This is an argument that
has long been made by thinkers on the left. Deneen, however, reconfigures it by
placing the evolution of the American political system amidst a semi-mystical
battle between “the few” and “the many” that dates back to the dawn of time. In
Deneen’s version the many are not masses seeking radical liberation but
localist conservatives seeking to be left alone. His elites refuse to do so,
however, instead enforcing what he calls the “core assumption” of modern
thought: that “transformative progress is the key goal of human society.”
Deneen identifies corporations
and capitalism as part of this problem, as capitalism’s “creative destruction”
and its global reach disrupt the lives of average people, who, he believes,
want nothing more than to make a decent living and raise heteronormative
families according to traditional, religious values. Yet his main target is the
“woke” elites of the left, those in universities, the CDC, and Hollywood—the
“Botox-smoothed meritocratic… smart set,” as he refers to them at one point.
Using their positions to ensure their way, and ensure that their children
retain their status, contemporary elites play at meritocracy but in reality
have rigged the game in their favor. Their newest tool is “identity politics,”
which allows them to divide the majority along lines of race and religion,
creating a seemingly tempestuous politics that in reality moves steadily in
culturally progressive directions in defiance of what the majority would truly
prefer if it were actually in charge.
Just when you think that
Deneen will suggest that the solution is therefore a more truly majoritarian democracy,
however, he pulls out the rug: The solution is a better elite. An elite more in
touch with the people, to be sure, but an elite that will lead and control all
the same. This new “aristopopulist” ruling class, he argues, would not divide
the people against themselves—as he believes liberal elites do—but would keep
society together as an organic whole. He conjures up an imaginary, pre-liberal
conservative tradition to support this idea, one that oddly enough includes
liberals (like Edmund Burke and Benjamin Disraeli) and medieval thinkers alike.
