While we already have enough post-mortems of the Democratic Party’s decimation to fill a ten gallon hat, a couple tidbits that I came across this morning suggested that there’s always room for more. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest held a press briefing this past Monday, wherein he discussed a visit to the Pearl Harbor memorial by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Mr. Earnest, noting that Abe was not expected to issue an apology for the December 7, 1941 attack that started the War in the Pacific, replied to queries about how veterans of that conflict might feel:
yes, there may be some who feel personally embittered. But I’m confident that many will set aside their own personal bitterness, not because they’re personally satisfied by the words of the Prime Minister, but because they recognize how important this moment is for the United States.
Back in the 1980s, I worked with an older engineer who was a WWII Pacific Theater veteran. He had a deep hatred for the Japanese, and, frankly, as someone who didn’t walk in his shoes, I had no business questioning it or doubting his right to his feelings and beliefs. While Earnest’s words are carefully chosen, they have a stink of condescension about them. Rather than merely recognizing that vets may find Abe’s lack of an apology unacceptable, he offered some “high road” gobbledygook that says “you should get over this for the greater good.”
Why? Anyone who’s alive today who fought in the Pacific Theater is in his 90s or older. If they’re “embittered,” does Mr. Earnest really think that they need to suck it up at this stage in their lives? Why can’t he simply acknowledge their service and respect them in their twilight years? Why must some old dude, enjoying the last few years of life, have to hear from the White House that he needs to “set aside their own personal interests” for the greater good?
Coincidentally, my social media feed brought to me a two-year-old jaw-dropper from some arrogant liberal: an oh-so-insightful determination that President Obama is simply too intelligent for Republicans to understand. The fates, the stars, Lady Luck, or what have you dared me to talk about how the Left loves to “talk down” to the rest of us, presumably because we’re not smart enough to figure our own lives out for ourselves.
Lest you think I doth protest too much, consider the entirety of modern liberalism’s attitude towards others. Your job, your home, your food, your clothes, your health insurance and anything else you might buy or sell is subject to government rules and restrictions. Worse, the list of rules and restrictions never seems enough, as the perpetually expanding regulatory state and federal register attest. There are countless rules and restrictions that don’t benefit us, that work against our liberty, that harm our ability to earn a living or do as we please (so long as we don’t harm others), but it is a rare day when a liberal suggests, gasp, repealing some of them. Obama shocked me in a happy way when he recently spoke of rolling back occupational licensing, but he’s leaving office, and the Great Orange Id is taking over, so I’m not expecting much to come of that. Liberalism’s modus operandi is more government, all the time, and I doubt many of them will latch onto this particular point and demand that Trump follow through.
Why so controlling? Why so nannying? Why so micromanaging of our lives? The only logical conclusion is that people aren’t to be trusted to manage their own lives. Sure, some will argue that individuals have so much less power than big companies that government is necessary to balance that power out, but a – unions served that role well before government got involved, and b – so much of what government does doesn’t fit that argument. The conclusion is supported by the actions of people like Michael Bloomberg, who, despite his “Republican” badge when he was mayor of NY City, is a liberal hero when it comes to nannying and controlling others’ lives. He’s most famous for his failed push to tax sodas, because people are too fat and they don’t know that sodas are making them fat. But as NY City’s mayor, he also pursued a massive crusade against smoking, another against cars in Manhattan, one against night life (or more specifically, nighttime noise), and a sea-change in the way the Health Department managed restaurants. There are countless other Bloombergs out there, both rich and poor, who believe that their greater intelligence (whether true or not) is a mandate to tell others how to live.
This “talking down” mindset extends beyond the halls of government. The “Angry Left” didn’t become a common phrase in a vacuum. The blogosphere is full of people of a statist mindset who will very quickly turn hostile and abusive towards anyone who disagrees with them. I’ve been cursed at more times than I can count by people who know that their will should be imposed on the rest of us for the common good. A writer at Vox, a site known for catering to young liberals, called this the “smug style.” Naturally, some on the Left don’t like the idea that others might legitimately see them as condescending. One writer at New Republic asserts that, since his personal experience isn’t a cushiony liberal bubble, the “smug style” assertion is debunked. Try using that sort of “personal experience” rebuttal against the next person to accuse you of white privilege. Try telling a slavery-reparations advocate that your ancestral lineage had nothing to do with slavery and see if that changes his mind. As if they weren’t enough, we are beset every day by Social Justice Warriors telling us how to speak, how to think, what words to use and what words never to utter again.
Truth be told, most people of a wonkish nature already have a sense of this. Yes, that includes those who do the “talking down” as well. Y’all may pretend you don’t, but really – do you treat non-liberals and the unwashed masses as equals when you argue with them, or do you “know” that your ideas are better for them than theirs are? So, why write what we already know? As I noted, the fates seemed to demand it this morning. When I was halfway done and had doubts about bothering to complete this article, the linked “smug style” and “bubble” articles came, unbidden, to my attention. Sometimes, you need to let the universe take you where it wants to.
As much as anything else, I’d say, this arrogant condescension, this “talking down” to the peons of Middle America, prompted the backlash that has run the Dems out of 1000+ legislative office and out of the White House.
Loading ...
Active Comment Threads
Most Commented Posts
Universal Background Checks – A Back Door to Universal Registration
COVID Mask Follies
When Everything Is Illegal…
An Anti-Vax Inflection Point?
“Not In My Name”
The Great Social Media Crackup
War Comes Through The Overton Window
The First Rule of Italian Driving
Most Active Commenters