Not appropriate for a kindergartener or a middle school class. You can watch this entire interview at booktv. Org. On facebook we posted a link about the first degree in selfpublishing to be offered at the university of central lancashire and to recognize the tenth anniversary of facebook, we posted the 2010 presentation of the facebook effect. On facebook you have to really be yourself in order to get the benefits that the software is designed to give you. In other words, you can pretend to be someone youre not, but you wont really have a lot of friends, because the whole point of facebook is to connect with people you really know, and theyre not going to know its you if you dont use your real name. Follow us on twitter booktv and like us on facebook, facebook. Com booktv for more news about the world of publishing and whats happening on booktv. Fred siegel argues that the roots of modern liberalism can be found in the writings of postworld war i figures like Sinclair Lewis, Randolph Bourne and h. L. Mencken. He says they despised both the Business Class and main street American Values and culture. This is about an hour. [applause] thank you. The you dont mind if you dont mind, im going to sit rather than go to the podium. Ive had a few health problems, and id just as soon not test myself. Thank you for coming tonight. In thinking about the problem of liberalism, i have to start off with the simple problem. Most people, including most people who think theyve studied the subject, have a very weak idea of the history of liberalism whether it be on the left or the right. Theres an idea that you started with progressivism, you moved on to writing about no, im teasing. [laughter] you started with progressivism, you proceeded to the new deal, and then you went on to the the great society, and theres a continuous flow. The trouble is, its simply not true. Most progress is did not become progressives did not become new dealers. Very few republican progresses you have to remember progressivism was a bipartisan movement. Very few republican progressives became new dealers. And not surprisingly enough among the democratic progressives, the group most likely to become new dealers were social workers, people who were early social workers. And they saw what they wanted, what they hoped for in the new deal. Part of the reason for this is theres a notion around world war i that has to do with the personality, the personality of Woodrow Wilson. A great deal has been written about the personality of Woodrow Wilson, but in my opinion, not enough. [laughter] he had an extraordinary effect. But before i get back to Woodrow Wilson, just let me lay out the general, the broad argument, and then ill come back to wilson. When we think of liberalism today, the top and bottom coalition we associate with barack obama, this began not with the new deal, but rather in the wake of the postworld war i disillusionment with American Society. Most american ors were happy to get back to the hearty years, the subject of a new book. But that was not true of intellectuals. And it was not true of writers of fiction. Those people who disillusioned, let me tell you who the people are im referring to, youll know some of them well, h. G. Wells, h. L. Mencken, most people in the room dont know who Randolph Bourne is. I hope after reading the book youll have a better idea because he has an enormous impact on the 1960s. Many of the ideas of the 1960s are bournes ideas. H. D. Wells you all h. G. Wells you all know, but you think of him as the writer of great science fictions. Wells was an enormous political influence on both sides of the atlantic. He met, he met with president Teddy Roosevelt. They talked about his fictions. He met with president taft, he met with period of president r repeatedly. He was a force to be reckoned with. Sinclair lewis, if youre over 50, you know who he is from the novels main street and it cant happen here, which are still part of the Political Landscape of america. And mencken. Many of you know in fact, all of you know who mencken is. But you probably dont know that mencken was the most influential liberal of the 1920s. You dont know this because in the 30s he was enormously hostile to fdr, and he was cast into per mity. But in the 1920s no one, and i say no one was more influential among liberal thinkers and young, advanced thinkers on campus, you know, todays equivalent of richard floridas creative class, god help us [laughter] no one was more influential than mencken. Like communism and fascism, modern liberalism was a Vanguard Movement born of a new class of politically selfconscious intellectuals. Let me repeat that, because it may sound odd. Like communism, fascism, modern liberalism was a Vanguard Movement born of a new class of politically selfconscious intellectuals. I am not suggesting liberals are fascists or communists. None of the above. Im saying there are a great many similarities and that theyre created by a vanguard of intellectuals. Critical of mass democracy and middle class capitalism, liberals despise the individual businessmans pursuit of profit as well as the conventional individuals selfinterest and pursuit of success. Both of which thrive in the 19th century in america. Snobbery is not new to liberalism, but the actual history of liberalism will be new to most readers. Liberalism, like its rivals including communism and fascism, emerge as part of the 20th century response to the newlyemergent worlds mass production, mass politics and mass culture. Like fascism and communism and i should adhere fabianism liberalism was strongly, strongly