Ruling Class vs. Country Life
He [Murray] goes on to detail how all of these demographic and cultural shifts have led to the destruction of the families of the working middle class that is the backbone of the country. They’ve taken the side of everybody but the white male, essentially. So the anger out there in his estimation is justified, and it’s deeper than Trump, and it’ll survive Trump. It’s gonna exist long after this election is over.
Codevilla: Democrat Ruling Class has created a dependent grievance underclass
Now, we’re talking about the Washington-New York-Boston corridor here, the Northeast power corridor, and his point here is that if you want prestige, if you want power, if you want to have perks, privilege, if you want to be in line to get rich, then you do what the Democrat power structure says. And to the extent that there are Republican elites, they’ve been converted into satellites, and depending on their behavior, they’re given access to some of this stuff. Mr. Codevilla continues.
“This class’s fatal feature –” uniformly educated ruling class “– is its belief that ordinary Americans are a lesser intellectual and social breed. Its increasing self-absorption, its growing contempt for whoever won’t bow to it, its dependence for votes on sectors of society whose grievances it stokes –” Codevilla is such a brilliant writer. What that means is, the Democrat Party has succeeded in creating dependents among groups of people whose grievances it stokes. They created this grievance culture, they give them the reason to keep grieving and getting ticked off, claiming they’re gonna be the solution to it, which they never are.
Opposition deemed Illegitimate
All of this has led this ruling class “to break the most basic rule of republican life: deeming its opposition illegitimate.” Deeming its opposition illegitimate. Which is what’s happened to the conservative, slash, Republican political wing in this country, the left has succeeded in delegitimizing it. Without that, there cannot be a republic. We’re gonna end up with an authoritarian, tyrannical dictatorship or something along those lines when the opposition has been deemed illegitimate. And yet it’s the Democrats that run around talking about cooperation and a level playing field and bipartisanship and working together when they have ended any possibility of any of that. They have delegitimized the opposition.
And the opposition’s sat back and let it happen. “The ruling class insists on driving down the throats of its opponents the agendas of each its constituencies and on injuring persons who stand in the way. This has spawned a Newtonian reaction, a hunger, among what may be called the ‘country class’ for returning the favor.” In other words, all of this has created in average, ordinary, middle class America a desire to pay these people back for what they’ve done.
“Ordinary Americans have endured being insulted by the ruling class’s favorite epitaphs — racist, sexist, etc., and, above all, stupid; they have had careers and reputations compromised by speaking the wrong word in front of the wrong person; endured dictates from the highest courts in the land that no means yes (King), that public means private (Kelo), that everyone is entitled to make up one’s meaning of life (Casey), but that whoever thinks marriage is exclusively between men and women is a bigot (Obergefell).” He’s citing Supreme Court decisions here that violate all tenets of common sense.
Now, here’s Charles Murray, and his piece, “Trump’s America: Why the White Working Class is Justifiably Angry.” Now, this a much longer piece, but I will excerpt enough of it to give you the flavor. It’s in the Wall Street Journal on February 12th. That means it’s behind a pay wall. We’ll still link to it at RushLimbaugh.com. Maybe it’s gone free side by now. We’ll find out. “If you are dismayed by Trumpism, don’t kid yourself that it will fade away if Donald Trump fails to win the Republican nomination.
“Trumpism is an expression of the legitimate anger that many Americans feel about the course that the country has taken, and its appearance was predictable. It is the endgame of a process that has been going on for [50 years]: America’s divestment of its historic national identity. For the eminent political scientist Samuel Huntington, writing in his last book, ‘Who Are We?’ (2004), two components of that national identity stand out. One is our Anglo-Protestant heritage, which has inevitably faded in an America that is now home to many cultural and religious traditions. The other is the very idea of America, something unique to us.”
Unique to us.
“As the historian Richard Hofstadter once said, ‘It has been our fate as a nation not to have ideologies but to be one.'” Americanism is an ideology. “What does this ideology — Huntington called it the ‘American creed’ — consist of? Its three core values may be summarized as egalitarianism, liberty and individualism. From these flow other familiar aspects of the national creed that observers have long identified: equality before the law, equality of opportunity, freedom of speech and association, self-reliance, limited government, free-market economics, decentralized and devolved political authority.
“As recently as 1960, the creed was our national consensus. Running that year for the Democratic nomination, candidates like John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson and Hubert Humphrey genuinely embraced the creed, differing from Republicans only in how its elements should be realized. Today, the creed has lost its authority and its substance. What happened? Many of the dynamics of the reversal can be found in developments across the whole of American society: in the emergence of a new upper class and a new lower class, and in the plight of the working class caught in between. …
“The new upper class consists of the people who shape the country’s economy, politics and culture. The new lower class consists of people who have dropped out of some of the most basic institutions of American civic culture, especially work and marriage. Both of these new classes have repudiated the American creed in practice, whatever lip service they may still pay to it. Trumpism is the voice of a beleaguered working class telling us that it too is falling away.” In the old days, “[s]uccessful Americans stubbornly refused to accept the mantle…”
RUSH: One more excerpt from Murray here explaining the differences in the upper class today versus long ago and not that far ago in America, particularly “white working class” versus current upper class. He says: “Another characteristic of the new upper class — and something new under the American sun — is their easy acceptance of being members of an upper class and their condescension toward ordinary Americans.” It used to not being the case, not nearly as the badly as it is today.
Murray: Anger is justified;
RUSH: Now, the Charles Murray piece delves into much deeper detail, such as this: “Work and marriage have been central to American civic culture since the founding. In the 1960s, almost all of the adult men were working or looking for work, and almost all were married.”
But then things started to change. For white working class men in their thirties and forties, the prime decades for working and raising a family, participation in the labor force dropped from 96% to 76% in 2015. Over that same period of time, the portion of these men who were married dropped from 86% to 52%. It may not sound big but they’re stunning changes, manifesting themselves throughout communities and neighborhoods. Half the children were born to unmarried women. All the problems that go with growing up without fathers, especially for boys. Drugs have become a major problem in small towns.
Destruction of Families
Anyway, he goes on to detail how all of these demographic and cultural shifts have led to the destruction of the families of the working middle class that is the backbone of the country, and he affixes claim to this, to the social architects and engineers in Washington, primarily liberal Democrats who brought about this destruction and then taken sides with the feminists and the other minorities in these arrangements. They’ve taken the side of everybody but the white male, essentially. So the anger out there in his estimation is justified, and it’s deeper than Trump, and it’ll survive Trump. It’s gonna exist long after this election is over.
Anyway, it’s a fascinating read, and it’s gotta be included in part of the mix to anybody trying to explain what seems to be the inexplicable here. Although it isn’t to me.