America needs a demagogue

Here’s another piece I wrote for Ricochet: This has long been the case, but it is not easy for Americans to find one, because of the political process that is so strangely influenced or even dominated by national parties the which are not creatures of the constitution, but of the politicians. It used to be, victorious generals could arouse the spiritedness in the people. That, I believe, reflected the passions connected with inequality; it is gone now. The parties, themselves expressions of American spiritedness, have survived war & are now spirited about peace.

These parties select people that end up talking like politicians, not because they are in power, but because they do a job rather well. The party now winning & the party now losing share disconcerting similarities–this is good for a sense of safety, while people trust government & their spiritedness is not aroused, but it is not good for hope in the future. These similarities are not difficultly explained: Americans are sympathetic to party government & only get angry when they are hurt, humiliated or kept waiting. The separation of powers is never safe with them for that reason. & this then is how a monarch may one day rise.

Some men belong to the family of the lion or the tribe of the eagle, as Lincoln said. They know other people are losers. They disdain a beaten path & can pay for their own elections. These men will either free the rich from the burden of caring for the poor or the poor from the indignity of the rich.

Demagogue is an old Greek work for a democratic phenomenon–how fear leads democrats to tyranny. Democracy is a remarkably erotic regime–sex sells, you know–so it’s a commercial regime as well. Like in the story of H.G. Wells, you could imagine the future of democracy as hapless, helpless frolicking–if men were gods. But underlying that frolicking is something dark & murderous. So with democracy–it is not all enthusiasm, because there is hysteria there as well. This is how some phrases & conspiracies capture the public imagination. For the softest power in memory, America is strangely receptive to talk about the war on this, that or the other…

My friend says, Americans could learn about their democracy from the Athenians. It is time to start paying attention when generals are recalled from fighting wars. Thucydides tells you how to think about the problems democracy faces when serious policy cannot be publicly formulated or carried out. So then we talked about this business–he does not like it that I liken America’s current source of enthusiasm & hysteria to a gangster–he says, This guy does not do & say what politicians do & say. That’s possibly a good thing. He should go to a poor shelter. Hopefully, he will not call the people there losers, I replied. He said, but no politician would ever do that–they would never dare look at or be seen with or shine a light on what real suffering looks like. Do Americans like lives of desperation to keep quiet?

Let me tell you I how I got the idea of demagogy as a solution to the American political problem. There is an old Greek comedy by the original comedian, Aristophanes: It is called The knights, after the class that ruled in Athens, not that there was not a democracy, but they did not have much equality. But you Americans have a political class of your own, even if it’s not going to war on horseback, so you can understand. The play starts with two knights who are slaves to Demos, the people personified–a kind of angry American populist at times, but not always–they are two famous Greek generals of the Peloponnesian war: Demosthenes–not the famous mouthful of stones orator–& Nikias. The one is an irreverent, brilliant commander–clever enough to know not to return to Athens after a failure, at least, so as to avoid a show of gratitude & the tender mercies of the democracy; the other is a pious man, competent commander, & one of the tragic figures of the war.

Much like some conservatives, Nikias has learned there is something divine beyond human beings because he knows he is personally hated by that god or those gods. The world is going to hell, as it were, so there must be some kind of divine justice… But the other man starts drinking & concocts a comic plot: To save Athens from the war demagogue who is turning Demos into a kind of madman–calling everyone losers & all that jazz–he will find a more successful demagogue. Fight fire with fire, you could say, but that is not quite his point: Drinking has taught Demosthenes–& not him alone–that doing what you should be doing as a politician depends neither on piety nor on merit. This is a democratic thought–you do not depend on having the right past. But it is also a monarchic or even philosophic thought–it is a vulgar image of the tyranny of the wise. That’s always the danger with the heroes Americans see at the movies. Also, with admiring politicians. Demosthenes, by the by, does find a man more vulgar, less educated, & more willing to scream calumnies & flatteries to attract the attention of Demos.

This man is remarkably sensible. I’m not going to give away the plot, but I’ll tell you this, it is not about speaking truth to power–the point is to play to your strengths while appealing to the sense the people have of the good. It is a comedy, so do not expect decency or law, to say nothing of what we now call morality. But it is possible that the only people who anymore see nobility in public life & could be effective are vulgar people. Maybe we need to start assuming we have no idea how to estimate character & instead have to start looking for prudent people. That’s the game–prudence.

The problem with how we think about character is that we do not really know much about the relationship of chance & success. Much talk about character is what the left calls class privilege. It’s not clear we would have had any great writers without unearned privileges that are often really unjust. There would be no beauty in Italy either. How would Washington & Jefferson afforded the grand life of politicians without the wealth & reputation that belonged to the social class? So it is not impossible that someone who does not fit with our expectations or experience could do what we are not able to do when it comes to understanding what goods really are public or hold the nation together & how to take care of them. At any rate, that is the way in which comedy punishes our presumption–incredibly tight plotting seems unpredictable to us–is shows we are not as knowing as we would like to believe.