influenced by the writings of nietzsche. The first book in america written about nietzsche was written by h. L. Mencken. The first book on George Bernard shaw in america was written by the same man, mencken. Mencken made shaw famous in america before shaw was famous in england. I wont go into shaw today, just suffice to say he plays an Important Role in the book. What people found appealing in nietzsche was the sense of his call for a new aristocracy. The old aristocracy has obviously crumbled under the impact of modernization. He wanted a new aristocracy. And h. G. Wells writings, if you remember as a kid, are full of this. Remember . Hes calling for the new samurai. Hes calling for this new elite to run the world. He never really stops. And hes picked up a few when youre reading al gore, i hesitate to mention his name here, when youre reading al gore on Climate Change, youre reading h. G. Wells. Gores solutions to Climate Change are wells solutions, creating global governing body. The set of liberal and emotional attachments, the political libido let me emphasize that phrase coalesced in the wake of world war i in the angry repudiation of of progressivism and modern and Woodrow Wilson. The very term liberal in its modern usage was coined by writers and intellectuals who define themselves by their hostility to the middle class and moralistic progressives. And who hated prohibition. I suspect many of you are aware of this, but prohibition was not the product of rightwing cranks, it was the product of progress iism. It was a way progressivism. It was a way of preserving peoples paychecks. And progressivism was a movement of social uplift. It wasnt just about dollars and cents and reducing bossism, it was about uplifting america. The new deal breaks with all of that. The new deal begins one of roosevelts first acts is to repeal prohibition which briefly sets roosevelt and mencken off on the right foot. [laughter] mencken was a great, a great drinker of german beer. The best short summary of what liberalism is came from the oncecanonical literary historian vernon pennington. Just for my knowledge, how many people today know who vernon pairington is. One, two, three, four very few. He was once, he was once a very widelyknown figure, and i suspect those of you raising your hand are historians. Anyone whos not a hitstorian . Raise your hand, im just curious. Michael, youre an historian. You cannot escape that. Pairington said the following in the late 20s rid society of the dictatorship of the middle class and, yes, he used that term and the artists and scientists will erect in america a civilization that may become what civilization was in earlier days, a thing to be respected. This alienation from american life, the sense that america was the worst of all places, was essential to liberalism in its inception. Now in the 1950s in a brief moment when liberals reconciled with america, lionel trilling, the literary critic, noted that, quote for the first time in the history of modern American Intellectual life, america is not to be conceived of as a priority, the most vulgar, the stupidest nation in the world. This novelty soon passed. [laughter] just a brief word on crowly to break up the narrative. Crowley was the founder of the new republic. Crowley, sometimes youve heard this phrase, im sure, in college from some dimwitted professor. He wanted to achievement and hamiltonian ends excuse me, he wanted to achieve jeffersonian ends by using hamiltonian means. He was a francophile of the first recorder. His parents finish of the first recorder. His parents were part of the quasicatholic, quasiscientist religion of comte, and he was one of the first to be baptized in the faith. Whatever that was, its not entirely clear. [laughter] his mother grew out of the name of jenny june, was an early feminist. And the father in this unhappy marriage was a futurist. He saw a comtean future. And crowley himself always admitted that he was basically a francophile. He wanted to make america more like france. Depending on whats going on at the elly say these days, you may agree or disagree with that. [laughter] now, as for wells, let me read something from let me throw another name out, im curious, van wick brooks . One perp. We have to get one person. We have to get this person out of here. [laughter] no, two. I dont know who these outliers are. Ill talk to you later. Vanwick brooks was a very important literary critic of the 20s, 30s and 40s who wrote about the idea of highbrow and lowbrow. Those terms come from vanwick brooks. Brooks wrote the first biography in america of h. G. Wells, and heres what he wrote about wellses. This is 1917. Without doubt, wells has altered the air we breathe and made a conscious fact in many minds the excellence that resides in certain kinds of men, an odiousness that resides in others. Wells located in the rockefeller institute, the carnegie and russell sage foundations, the endowed universities and bureaus of research. The future church he hoped that would govern all of america. In other words, what he was hoping for brooks saw in wells was hope for a clerics, a semisecular but in some sense a religious group whose underlying values would define the country. And if im not going to get into it today, but if you think about the members of lbjs cabinet, how many of them are ph. D. S, how many of them come out of the universities, theres a famous moment when John Gardener supposedly jokingly began a Cabinet Meeting when he said, welcome, faculty. [laughter] because thats what it was. Literally, not just metaphorically. Now, the