In this interesting article about the predictions of the philosopher Richard Rorty we hear the plea that liberal intellectuals stop their other-worldly theorizing and wake up to the world around them. It was true in 1998 and it is certainly true in 2016. His observations suggest that there is much work to be done to bring this nation together.
The victory of Donald Trump caught countless progressives and establishment conservatives by surprise. Since Election Day, there’s been no shortage of ink spent trying to sort out the underlying factors behind his startling rise to the Oval Office. But for late philosopher Richard Rorty, the writing was on the wall.
In 1998, Rorty, who most recently taught at Stanford University, argued in Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America that “old industrialized democracies” are heading toward a period “in which populist movements are likely to overturn constitutional governments.”
He said the left had embraced identity politics at the expense of economic justice. Resentment would fester among the working class as they realized that the powers that be were not fighting to stop wages from shrinking or jobs from being sent overseas.
He suggested that many would turn to a “strongman” to flip the script on the smug, overpaid and deceitful who had long neglected their suffering. The author said the progress made on behalf of ethnic minorities, homosexuals and women would then run the risk of being rolled back.
One reason Rorty perceived something many other left-leaning academics missed might have to do with his chosen philosophical tradition: pragmatism, which emphasizes practical consequences. He died in 2007, so we will never know for sure what he would have thought about Trump’s highly unconventional campaign.
A few days after Trump’s surprise victory, Queen’s University law professor Lisa Kerr and others posted a particularly prescient passage from Achieving Our Country on Twitter. The three paragraphs swiftly caught fire on social media and were shared thousands of times. The New Yorker cited the passage in a profile of President Obama, and the New York Times analyzed the words in-depth.
Here is the slightly condensed version of the passage that Kerr posted online:
“[M]embers of labor unions, and unorganized unskilled workers, will sooner or later realize that their government is not even trying to prevent wages from sinking or to prevent jobs from being exported. Around the same time, they will realize that suburban white-collar workers — themselves desperately afraid of being downsized — are not going to let themselves be taxed to provide social benefits for anyone else.
At that point, something will crack. The nonsuburban electorate will decide that the system has failed and start looking around for a strongman to vote for — someone willing to assure them that, once he is elected, the smug bureaucrats, tricky lawyers, overpaid bond salesmen, and postmodernist professors will no longer be calling the shots.…
One thing that is very likely to happen is that the gains made in the past 40 years by black and brown Americans, and by homosexuals, will be wiped out. Jocular contempt for women will come back into fashion.… All the resentment which badly educated Americans feel about having their manners dictated to them by college graduates will find an outlet.”
Amid the renewed attention, online searches for Achieving Our Country skyrocketed and there was a run on the book at Harvard University Press, which is reprinting the book and plans to make it available online as soon as possible.
Lindsay Waters, executive editor for the humanities at Harvard University Press, recalled having big arguments with Rorty before the book was published because he thought it was “too old-style liberal.”
“He thought some of the liberals from the 1930s were really fabulous. He was trying to revive the left with this book. He was trying to kick them in the rear end so they would stop doing stuff that was easy and lazy however trendy it looked,” Waters said in an interview with Yahoo News.
According to Waters, Rorty was a clear-thinking provocateur who refused to play it safe and retained the ability to see larger trends, the big picture. He said a lot of scholars in academia think of themselves as left-wingers but don’t actually do anything.
“Rorty was trying to get people to think. That’s the philosopher’s job,” he continued. “He was trying to get people to prepare for being more responsive to the political situation in America.”. . . .
“The reason we love poets and philosophers is that they almost have some sixth sense. They pick up vibes that the rest of the world is not sensitive to or refuses to see,” he said. “He was being Cassandra: ‘If you people don’t wake up, things are going to get a lot worse. The enemy is going to win. Can I make that any more clear to you?’”
The crux of Rorty’s thesis in Achieving Our Country is that the sins of the United States past do not need to define its future. He criticized the American left of retreating into theory at the expense of taking an active role in civic life.
