sent to Greece for instruction, and it became standard for them to be bilingual. As Horace put it “Graecia capta ferum victorem coepit” (Greece, once it was conquered, conquered its savage victors). Philosophers were commonly employed as imperial advisors. The enduring power of classical civilization comes from a blend of Roman pragmatism and engineering and Greek intellectualism. The ruling class in the classical world was very much an intellectual elite.

Why does this ancient history still matter today? Every modern democracy is built upon a blueprint of Greek and Roman institutions with various adaptations. The American Revolution, which started the modern republican movement, was led by intellectuals who were very familiar with the classical world, and who consciously attempted to construct a hybrid between Athenian Democracy and the Roman Republic. The popular vote was an Athenian invention. Rome had a Senate and two Consuls (“President and Vice-President), as well as a court system (tribunals) and a code of jurisprudence. The very word “Republic” is Latin (Res Publica, or “that which belongs to the public”). Both Athens and Republican Rome were led by educated elites at the height of their powers. The public had more say in Athens than they had in Rome, but they were also keenly informed on current events. In fact, the word “idiot”, used today as an insult, is Greek. It means “self-absorbed person who only knows about his own life (and is uninformed about politics)”.

In the Hellenistic world, religious elites existed but had a rather limited role in power politics. Conversely, in ancient Egypt and Israel the priestly class held significant political power, and organized religion was an important ally of political power.

 This trend intensified with the diffusion of Christianity and Islam. Religious justification for monarchies of all sorts, from French and British kings to Russian czars and Islamic Caliphs served to keep the populace under control and provided supernatural support for earthly rulers. Constantine adopted Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire after claiming that his defeat of Maxentius in 312 AD was divinely ordained[i]. Christian apologists promoted a story according to which an angel had visited Constantine in a dream, telling him to decorate his soldiers’ shields with a cross, and promising “In Hoc Signo Vinces” (In this sign, you shall win). Elaborate crowning ceremonies whereby a priestly authority conferred divine approval upon the anointment of a monarch became standard in Christian Europe, beginning with Charlemagne’s coronation as Holy Roman Emperor by Pope Leo III on Christmas Day, 800 AD[ii]. In the Muslim world, the Caliph (Khalifa) was revered as the ultimate religious authority and a direct successor of the Prophet, a hybrid between a king and a Pope[iii].

The “alliance between the throne and altar” was highly successful for centuries. It essentially consisted in a military/plutocratic elite ruling with the support of a religious elite.

The American and French Revolutions signed a turning point in history, with the rebellion of intellectual elites to aristocratic elites to re-establish the republic as a viable form of government for the first time since Julius Caesar. The rebirth of the republic was not painless. The American republic descended into a savage civil war few decades after its inception. The divisions that caused that war have not yet completely healed. The French republic had to endure multiple bouts with dictatorship and monarchy before its eventual success[iv],[v].  After the two World Wars, most Western nations adopted democratic republican forms of governments, though some, such as Britain and the Netherlands, retained ceremonial monarchs. In the post-World War 2 era, republics arose throughout the world, although in many cases such republics were and remain today de facto dictatorships with perfunctory elections and rubberstamp legislatures.

Nominally, democratic republics are ruled by the citizens through a process of popular vote similar to that of ancient Athens. Details vary from country to country, but the basic principle is that of government “of the people, by the people and for the people”.

This most inclusive form of government, whereby citizens are not subjects and government is accountable to citizens, is the product of French and British Enlightenment philosophical theories which promoted reason over belief and introduced the radical idea that all humans have equal rights[vi]. The Enlightenment was at the root of the scientific revolution that produced the modern Western world. In fact, the American and French Republics represented attempts to replace tradition and religion with reason in to justify the existence of a government. They also placed, for the first time, the military under the collective control of the citizens.

The establishment of republics did not mean the end of elitism, nor did it achieve complete egalitarianism. It did mean that a political/intellectual elite, in many cases supported by a financial/plutocratic elite, replaced hereditary aristocratic elites supported by religious elites. At least temporarily, religious elites lost some of their power to secular financial and intellectual elites.

However, in capitalist societies political power exercised on behalf of voting citizens is not the only kind of power. Financial power wielded by plutocratic elites is a strong contender. Elections offer opportunities to increase the share of power wielded by a particular elite. In a sense, the constant struggle between conservatives and progressives in Western democracies can be boiled down to a power struggle between a plutocratic elite, which tends to concentrate financial resources into its own hands, and an intellectual elite, which claims greater control of these resources on behalf of a majority of citizens.

In a democratic system, this poses an interesting challenge. Both the plutocratic elite and the intellectual elite are minorities. In order to gain and retain political power, they need the continued support of the majority of voters, who are neither wealthy nor highly educated.

Superficially, the intellectual elite would appear to have a natural advantage. They are committed to broadening access to financial and educational resources, and inasmuch as they promote progressive policies, they are driven by more altruistic motives than the plutocratic elite. The plutocratic elite, which is primarily motivated by self-interest, would never win an election if elections were simply competitions between clearly laid out platforms for progress.

How the plutocratic elite has solved this dilemma, at least in the United States, is apparent by looking at the history of the past few decades.

 In 1961, in his farewell speech, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against the growing influence of a military-industrial complex, adding that only an “alert and knowledgeable” citizenry could control this influence [vii]. Today, approximately two thirds of the U.S. Federal budget is spent on maintaining an enormous military complex, which supports a myriad of contractors, companies and jobs. The old military elites have joined forces with the plutocratic elite, and provide jobs for many working class Americans. These Americans have an interest in maintaining the military-industrial complex.