book by wells, let me try those with the same two people again, the book by wells that had the most influence was not the time ma cheep which was what he talked to Teddy Roosevelt about where we were all destined to become either beasts or loci, it was a small book called anticipations. Anyone familiar with that book . Okay. Not even our two savants know [laughter] this was a fascinating book. Let me just read a little bit about it. The book explain d explained well, was designed to destroy monogamy, faith in god and respectability all under the guise of speculation about motor cars and electrical heating. Thats exactly right. [laughter] for many young American Intellectuals, wells writing were a passport out of provincialism. Now, what all these people wanted was a secular priesthood. Including bourne. Secular priesthood that was, and this is bournes words,s net size slovenly america. Bourne and mencken in particular were fhilo philogerman in world war i. Mencken writes a series of articles for the atlantic calling for german victory. And he writes an article, one article which is never actually published, to his everlasting luck, which calls for the german conquest of america. The proofs of it exist somewhere in the mencken connection collection, but when you go to talk to the librarians, they will not bring it forward to you. They do not want it seen, and theyre right. The only way we know about it is in letters that mencken wrote to other people. Ill come back to this in a bit. Let me turn to a fateful year, 919. We fought a war, prohibition has been imposed. During the war theres a good deal of repression. World war i is ugly. In 1917 on the eve of american entry in the war, american leftists and im including people like max eastman and sister crystal who were part of pacifist groups who visited washington were enamored of Woodrow Wilson. And youll see someone, a famous russian bolshevik who was also enamored of Woodrow Wilson. Well get to that. They see Woodrow Wilson as one of them, and he, indeed, sounds like one of them. Hes opposed to the war on many of the same grounds they are. He opportunity want to see european imperialism triumph. Hes studied socialism. Hes not a socialist, but hes studied socialism. And he sees in american progressivism an american form of socialism. But those years between 1918 and 1920 were traumatic. In 1916, excuse me, many leftists had embraced wilson as a farm you are the jibbing alleyeder. By 1919 he was seen as a judas whose rhetoric was despised as mere mum erie. Wilsons 14 points, his message of good good luck to the republf labor unions, the ussr and his warning to the allies that their treatment of bolshevik russia would be the acid test of their goodwill and unselfish sympathy were immensely impressive to us, explained max eastman. Speaking for many leftists and progressives. This was the extraordinary moment, extraordinary moment when russias war commissar, leon trotzky, referring to wilson coined the nowfamous concept of the fellow traveler. Its wilson whos the model for trotzky when he coins the term fellow traveler. Now, as we use the term later, its not true. But for a time this appears to be the case. The metaphor was based on trotzkys belief that the american president and the bolsheviks shared a critique of european imperialism and a hopeful for a capitalist u. S. This could sound like Kenneth Galbraith in the 1980s, but theres no reason to go over old garbage. Liberals were those progressives whod remain excuse me, liberals were those progressives who renamed themselves so as to repudiate wilson. Liberals were those progressives who had renamed themselves so as to repudiate wilson. The word liberalism wrote Walter Litman in 1919, was introduced into the jargon of american politics by a group that was progressive in 1912, and wilson dem can accurates from 1916 to 1918. The new liberalism was the decisive cultural break with wilson and progressivism. While the progressives were inspired by faith and democratic reforms as a safl for the wounds of industrialization and power politics, the newly selfdefined liberals saw the American Democratic ethos as a danger to freedom at home and abroad. Sound far . Sound familiar . For liberals, the great revelation this 1919 that carried into the 20s with them was the middle Class Society at large and not just the bible belters with their ricket i mores were to blame for their subjugation. Even though american writers prosper in the 20s as never before, they feel oppressed as never before. Youve all met people like this. Not here this washington, its too provincial. [laughter] but if you come a few hours north and you attend a dipper party a dinner party, i guarantee you will bump into such people. Their disdain for main street was matched by the urban Popular Culture. They always referred to most americans as the herd, or menckens favorite term, the peasants. They saw the industrialism that raised standards of living as a pernicious degradation imposed by a country organized around the needs of the middle class. This very sense of industrialisms degradation and prosperitys degradation would be picked up after world war ii by the Frankfurt School and become enormously influential in writers like richard stetter and my mentor hot stetter, and my mentor, irving howell. Although irving, im pleased to say, had the good sense to repudiate this. Heres vanwick brooks talking about coney island. The new Popular Culture of broadway shows, baseball, movies and coney island, he said, were all makeshifts of despair, proof that america was a joyless land. This is, i