home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  An American Manifesto
Thursday May 24, 2012 
by Christopher Chantrill Follow chrischantrill on Twitter

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

BLOGS 12

May 2012

Apr 2012

Mar 2012

Feb 2012

Jan 2012

BLOGS 11

Dec 2011

Nov 2011

Oct 2011

Sep 2011

Aug 2011

Jul 2011

Jun 2011

May 2011

Apr 2011

Mar 2011

Feb 2011

Jan 2011

BLOGS 10

Dec 2010

Nov 2010

Oct 2010

Sep 2010

Aug 2010

Jul 2010

Jun 2010

May 2010

Apr 2010

Mar 2010

Feb 2010

Jan 2010

BLOGS 09

Dec 2009

Nov 2009

Oct 2009

Sep 2009

Aug 2009

Jul 2009

Jun 2009

May 2009

Apr 2009

Mar 2009

Feb 2009

Jan 2009

BLOGS 08

Dec 2008

Nov 2008

Oct 2008

Sep 2008

Aug 2008

Jul 2008

Jun 2008

May 2008

Apr 2008

Mar 2008

Feb 2008

Jan 2008

BLOGS 07

Dec 2007

Nov 2007

Oct 2007

Sep 2007

Aug 2007

Jul 2007

Jun 2007

May 2007

Apr 2007

Mar 2007

Feb 2007

Jan 2007

BLOGS 06

Dec 2006

Nov 2006

Oct 2006

Sep 2006

Aug 2006

Jul 2006

Jun 2006

May 2006

Apr 2006

Mar 2006

Feb 2006

Jan 2006

BLOGS 05

Dec 2005

Nov 2005

Oct 2005

Sep 2005

Aug 2005

Jul 2005

Jun 2005

May 2005

Apr 2005

Mar 2005

Feb 2005

Jan 2005

BLOGS 04

Dec 2004

Mobs, Lynchings, and Psychos "The Backs of our Mosts Vulnerable Citizens"

print view

Disdain for Palin

by Christopher Chantrill
February 13, 2011 at 12:23 pm

|

NOW THAT the left’s McCarthyite attack on Sarah Palin has subsided, she merely has to suffer the disdain of the intellectual elite. Even James Taranto, admitted high-school dropout, damns her with faint praise.

This is nothing new. The nostrils of the educated class have always twitched at populist conservative candidates for president. Voters of a certain age will remember the disdain for Candidate Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan? Of course Ronald Reagan. Back in the 1970s Ronald Reagan was a wild-eyed right-wing conservative who could never be elected president. So a young conservative like me, already a devotee of Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek, went to my local precinct caucus in Washington State in early 1980 as a Bush supporter. Bush was more electable, you see.

At the precinct caucus I discovered something that changed my mind. In the Bush corner with me was a nice older couple. But across the room were the unwashed folks in the Reagan corner. They looked like technicians, construction guys, and they looked like they ought to be Democrats. And there were a lot of them. Ah ha, I thought. Something is afoot in America. So I switched to the Reagan side in that caucus and lived happily ever after.

Here in are in 2011 and nothing has changed. The popular, populist candidate of the ordinary working stiff is Sarah Palin, and the educated classes just can’t get their wine glasses around the idea of a Sarah Palin as president. Where’s the experience, they wonder? Where’s the well-rounded education in political philosophy? Where’s the record as a successful administrator? Where’s the Ivy League degree?

I once used to believe in all that malarkey, and I agree that all those things are important—in the staff. The Germans figured this out two hundred years ago when they created the General Staff for their armed forces, complete with staff colleges. What are our modern policy analysts in their think tanks but the general staff of the nation’s political forces?

The big idea of the general staff concept is to free the leader from the details so he can concentrate on the big picture and win the battle. In warfare, we have the commander and his chief of staff. Already at the Battle of Waterloo the Prussian army was led by Blücher, with chief of staff Gneisenau to do all the brainiac stuff. In politics, we have the candidate up front and his consultant in the back room.

Let us hear what the “creative destruction” guy, Joseph Schumpeter, has to say about candidates and elections in his Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. “Democracy means only that the people have the opportunity of accepting or refusing the men who are to rule them... viz., free competition among the would-be leaders for the vote of the electorate.”

The name of the game is winning elections. This means that electoral politicians are like football players, they are best they can be at what they do. They are professionals, experts in winning elections. Schumpeter quotes an unnamed politician: “exactly as [businessmen] are dealing in oil so I am dealing in votes.”

In 2012 Republicans will be nominating for president a professional politician to win an election. We cannot worry about administrative skills and legislative tactics and academic pedigrees. That comes later, in 2013. For now what matters is the skills of the professional politician: framing issues, sensing the mood of the people, moving the center, and telling the people what they want to hear, and doing it again and again.

We already know that Sarah Palin is No.1 when it comes to framing issues. Back in 2009, the summer of the “death panels,” old warhorse Pat Buchanan neighed his appreciation of her skills when he wrote: “Of Sarah Palin it may be said, the lady knows how to frame an issue.” No wonder. Palin has been a professional politician since 1992.

Here’s another little nugget. In her first book, Going Rogue, Palin called herself a “common-sense conservative,” and repeated the notion every second sentence as she traveled around the nation on her book tour. Last fall, as she promoted her second book, the leopard had changed its spots—just a little. Now Palin was a “common-sense constitutional conservative.” Who wouldn’t prefer that to a ideological rule-by-czar liberal?

It just happens that Palin has a particular connection with the white working class, a large demographic that is up for grabs in 2012.

In the winter of 2011 President Obama is clearly tacking to the middle; he would be a fool not to. Already, his polls are improving. It will take the best politician, the best in America, to spoil his wind.

If there’s a better politician around than Sarah Palin, we’d better know his name by the summer of 2012.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.  His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.”  —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison


Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust


Hugo on Genius

“Tear down theory, poetic systems… No more rules, no more models… Genius conjures up rather than learns… ” —Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois


Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State


Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings...”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990


Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing


Religion, Property, and Family

But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family. Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit


Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity


US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism


mysql close

 

©2007 Christopher Chantrill