Why Intelligence is So Important To Liberals This Year
July 29, 2008 3 Comments
My attention was drawn to a recent “Carnival of Elitist Bastards” primarily because two of my favorite blogs, Submitted to a Candid World and It’s the Thought That Counts both participated. The theory behind this particular Carnival is that elitism should be celebrated in this country and not frowned upon. On that point I strongly agree. To its credit the carnival has produced some fantastic stuff in its short history (I discovered our good friend, the lovely NP at The Coffee-Stained Writer through one of her submissions.)
This morning I read a piece by Richard Cohen of the Washington Post that made me think a bit more about the motivation behind the Carnival. Cohen asks the question, “Just tell me one thing Barack Obama has done that you admire.” It appears his Democrat friend found it difficult to cite a specific achievment beyond colorful rhetoric. What he is getting at, of course, is the striking difference between McCain’s long history of accomplishments (good or bad) and Obama’s long history of speeches.
I think even his most vocal supporters know that voting for Obama is more about hope than past deeds. There’s nothing wrong with that but it does require a certain amount of self-imposed willingness to ignore the issues in favor of grand vision. It also requires that one replace experience with some other measurable factor. In Obama’s case liberals have chosen to substitute intelligence or elitism. This is a good choice owing to Obama’s stellar academic career and its stark contrast to McCain’s lackluster performance at the Naval Academy. While it is hard to argue that superior intellect always means good judgement on policy (see Jimmy Carter) there is no doubt that it has certainly made Obama a more eloquent speaker. This adds to his overall appeal for optimistic liberals willing to ignore specifics.
What concerns me the though is that the Democrat Party, which has most often portrayed itself as a populist and anti-elitist ‘everyman’ organization, is now promoting a decidedly anti-populist message. This seems similar to their out-of-character embrace of military experience when John Kerry ran against a war president in 2004. It would just be nice if for once we could get a sense of what Democrats really believe in.
I have no doubt that most or all of the writers in the latest Carnival of Elitist Bastards truly believe in promoting intelligence. That much is clear by the non-political tone most of their pieces take. Still, I can’t help but wonder if the Carnival itself is less about promoting true intelligence and more about saying it’s okay for Obama to run on his potential rather than his deeds?
You nailed it. The carnival is an extremely creative political tactic, but it is a political tactic nonetheless.
I think you have it backwards. Democrats do care a lot about intelligence this year, but I don’t think they’re doing that in order to elect Obama. I think Obama and Clinton were the two front-runners for the Democratic nomination because they are both so intelligent. It’s a reaction to what’s seen as one of the worst aspects of Bush. Democrats are looking to run the anti-Bush candidate, and one clear way to be opposite Bush is to be an intellectual.
Also, I gotta say… it’s starting to push a little into the conspiracy theory realm to argue that because a group is promoting a particular trait, and a political candidate happens to share that trait, the purpose of the group must be to help get that candidate elected. By that logic, Mormon missionaries were trying to convert people in order to help Romney’s political career. Yes, those who care about intelligence tend to like intelligent politicians, but the caring about intelligence came first, and then the politicians. Intelligence is something worth promoting for its own sake.
Elitism became a buzz word this year because the term was applied primarily to Obama (and to a lesser extent Hillary).
The ‘defense’ of science undertaken primarily by atheists in the last few years has been a liberal movement reacting to the fundamentalism of Bush. As you yourself say, Democrats think they are putting up geniuses with their contendors, so there is a certain amount of partisan pride in elitism there as well.
You can argue that the motivations of the group are purely non-partisan in nature, but there aren’t too many readers who are going to swallow that. While the Carnival has proved itself to be a strong collection of good writing, I think it’s a little disingenious to contend there isn’t an undercurrent throughout.