mean, this takes a leap to think that coney island and baseball represents joylessness. I mean, maybe if you spend time with alex rodriguez, but [laughter] that would be a long time in the future. Brooks compared the United States to a, quote, a primeval monster that was relentlessly concentrating the appetite of the moment, that knew nothing of its own vast, nerveless body, encrusted with parasites, half indistinguishen from the slime in which it moves, half indistinguishable from the slime in which it moves. This is not a very positive picture. [laughter] these writers wrote the chronicle of this generation. Were united in one crusading army by the revolt against the american tradition as they understood it. In the exciting years 1919 and 1920, wrote cally, they seized power in the literary world almost like the bolsheviks in russia. They seized power in the literary world almost like the bolsheviks in russia. Thats exactly right. Lets go back, just if we can, to Woodrow Wilson, the seizure of power. Wilson seems to understand that an attempt to impose uniformity in the midst of war, the antigerman hostility mania, you know, banning sauer caught, you know all the specifics of this, that this could be avoided. But then he empowers people like george ceil to impose just that, a frightening uniformity on the country. And if theres anything good about liberalism, and i think there is i dont want to push too hard there would be two things; concern with conformity, although most often liberals are the most conformist people imaginable, but in principle concern with conformity, and as liberals who create the aclu. Has had its good moments even most of which are bad and civil rights. What they see with this wartime repression is something that frightens them. They see an attempt to create a culturallyuniform america, and theyre not imagining things. Many of wilsons supporters, including people in the american protective league, are cracking down on german institutions and cracking down on all sense of dissent. So africanamericans criticizing lynchings were denounced as excuse me, prussian sympathizers. Much as we denounced bolshevik sympathizers 20 years later. Now, i mentioned mencken and his love affair with prussian germany. His love affair with the kaiser. His love affair with nietzsche. He was not a nice man, h. L. Mencken. He was very he and h. L excuse me, h. L George Bernard shaw liked each other. One was a meeting [inaudible] the other was a teetotaling vegetarian. Shaw was a very strange man. But they both understood they were working the same side of the street. They both hated angloamerican culture. And for mencken this led to a prussianism, for shaw it led toward stalin. Heres mencken talking about the after math of the war. I, too, like the leaders of germany, had grave doubts about democracy. It suddenly dawned on me, somewhat to my surprise, that the whole body of my doctrine that i had been preaching was fundamentally antianglosaxon and if i had any spiritual home at all, it must be in the land of my ancestors. When world war i actually started, i began forthwith to whoop for the kaiser. Now unfortunately, he did suffer repression, some of his columns were repressed, and he could present himself as a martyr. But most of whats written about mencken today ignores all this. Let me just jump ahead with one incident with mencken. Does anyone want to talk about the scopes trial later . If so, ill stop and talk about it later. Anyone interested in the scopes trial . [inaudible] im the boss, okay. Ill pick up mencken and the scopes trial now. Most of what you read about the scopes trial isnt true. Scopes wasnt ridden out of town on a rail, he wasnt persecuted. The town put him up for this case with the aclu as a way of promoting the town. It seemed like a good idea. Bring tourists. [laughter] this was classic promotionallism. And bryan, William Jennings bryan, he was not a pompous ass, not a fool. William jennings wyoming yang had debated George Osborne in 1905. Heeld actually read hed actually read darwin. Bryan had his failings, especially when it came to evolution. Bryon was leaving race aside, a decent man. When heckly ford came out henry ford came out with antisemitism, bryan repudiated it. He was a methodist that went to a presbyterian service. He was a general hi open and decent man generally open and decent man, and he was antiwar in world war i unlike mencken. When mencken wrote about bryan, he created a cartoon which has lasted til the present. Let me just jump way ahead now. Is there any historian that you know of that you would think of as the second mencken . Let me throw the question over. Any historian that you would think of as the second mencken . Very famous historian. Think about the kennedy can assassination for a minute. [inaudible] no. No, but not a bad, not a a good, a good guess. Enter. [inaudible] no. No. Another good guess. Richard hostetter. Whos the second mencken . You remember menckens supporters were all antisemitic. No evidence of this at all. Excuse me, bryon supporters. Let me were all no support for this at all. You read bryan in american political tradition, you think youre reading mencken all over again but as an historian. Let me stop there. Ill pick up with hostetter and the kennedy assassination and liberalism a little later. Mencken mocked allied outrage over german killings of belgian civilians as well as the sinking of the lucetania with the death of 124 americans. E wrote to theodore devicer, another piece of work, a fellow germanamerican. Quote there can never be any compromise in the future