One of the problems our ruling class has is that its concerns are not the concerns of ordinary Americans.
As a congressional candidate that I recall in the dim mists of memory said. It is all about jobs, jobs, jobs. That is the primary concern of ordinary people.
But the sons and daughters of the ruling class already have jobs. So they must find something else to do in order to find meaning in life.
It is, of course, a problem we would all like to have.
One thing that you can do if you are a wealthy Peter Buttigeig or a Beto O'Rourke is go into politics.
I'd say that it is a sensible and practical thing to do. I suspect that using family money to jump-start a political career is probably a good way to go, especially if you are a likable guy or gal.
(Hillary Clinton need not apply).
But, I would like to say, this is a pretty low-rent way to live.
Or put it another way.
If you are a creative person, as all educated people imagine themselves, what is the best way to be creative and benefit mankind? Artist? Writer? Business startup? Activist? Politician?
I suspect that if you ask a young head full of mush about this they would respond by putting activist first, followed by artist and writer, then politician, then business startup.
I think that I would probably order the list the other way around. If you want to benefit mankind, the most concrete way to do it is the business startup, to bring to market something that nobody ever thought of. But it is the hardest. Then I'd say artist and writer which is relatively harmless, but also much less likely to make a difference. Then politician, which is a way to muddle through with clumsy programs of compulsion because you are too dumb to figure out cultural changes that could do the same thing without force.
At the bottom I'd put the activist, which is 97.2 percent conceit and very little chance to "change lives." Why? Émile Zola made the point way back in 1885 with his novel Germinal. It's about the union activist, Étienne, that comes into a mining district, riles up the miners into striking and sabotaging the mines, bonks all the girls, and then heads out of town to his next activism gig.
Yep. That'll do the trick, Étienne, old chum.
So, I'd say that politics and activism are cheap ways for well-born youngsters to get their names up in lights. But politics and activism don't actually do anything to make human lives better.
Politics in its defensive aspect is protecting people from existential harm; in its offensive aspect it is loot and plunder. In practice politics and government is loot and plunder disguised as protecting us from existential peril. And the politicians are forever conjuring up existential perils, real and imagined, from which we need protection.
And then activism. I think the word on that was given by Barack Obama, who started an activism career organizing the laid-off steelworkers in South Chicago. He quit after a year, and went to law school. Why? Because there was nothing that could be done for the steelworkers. The jobs had gone, and were never coming back, at least not as basic steel union jobs. So all Barack the activist achieved was raising false hopes.
And this is a basic problem with activists and politicians in general. The facts of life are that nothing is forever. When the gig is up, you up-sticks and move on. Politicians and activists propagate the lie that, no, it's not necessary to move on. Instead it's the cruel corporations, the greedy bankers, the system. And we will fight the system and bring back your jobs.
No. Usually the jobs never come back. Not because of the perfidy of the capitalists, but because technology changed and it would cost too much to update the factory to utilize the new technology. Plus the workers were already getting paid well over the market rate, so, from the point of view of the capitalists, it is better to get out of town and start anew with workers that are not yet organized by activists and politicians to demand above market rates for their labor.
Remember this: the real per-capita income of Americans has gone up by 30 times in the last 200 years. There has never been anything like this Great Enrichment in human history, says economist Deirdre McCloskey. And what did it? Innovation. Guys with an idea that put it into a business and made peoples' lives better.
What politicians did do about that? They failed to stop the innovations, probably from ignorance and stupidity. Bully for them. What activists did is they failed to peacefully protest against the innovations until it was too late. Thank goodness for that.
And artists and writers? Maybe they occupy the sweet spot, between the grueling struggle of the business startup and the negative spiral of the politician and activist. And they create the narrative by which we attempt to understand the past and wonder about the future.
But it's a problem. What can elite scions do to make their lives meaningful?
As a congressional candidate that I recall in the dim mists of memory said. It is all about jobs, jobs, jobs. That is the primary concern of ordinary people.
But the sons and daughters of the ruling class already have jobs. So they must find something else to do in order to find meaning in life.
It is, of course, a problem we would all like to have.
One thing that you can do if you are a wealthy Peter Buttigeig or a Beto O'Rourke is go into politics.
I'd say that it is a sensible and practical thing to do. I suspect that using family money to jump-start a political career is probably a good way to go, especially if you are a likable guy or gal.
(Hillary Clinton need not apply).
But, I would like to say, this is a pretty low-rent way to live.
Or put it another way.
If you are a creative person, as all educated people imagine themselves, what is the best way to be creative and benefit mankind? Artist? Writer? Business startup? Activist? Politician?
I suspect that if you ask a young head full of mush about this they would respond by putting activist first, followed by artist and writer, then politician, then business startup.
I think that I would probably order the list the other way around. If you want to benefit mankind, the most concrete way to do it is the business startup, to bring to market something that nobody ever thought of. But it is the hardest. Then I'd say artist and writer which is relatively harmless, but also much less likely to make a difference. Then politician, which is a way to muddle through with clumsy programs of compulsion because you are too dumb to figure out cultural changes that could do the same thing without force.
At the bottom I'd put the activist, which is 97.2 percent conceit and very little chance to "change lives." Why? Émile Zola made the point way back in 1885 with his novel Germinal. It's about the union activist, Étienne, that comes into a mining district, riles up the miners into striking and sabotaging the mines, bonks all the girls, and then heads out of town to his next activism gig.
Yep. That'll do the trick, Étienne, old chum.
So, I'd say that politics and activism are cheap ways for well-born youngsters to get their names up in lights. But politics and activism don't actually do anything to make human lives better.
Politics in its defensive aspect is protecting people from existential harm; in its offensive aspect it is loot and plunder. In practice politics and government is loot and plunder disguised as protecting us from existential peril. And the politicians are forever conjuring up existential perils, real and imagined, from which we need protection.
And then activism. I think the word on that was given by Barack Obama, who started an activism career organizing the laid-off steelworkers in South Chicago. He quit after a year, and went to law school. Why? Because there was nothing that could be done for the steelworkers. The jobs had gone, and were never coming back, at least not as basic steel union jobs. So all Barack the activist achieved was raising false hopes.
And this is a basic problem with activists and politicians in general. The facts of life are that nothing is forever. When the gig is up, you up-sticks and move on. Politicians and activists propagate the lie that, no, it's not necessary to move on. Instead it's the cruel corporations, the greedy bankers, the system. And we will fight the system and bring back your jobs.
No. Usually the jobs never come back. Not because of the perfidy of the capitalists, but because technology changed and it would cost too much to update the factory to utilize the new technology. Plus the workers were already getting paid well over the market rate, so, from the point of view of the capitalists, it is better to get out of town and start anew with workers that are not yet organized by activists and politicians to demand above market rates for their labor.
Remember this: the real per-capita income of Americans has gone up by 30 times in the last 200 years. There has never been anything like this Great Enrichment in human history, says economist Deirdre McCloskey. And what did it? Innovation. Guys with an idea that put it into a business and made peoples' lives better.
What politicians did do about that? They failed to stop the innovations, probably from ignorance and stupidity. Bully for them. What activists did is they failed to peacefully protest against the innovations until it was too late. Thank goodness for that.
And artists and writers? Maybe they occupy the sweet spot, between the grueling struggle of the business startup and the negative spiral of the politician and activist. And they create the narrative by which we attempt to understand the past and wonder about the future.
But it's a problem. What can elite scions do to make their lives meaningful?
No comments:
Post a Comment