Ghost of a flea: Post-democracy

? But I was not bendy so I said nothing | Main | Twitter Tube Tracker ?

December 15, 2008

Post-democracy

Speaking truth to power, dissent as the highest form of patriotism, yadda yadda yadda. An incident involving Czech President Vaclav Klaus and 68er Daniel Cohn-Bendit illustrates the difference between an authentic dissident and a poseur.*

President Klaus, an economist and former dissident against Stalinism, has authored Blue Planet in Green Shackles, a book expressing scepticism regarding supposed global climate change. Klaus has also criticized the European Union, comparing it to the Soviet Union and claiming it is a threat to democracy, freedom and prosperity. Green European Parliament leader, Cohn-Bendit - who allowed children to open his fly and tickle his private parts in his days as a kindergarten operator (YJCMTSU) - and other equally notable figures, chose a meeting at Hradcany Castle as their moment to object.

You can read about Cohn-Bendit's grandstanding for yourself. For me, the moment of maximum leftist contempt for democracy lies in a further exchange with Irish MEP, Brian Crowley, Crowley exclaiming.

... "all his life my father fought against the British domination [of Ireland]… That is why I dare to say that the Irish wish for the Lisbon Treaty. It was an insult, Mr President, to me and the Irish people what you said during your state visit to Ireland." Klaus repeated that he had not experienced anything like this for 19 years and that it seemed we were no longer living in a democracy, but that it was "post-democracy which rules the EU".

On the EU constitution, Klaus recalled that three countries had voted against it, and that if Mr Crowley wanted to talk about insults to the Irish people, "the biggest insult to the Irish people is not to accept the result of the Irish referendum". This provoked Crowley to retort angrily, "You will not tell me what the Irish think. As an Irishman, I know it best."

This is typical of what now passes itself off as the left: Truth drawn from collective racial identity no matter what the democratically expressed will of the electorate might happen to be. We used to call it Nazism.

Also typical, catastrophic sums they could never have earned for themselves squandered on fictional problems, an overweening sense of entitlement, and the gruesome spectacle of a moral dwarves lecturing a decent man.

* True fact: The word poseur is French.

Related: Klaus on Hayek... The Intellectuals and Socialism as seen from a post-communist country situated in a predominantly post-democratic Europe.

Hayek was – more than half a century ago, which means before the current prevalence of electronic media – aware of the enormous power of intellectuals to shape public opinion and warned us that “it is merely a question of time until the views held by the intellectuals become the governing force of politics”. This is as valid today as it was when he wrote it.

The question is what kind of ideas is favoured by the intellectuals. The question is whether the intellectuals are neutral in their choice of ideas with which they are ready to deal with. Hayek argued that they are not. They do not hold or try to spread all kinds of ideas. They have very clear and, in some respect, very understandable preferences for some of them. They prefer ideas, which give them jobs and income and which enhance their power and prestige.

They, therefore, look for ideas with specific characteristics. They look for ideas, which enhance the role of the state because the state is usually their main employer, sponsor or donator. That is not all. According to Hayek “the power of ideas grows in proportion to their generality, abstractness, and even vagueness”. Hence it is not surprising that the intellectuals are mostly interested in abstract, not directly implementable ideas. This is also the way of thinking, in which they have comparative advantage. They are not good at details. They do not have ambitions to solve a problem. They are not interested in dealing with the everyday affairs of common citizens. Hayek put it clearly: “the intellectual, by his whole disposition, is uninterested in technical details or practical difficulties.” He is interested in visions and utopias because “socialist thought owes its appeal largely to its visionary character” (and I would add lack of realism and utopian nature), the intellectual tends to become a socialist.

Posted by Ghost of a flea at December 15, 2008 08:14 AM

Comments

This is a fine summary of Hayek's "The Fatal Conceit".

Posted by: The_Campblog at December 15, 2008 04:48 PM