between the men of german blood and the common run of good, quote, rightthinking hes being star tsaic americans. We must stand against them forever and do what damage we can against them ask their tin pot democracy. If you come across this in your readings on mencken, let me know, because i rarely find it. Or in the 1920s the leading communist cultural figure, mike gold you know, the famous fellow for jews without money had declared mencken the nations greatest political influence. Now, as i said, he faded in the 30s because he attacked fdr head on, and that wasnt going to fly. In the 30s menckens act lites, former acolytes still hated the bowrnlg who si. You couldnt throw a stone in a communist party mass meeting excuse me, you couldnt throw a stone in a communist party maas meeting noted Lincoln Steffens in 1936 without hitting someone who sometime in the past hardly agreed with mr. Menckens bitter assault on everything that was typically bourgeois. So there was a continuity between communism in the 30s. The bourgeois was responsible for all of the societys failings. Let me now turn to the writer more than anyone else who encapsulates liberalism, and thats Sinclair Lewis. I suspect many of you have read main street. If you havent, youve read it cant happen here. Shaped by herbert crowley, lewis was to a great literary critic who was a mentor to Arthur Schlessinger, lewis was Randolph Bournes writing turned into novels. His midwest, said Arthur Schlessinger, was stocked with unforgettable symbols of business domination. He goes on, they fixed the image of america not just for the intellectuals of his own generation, but for the world in the next half century. I think thats exactly right. He was the First American to receive the pulitzer prize, although i suggest be you read Sinclair Lewis today, youll find his writing not all that appealing. Hes not a good writer, and he knew it. And it drove him crazy that he got the pulitzer prize. It wasnt a favor. Now, main street caught the world of postwar literary disillusioned with america. Its about a young woman, carol, whos married to a dull but faithful husband and how she suffers because her fellow citizens of gopher falls are just, excuse me, gopher prairie, gopher prairie are just too dull beyond words. They dont have parties in pajamas, they dont read the best new writing. Theyre just provincials, and shes tortured by this. The book is an enormous success. Mark shore, whos one of lewis biographers, i think the best, lewis best biographer, described the book as an event in american history. Not just a novel, but an event in american history. And hes right. It marked, it was a demarcation point in american culture. Twelve years he would go on to write babbitt who, too, was oppressed by being successful. Twelve years later, in 1934, after his wife, dorothy thompson, had been in europe looking at the rise of fascism, mencken excuse me. Im sorry, im confusing, lewis writes a novel about the rise of fascism in america. It cant happen here. Im sure most of you have read it. If you havent, its really worth reading. Not because it is written well. Its not. Just because its so interesting. Because so many of the themes of it are still alive today. And it cant happen here is marvelous because it turns out that the equivalent of the black shirts and the brown shirts are the rotary club meetings. [laughter] sounds ludicrous . Read is Sinclair Lewis. Its the conformity he thinks he sees at rotary meetings and moose meetings and elks. All the kinds of institutions de tocqueville insisted were essential for making democracy, that in the present day we mourn their passing was we bowl alone. [laughter] all of that was, for Sinclair Lewis, the base obviously, he didnt have the faintest idea what he was talking about. He couldnt think politically. And he didnt can even really think very well socially. But he was very good at capturing a political mood. Lewis was repulsed by the intolerance of world war i, and like most liberals, he paid little anticipation to the kaiser. Attention to the kaiser. Max eastman wasnt a liberal, but a leftist, paid no attention whatsoever to prussianism. Wasnt their concern. When hitler came along peddling mysticism, militarism, romanticism and resentments about german racial purity and eugenics, you vennics popular among american liberals, lewis stepped in by suggesting that the loathing he felt for main street was being recapitulated in europe. It cant happen here was greeted by extraordinary praise. The new yorker reviewer, clifton finish. [inaudible] described as one of the most important books ever produced in america. Published at a time when the American Population was about 127 million, it quickly sold 320,000 copies. Opening just prior to the 1936 president ial elections, the play of it cant happen here ran in 18 cities drawing nearly 400,000 viewers in just four months. It was a sensation. Reissued periodically, it became part of every young intellectuals required reading. I know i read it when i was about 14. It became part of every young intellectuals required reading in a national biword. Readers of phillip roths 2004 novel, the plot against america, will recognize the plot of it cant happen here. The plot i love reading phillip roth for the most part. This is one of his worst novels. It just doesnt work. In this case, lindbergh takes the country over. During the second term of george w. Bush, the new American Library brought out a i new printing of it cant happen here. Newspaper columnists, bloggers and pundits such as paul krugman and Anthony Lewis true on the Books