I'm reading a biography of the second Lord Melbourne, who was Queen Victoria's Prime Minister and her "Lord M" in the early years of her reign. One can argue that it was his care and feeding of the 18-year-old monarch that kept Britain from revolution in the mid 19th century.
In The Young Melbourne & Lord M David Cecil also attempts to tell the story of the rise of the middle class and the working class to political recognition in the first half of the 19th century.
The point is that in 1800 Britain was entirely run by its landed aristocracy, either directly in the House of Lords and the main offices of national government, or through their elder sons sitting in the House of Commons. By 1850, after the Great Reform Bill of 1832 and the Chartist movement of the 1840s there was no doubt that Britain would be ruled with the contribution of the middle and the working classes -- even though the working class didn't yet have the vote.
But I would say, reading David Cecil, that while the ruling class in Britain pretty early on realized that things were changing and would never be the same again, they were always divided on what to do about it, in every way possible. We often hear about the "Tory ultras" that were opposed to all change. But the Whigs, who get the credit for pushing Reform in the critical years leading up to 1832, had their own ultras.
Not only that, but the middle class also had a voice, even before the electoral reform. In the late 1820s and early 1830s there was a lot of unrest in the countryside, with mobs and rick-burnings, so the middle class became very pro-law-and-order. So even though the middle class didn't have the vote, the middle class support for law and order influenced the government when it was wondering what to do about the unrest.
Naturally, I am trying to use the past as a lens into our current political divisions. You see, my main feeling is that our liberal friends just do not have the slightest inkling that the world has changed, that their governing philosophy is in deep trouble, and things will never be the same again.
Maybe the difference is that the "change," whatever it is, is just in its early stages, and the folks on the commanding heights of liberal opinion have not really grasped the situation. Maybe it is because in 1800 the ruling class was really a very small world where everybody knew everybody and intelligence about what was going on was widely shared. Today, in a more ideological age, our ruling class is kept informed by ideological media. Most members of the ruling class are not in high politics -- or in contact with someone who is -- but in patronage jobs in education and NGOs and culture where ideological rectitude is a condition of employment and intelligence about what the leaders are really thinking is not available.
The big thing, I think, is that the modern economy and culture is very good for the ruling class, those that I call the People of the Creative Self. But living in what we call the "liberal bubble" these folks really do not have a clue about how life feels in the rest of the country.
For instance, I would say that, outside the highly educated, average Americans are utterly confused by the "gay turn" and the rise of "non gender binary" culture. This culture, in my judgement, is only possible for People of the Creative Self getting creative about sex. Average people can't get beyond the accepted cultural practices of courting, marriage, and household formation, and the consequences thereof. I don't think that my liberal friends have a clue about how confusing and frightening their imposition of LGBT culture appears to ordinary Americans.
It was telling to me that when the Tea Party emerged in 2009-10 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi muttered about AstroTurf. She assumed that any protesters and protest groups were organized and funded from above. Because that's the way it's handled in the liberal world. All the left-inspired protests you see do not represent the authentic voice of the people, but political action ginned by the the ruling class made to look as though it were authentic. The assumption here is that "we liberals" have everything under control and nothing moves without we give the OK. In fact, of course, the Republican establishment was taken completely by surprise by the Tea Party, and "change" is not a game played by lefty activists but real response by real people to real economic and social change impacting their lives.
The first thing America needs, according to me, is for the liberal ruling class, the People of the Creative Self, the Prius drivers, the gentrifiers, the MSNBC watchers to get to the realization that they and their political culture and their governance agenda have a problem, that the current liberal world-view is the only thing that counts, and anything else is racism, sexism, or homophobia.
They haven't got there yet and that is a problem.
Put it this way. Here in the United States we had a civil war in the 1860s because the two sides were determined to teach the other guys a lesson. But in Britain the rise of the middle class and the working class was managed without a civil war.
What does it take to get "change" without a civil war? And what will it take this time?
In The Young Melbourne & Lord M David Cecil also attempts to tell the story of the rise of the middle class and the working class to political recognition in the first half of the 19th century.
The point is that in 1800 Britain was entirely run by its landed aristocracy, either directly in the House of Lords and the main offices of national government, or through their elder sons sitting in the House of Commons. By 1850, after the Great Reform Bill of 1832 and the Chartist movement of the 1840s there was no doubt that Britain would be ruled with the contribution of the middle and the working classes -- even though the working class didn't yet have the vote.
But I would say, reading David Cecil, that while the ruling class in Britain pretty early on realized that things were changing and would never be the same again, they were always divided on what to do about it, in every way possible. We often hear about the "Tory ultras" that were opposed to all change. But the Whigs, who get the credit for pushing Reform in the critical years leading up to 1832, had their own ultras.
Not only that, but the middle class also had a voice, even before the electoral reform. In the late 1820s and early 1830s there was a lot of unrest in the countryside, with mobs and rick-burnings, so the middle class became very pro-law-and-order. So even though the middle class didn't have the vote, the middle class support for law and order influenced the government when it was wondering what to do about the unrest.
Naturally, I am trying to use the past as a lens into our current political divisions. You see, my main feeling is that our liberal friends just do not have the slightest inkling that the world has changed, that their governing philosophy is in deep trouble, and things will never be the same again.
Maybe the difference is that the "change," whatever it is, is just in its early stages, and the folks on the commanding heights of liberal opinion have not really grasped the situation. Maybe it is because in 1800 the ruling class was really a very small world where everybody knew everybody and intelligence about what was going on was widely shared. Today, in a more ideological age, our ruling class is kept informed by ideological media. Most members of the ruling class are not in high politics -- or in contact with someone who is -- but in patronage jobs in education and NGOs and culture where ideological rectitude is a condition of employment and intelligence about what the leaders are really thinking is not available.
The big thing, I think, is that the modern economy and culture is very good for the ruling class, those that I call the People of the Creative Self. But living in what we call the "liberal bubble" these folks really do not have a clue about how life feels in the rest of the country.
For instance, I would say that, outside the highly educated, average Americans are utterly confused by the "gay turn" and the rise of "non gender binary" culture. This culture, in my judgement, is only possible for People of the Creative Self getting creative about sex. Average people can't get beyond the accepted cultural practices of courting, marriage, and household formation, and the consequences thereof. I don't think that my liberal friends have a clue about how confusing and frightening their imposition of LGBT culture appears to ordinary Americans.
It was telling to me that when the Tea Party emerged in 2009-10 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi muttered about AstroTurf. She assumed that any protesters and protest groups were organized and funded from above. Because that's the way it's handled in the liberal world. All the left-inspired protests you see do not represent the authentic voice of the people, but political action ginned by the the ruling class made to look as though it were authentic. The assumption here is that "we liberals" have everything under control and nothing moves without we give the OK. In fact, of course, the Republican establishment was taken completely by surprise by the Tea Party, and "change" is not a game played by lefty activists but real response by real people to real economic and social change impacting their lives.
The first thing America needs, according to me, is for the liberal ruling class, the People of the Creative Self, the Prius drivers, the gentrifiers, the MSNBC watchers to get to the realization that they and their political culture and their governance agenda have a problem, that the current liberal world-view is the only thing that counts, and anything else is racism, sexism, or homophobia.
They haven't got there yet and that is a problem.
Put it this way. Here in the United States we had a civil war in the 1860s because the two sides were determined to teach the other guys a lesson. But in Britain the rise of the middle class and the working class was managed without a civil war.
What does it take to get "change" without a civil war? And what will it take this time?
No comments:
Post a Comment