Rorty lamented that many of his fellow liberals had come to view American patriotism as an endorsement of past atrocities, such as slavery or violence against Native Americans. He encouraged his peers to re-embrace the patriotism of the old left and work toward a more hopeful future, much like Walt Whitman and John Dewey had before.
In the relevant passage, Rorty goes on to suggest that after his “imagined strongman” comes to power he will quickly make peace with the “international super-rich” and invoke memories of past military victories to encourage military adventures for short-term prosperity. But, Rorty continued, the strongman will ultimately be a disaster for the world and people will wonder why there had been so little resistance to his ascent.
“[Rorty] was a big-picture guy,” Waters said. “He was inspired by [Ralph Waldo] Emerson and William James and was concerned about the soul of America and what’s happening in America. I suppose that’s one of the things that makes him the most different from other people. He dared to think about the country and what’s good for the country.”
The question I would ask is whether Trump will turn out to be the “strongman” those folks were hoping for or whether they will soon realize that he doesn’t care a tinker’s dam about them and is all about himself? Then what??
From time to time, a historian or scholar will write something general about possible problems ahead for the country. I’ve been surprised by how accurately, and specifically Rorty pin-pointed what would come and that he saw a person almost exactly like Trump taking over. The social unrest, the income gap, the disenchantment, have been boiling for a while. But Rorty took his forecast and diagnosis deeper and was correct.
Indeed. Truly remarkable.
Note to readers: Check out this excellent opinion piece in the New York Times which helps fill in some of the blanks left by Rorty. It helps us to understand better what “identity politics” is all about and why the lefty-wing intellectuals need to abandon it and return to more fundamental issues, like health care and living wages. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?_r=0
Hugh, this is excellent and so prescient. I read something this morning along these lines that H. L. Mencken of the Baltimore Evening Sun wrote almost 100 years ago.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and complete narcissistic moron.” H.:. Mencken, July 26, 1920.
Even though we must be supportive of this President, we must continue to advocate on issues of import. Bernie Sanders said let’s see what he does. He promised to improve the infrastructure which can be done to benefit all or benefit a few. What we cannot do is retrench on civil rights or harm our environment.
We are in for some scary times with this one, though. Keith
Indeed. Fasten your seat belts!
Always the Last Word of the Poet/Philosopher: “I hate to admit it; but I told you so.”
Indeed. Chomsky predicted this as well.
I tell you, not long ago I had a higher gratitude for Chomsky’s work and intellect than I do these days. I’ll leave you to guess why, which should be no mystery. But it seems that there is a Controlled Opposition Principle at work riddling our Polity, which even the best intention intellect can fall victim to, out of a very ordinary sense of supposed Duty. I’ve always disapproved of such a Concept of Duty, which requires an abnegation of the Highest Principles for the Compromise among Lesser among Evils. I reject as much, which has gifted me with a completely Private Life all these years, for which I am not ruefully thankful, despite some material inconvenience and requisite Slander for the inevitable mess an overly clever mind may invent for themselves, in the way of being entertained (like Spartan youth at night when the Guards perform their own form of Duty). Catch as catch can, as always. Poof* and out-the-door I went…Siren wailing.
Ever the Last Word of the nomadic Poet-Philosopher: “I hate to admit it, but I told you so.”
Wow, Hugh! Rorty hit the nail on the head … and nearly two decades ago! Your post is excellent and certainly thought-provoking. I would like to re-blog tomorrow.
Be my guest….as always.
There appears to be 2 of a Kind for me, of the same Color. I can live with that.
Reblogged this on Filosofa's Word and commented:
Richard Rorty was a modern-day, American philosopher. I had never heard of Rorty until yesterday when blogger-friend Hugh Curtler penned this post about Rorty and his predictions … predictions with which we may well see parallels today, both here in the U.S. and also in Europe. Hugh’s post is fascinating … take a gander for yourself, and see what you think. It is certainly a thought-provoking post …