Authority to warn against what they saw as the current bush administrations slow motion rightwing takeover of the United States by bush who they saw as yet another down home strongman. They never specified who the first one had been. The notion that bush was a fascist, as some of you will know, is an unchallenge bl revelation for some people even today. Its pointless to argue about it. Although i sometimes bring it up just to annoy people. [laughter] now, this one element of it cant happen here that relates to the present, it never specifies what his alternative is. And what he implies is whats needed is an oligarchy of good people. You know, not so different from the new samurai. And i dont know how these people are to be selected, these good people are selected, but you have to replace democracy with an old old garre finish oligarchy of good people. How this is to be done, he doesnt want much to say. When you read or listen to people around the obama administration, its very similar to their view of world. Very similar to their view of the world with one important difference which i wont go into now, but ill pick up in questions and answers. Let me stop with that. Ive probably gone on too long. What time is it . 6 oh, good. Ive gone on too long. Sorry. Thank you. [applause] fred has agreed to take your questions. Who would like to begin . Yes. Hi. [inaudible] they should be coming. Im always intrigued by this antagonism of intellectuals to capitalism, and its a persistent threat. Ask i wonder and i wonder is it because capitalism stands for a source of power that doesnt recognize what intellectuals are selling, which is their intellect, or is there how would you explain it . You know, capitalism does recognize this as a source of of influence. The writings of f. Scott fitzgerald, Sinclair Lewis they explode in the 1920s. So they are richly rewarded by the society they e do despise. They despise. I think it has to do with the following intellectuals, however much attention they get, think they dee serve more. And the reason they deserve more is that egalitarianism is like acid on their skin. Because egalitarianism suggests that their vote is no more important than anyone elses vote. And if you go back to john stewart millen, theres much i admire and much i dont. However, mills argued for multiple balance for people like himself, that they shouldnt be compelled to vote like ordinary people. This is a longstanding and its insofl bl problem. And you can flip it around talking about low voters. A lot of voters, im thinking now of my home up to in new york, a lot of voters people realize de blasio was elected by a record low turnout. The turnout hadnt been that low since before women could vote. So its not as if there was this great effusion of enthusiasm. But the city now is entirely in the hands of low information voters. So its not that its not a problem, but thats not the problem intellectuals are talking about. And just one last point on this, on intellectuals and capitalism. Its not just capitalism that intellectuals dont like, its democracy. Its democracy. So whether it be the love affair of any intellectuals with the kaiser, whos certainly not a lovely fellow. And has anyone im just curious, anyone read john roll, the british historian . He may not be well known in america. Hes very good on seeing how much of Hitler Naziism is anticipated in the kaiser. But this hasnt been discussed. And part of the reason it hasnt been discussed is that the kind of Arthur Schlessinger view of the world is simply triumph. The 20s were a horrible time. Society was redeemed in the 30s, and, you know, we better we best better understand that. Michael . Michael barone of aei and the washington examiner. Congratulations, fred. Thank you. One name you mentioned is different from all the others, and i wondered whether they pay much attention to him at all or saw him as an opponent, tokeville. You mentioned that crowley was a francophile and a comtean. I am not really uptodate on my comte, but i have a feeling hes Something Like the opposite of what de tocqueville, with some reservation, admired the america he saw in the 2830s. 1830s. Youre exactly right. What comte was a kind of sanctimonious are socialism imposed by a central power. He wanted extreme central and that, thats what liberals have represented ever since, centralization. Centralization under the aegis of an enlightened elite. And so comte had no use for de tocqueville whatsoever. He considered him beneath us his considerations. I dont recommend anyone read [inaudible] today, but hes very interesting. Because its kind of socialism because its socialism premarx. And a great deal of what survives as socialism let me just pop over, a second over to h. G. Wells. You wouldnt be well aware of this because very little was written about it, but h. G. Wells was great admirer of utopian socialist experiments. For instance, it was something he studied closely. To need da colony, upstate new york, he studied closely. And wells socialism derived in the part from american utopian socialism. Wells very nearly became an american. His father was a cricketeer and never made a real living. The family thought about moving to america and very nearly did so. Wells always felt he had one leg in america. But de tocqueville wasnt important to these people. And had he been realize, he would have been seen as hopelessly petty bowj boy. Theres a great, theres a great short essay by d. H. Lawrence, how beastly the bourgeois. Anyone familiar with this . If you get a chance, you know, its all about how the bourgeoisie are