Additionally, the plutocratic elite has made masterful use of emotional manipulation, following the old Roman motto “Divide et impera” (which correctly translates as “divide and rule”, not “conquer” as often reported). After the Democratic Party broadened the popular base of American democracy by passing the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Right Act of 1965, the plutocratic elite saw a major opportunity to gain power and took full advantage of it. After the Civil War, the Republican Party had become increasingly controlled by the plutocratic elite that had enriched itself from the war and the subsequent reconstruction. As a result, it was largely a Northern, pro-business party. While initially in favor of government spending on infrastructure, it has developed an anti-government position to limit the impact of regulations meant to protect the public on commercial activities [viii]. Southern whites were hostile to Republicans, the party of the Union, and had embraced Democrats, until they “betrayed” them by sponsoring civil rights and voting rights for African Americans. President Richard Nixon and especially his advisor Lee Atwater saw an opening to reverse the South’s political loyalties. With his Southern Strategy, Nixon exploited white racism and hostility to a government that was forcing whites to accept civil rights policies they loathed. This strategy worked brilliantly. Southern and rural whites who had nothing to gain from enriching big businesses in the North became unwaveringly loyal to the Republican party, the party of the plutocratic elite, and remain so to this date. In essence, plutocrats exploited tribalism under the form of racism to gain political power (see my post “Why Does Racism Persist?”). This strategy was continued with minor variations by Presidents Reagan, G. H. W. Bush and G. W. Bush, consolidating Republican loyalty among whites [ix]. Donald Trump further reinvigorated this strategy with a particularly divisive campaign that garnered the support of white supremacists and neo-fascists [x]. Conservatives also took full advantage of mass media, creating an empire of right wing TV and radio stations, and eventually websites, that spread manipulative messages meant to turn working class whites against the government and to keep the flame of racism alive. Another Machiavellian move was dusting off the old religious elite, and retooling it for the 20th and 21st century. “The God Strategy”, a book by David Domke and Kevin Coe, argues that Republicans starting with the Reagan presidency began using conservative Christianity as a political tool to consolidate support among white working class voters. Conservative churches obliged, and retooled their own message to heavily support Republican causes. The “Religious Right” was born to protect racially segregated private schools, which had become major cash cows in the post-desegregation South [xi].  A 1970 lawsuit originating in Holmes County, Mississippi, had led to a ruling denying charitable, tax-exempt status to segregated religious schools. As a result, Evangelical churches started adopting an anti-government stance. They seized upon the highly emotional issue of abortion (although Evangelicals had not originally opposed Roe V. Wade), and gained control over millions of “single issue” voters. Republicans coupled their own anti-government, anti-regulation stance with a pro-Evangelical Christianity, anti-abortion stance, and the deal was sealed. Some Christian pastors went as far as to reinterpret scripture, preaching that material wealth is a divine blessing, and therefore the wealthy are deemed by God to deserve their financial advantage [xii]. This so-called Prosperity Gospel is in blatant contradiction with the teachings of Jesus as reported in the Bible, but it has met considerable success. A right-wing Christianity has been created that conflates anti-abortion, anti-birth control positions with anti-taxes, anti-government, pro-wealth, pro-war, pro-weapons, pro-death penalty views and racism in an improbable but successful ideological concoction. The alliance between throne and altar has been reborn under a new shape. The alliance between altar and ballot, seasoned with a good dose of racism and Southern resentment, is a very powerful force in American politics today.

The final prong of the plutocratic strategy is possibly the most effective one. Although the plutocratic elite is a numeric minority, it does control a disproportionate amount of wealth (see “A Tale of Many Elitisms, Part 2: Plutocratic Elitism”). It can use this wealth to buy off politicians and to fund political movements, provided that this use of wealth remains permissible under law. Securing a conservative majority in the Supreme Court has always been a key strategic objective of conservatives, because Justices serve for life. This objective has been sold to the religious elitists as a means to overturn the legalization of abortion. But a conservative Supreme Court, through the “Citizens United” ruling, has essentially legalized unlimited political bribing in the United States, thereby allowing the plutocratic elite to wield its most powerful weapon without hindrance.

And here we are today, in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s election. The plutocratic/military elite is firmly in control, with the support of the religious elite. Through emotional manipulation revolving around racism, xenophobia, resentment of change and religion, it has managed to condition large masses of people to consistently vote against their own interest and buttress its power. The Enlightenment and the values on which modern republics are founded are a distant memory. The intellectual elite has a sounder strategy for the future, enjoys the support of a majority of voters and remains responsible for the vast majority of the economic productivity in this country and elsewhere. However, for the time being in the US it remains confined to urban, Northern and coastal areas. The tribalism-based divide between slave-holding economies and anti-slavery forces that existed at the beginning of the American republic remains in place. It has morphed into different shapes but continues to plague the republic as its original sin.

How long will this round of the game of thrones last? What will the future elites and their relationships look like? No one can tell for certain. However, demographic trends and the historical tendency of plutocratic elites to overplay their hand and cause intolerable inequalities suggest that momentum for a new phase is building. How long this will take and what the new phase will be remains to be seen. In the interest of the planet, I hope that reason prevails and that the worst consequences of unrestrained, shortsighted greed are avoided. We desperately need a new Enlightenment to preserve not only modern democracy but the very planetary habitat humanity depends upon.



No comments:

Post a Comment