subhuman. Not metaphorically. [laughter] its this attitude that gets, that gets picked up. And sometimes in the case of mencken, literally. Hi. My name is tom curry. I had trouble fitting what i thought was my understanding of liberalism and progressivism in with some of what you said. At one point you used the phrase some of these people had a sense that america was the worst of all possible places, Something Like that. If you think about what happened just a few years before the period you were talking about, you know, Woodrow Wilson signed into law a law against child labor. Yes. And then it was struck down, and later in the new deal child labor was banned. Its not that liberals and progressives thought that American Society was con its bl or that it was contestable or incapable of being redeemed, they thought it was capable of being improveed. I mean, your view, it seems, think back to hubert humphrey, for example. Hubert hutch friday would have never said American Society was utterly contemptible. He was also against affirmative action, and there are no Hubert Humphreys in america today. [inaudible] liberal long ago, yes. But let me go back to my point. You missed one of the central points of my argument, that theres a break between liberalism and progressivism. I think progress is do believe america will be redeemed, and they very much believe in america. Liberals break with that over Woodrow Wilson. They see in wilson the embodiment in progressivism, and they want to break with it. They want nothing whatsoever to do with it and nothing whatsoever to do with the massive American Society. Theyre not progressives. Thats all i can say. I hope you read the book [inaudible] who are they . They are just the people who i described. They want, they want a new aristocracy to govern the land. Next question. Hi. David [inaudible] with the heritage foundation. Thank you very much for the presentation. I look forward to reading the book. Is obama a liberal or a progressive . I mean, at times e seems to [laughter] he seems not to reveal his contempt for the people when he says that they cling to their guns and their religion and their antipathy towards immigrants, but at times its all about forward and improvement and blah, blah, blah. [laughter] the term progressive came back into use because the term account liberal becomes such a pejorative. Because the Hubert Humphreys of the world died off and were replaced by the George Mcgoverns and much worse. I would describe, i would describe the president as a liberal. And, you know, when he belongs to reverend wrights church, one of the things reverend wright preaches against is middle classness. Preaches against middle classness. You have to avoid those middle class virtues. Well, exactly how do we get to be middle class without middle class virtues . Somebody has to explain this to me. Contemporary liberalism let me make a leap. The closing captainers of the book chapters of the book anticipate the election in new york city. Now, im not going promote the book that way, because no one will then read it. But the election in new york city has put into power and every major Office People very close to the Service Employees international union, seiu, and 1199, the health care workers. Theyre combined. De blasio, the new mayor, the new speaker of the council both worked for seiu 1199. And you can go on down the list. One of the ways liberals have changed is that when lost the american majority, and i talk about this in a section i call the philosophical crisis of american liberalism, it was in the wilderness. And it discovered a new middle class. Public sector unions. Public sector unionists like liberals because, like liberals, they want to extract from the state. Private sector unionists,s this is one of the key i dont know how many people follow governor christie, and i have no interest in defending governor christie. The way governor christie has succeeded to the tree he has is by to the degree he has is by working with the president of the state senate, steven swanson, the head of the Steel Workers union excuse me, iron workers union. Because as a private sector unionist, he wants a vital economy. And the new jersey economy is pretty much dead in the water. And he opposed private sector unions. But what private sector unions like 1199 want is they want extraction. Thats what Governor Walker was dealing with in wisconsin. Theres no interest in growing the economy at large. If you can show me where obamas policies have been designed to grow the economy at large, i want to know about them. So liberalism becomes deeply connected with Public Sector unionism. And it recreates in itself a majoritarian sense by bringing Public Sector unionists. And acorn, acorn is very closely connected to seiu. And acorn is supposedly dissolved. It hasnt dissofted, its dissolved, the its just changed its name. Its not doing Voter Registration anymore, but acorn is still a very effective voter turnout operation for liberal democrats. [inaudible] what are the end goals of liberalism, this new aristocracy . Is it to have socialism without any voting where theyre in control of all the resources . A sort of communism without any party . Im not quite sure because they dont like any threats, it seems like. Capitalisms bad, democracy bad, religions bad. I guess global warmings good because they think they control it . Im not quite sure where they want to get. Well, a couple years ago joel cot ca and i wrote a piece for the Weekly Standard talking about obamas authoritarian tendencies, his tendency to try to rule through executive order. And i think were going to see a lot more of that, especially if he loses this upcoming election. Were going to see some really nasty conflicts, because hes going to try to govern without congress. The odd thing about obama, and my wife who i can now criticize is sitting in the front row is from chicago. And people from chicago have a lot to answer for. [laughter] thaw knew obama was a they knew obama was a fraud way back when. When jan would bring me to my sisterinlaw, shes my sisterinlaw, but shes like my sister, jonis parties in chicago, and all these people who knew obama, his former, his former tax attorney and knew him rather well. And i asked them, what are his accomplishments . What has he done . They said, nothing, he has absolutely no qualifications. Why are you supporting him . This is going to be very good for chicago. Money will be coming in here. Why should i oppose this . Thats the chicago way of thinking, which i criticize my wife heartily. What hes done is bring chicagostyle politics to america writ large. Whats good for the machine, whats good for people who pay the machine off. Of so hes not opposed to all capitalists, just capitalists who havent paid off. And my, you know, this is here im not speaking as an historian, im just speaking as a guy flapping his lips. [inaudible] i wouldnt call it gangsterism, but its not very appealing either. Judge williams . You made Woodrow Wilson sort of a pivotal figure, but i didnt hear you recount the exact positions of his or acts of his that liberals found anathema. Prohibition was one. Another was the ban on german, use of german language, the sale of german foods. And wilsons tolerance of his attorney general, a. Mitchell palmer who was in the american protective league, repressed germanamericans. And its not well known, but there were fights in the streets of american cities, milwaukee, chicago between germanamericans and polishamericans. And nongermanamericans. It was, it got ugly. So what they disliked about wilson was this, was this repression. Not necessarily from, directly from the executive office, but countenanced by the executive office. Fred, will you take one or two more . Sure, as many as youd like. [inaudible] the savant in the front row too. This will be the last question. Hi, thanks. My name is pete chase. Referring to one of the answers you gave earlier tonight, you said that what liberals despise is egalitarianism and, in particular, democracy i guess because it empowers the average guy in a way they find deplorable. But im having trouble squaring that with calls on the left, its always for more democracy. Repeal i mean, the 17th amendment, the calls for the abolition of the electoral college. It seems like on the left theyre always calling for more direct democracy, and im having trouble squaring. Stick with that word, direct. I think thats crucial. They want more direct democracy to create a more direct centralized society so that when you control the center, you control the entire society. What theyre opposed to is republicanism, small r. Selfgovernment on the local level. Respondent on a responsibility on a state and local level. And a lively, fertile congress which is certainly something we dont have. So when you say theyre in favor of direct democracy, yes, theyre opposed to the electoral college. But only in the years when they lose. [laughter] other years theyre quite happy. I mean, i wouldnt take this too seriously. This is something thats tactical just the way harry reids decision to abolish filibuster is tactical. I wouldnt i mean, is that an example of, kind of an example of direct democracy . Well, it would be a very good example of direct democracy because it precludes debate and discussion. Thats always the whole purpose of the filibuster. And its deeply anticonstitutional. Deeply, deeply anticonstitutional. Not in the literal sense, but in the structural sense of the spirit of the constitution. We have one question over here that i missed . Oh, yes, go ahead, and then well go to [inaudible] youve been talking some about the writers of the time, and i was wondering, these writers, writers of the whole lost generation, the 20s, used to be the biggest writers. When i was this school, we were the people we were given to read when we took american literature. Now largely gone. Why do you think that is . Well, first of all, no one reads american literature, theyre reading theory. As for these writers, yes through the 1970s and 80s i would say they were at the very top of peoples lists you have to read s. Scott fitzgerald. You couldnt be considered a College Graduate. But it takes to be considered a College Graduate now is not much. A question up here. [inaudible] i was kind of [inaudible] in liberalism to me that you described it and to the Democratic Party as a whole. If you could project for the middle class the value as it seems to me that democratic politicians in the past like truman and humphrey and candidates to fit this profile. [inaudible] think about truman for a minute. He was an oldfashioned democrat who belonged to every know thoue club in his home town in missouri. He was a backsplash. Arthur and sure despised him. John Kenneth Galbraith describes him. Even though they had no idea what eisenhower represented. He hadnt been very pleasant in world war ii. What was so appealing about this . He didnt come out of the middle class he represented something to be a cut above elevating american peace. Liberalism as we once knew as an electoral force that collapsed with mc govern the sum and then
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.