Neocons promote plutocracy under guise of liberalism

William Kristol wrote an emotional defense of America's constitutional founders in yesterday's New York Times and almost had me convinced that he truly honors that supreme guidepost of American values. Then I examined the column a second time and realized Kristol's true message; he believes the elites are the source of our freedom and are the only one's capable of determining what is right for America and the world.

Mr. Kristol began his column by quoting from the Marx of neo-conservatism, Leo Strauss, on the elasticity of the "self evident truths" of the Constitution, not withstanding its excessive contact with the masses. He spends most of the column recounting the final years of Thomas Jefferson and the former President's heart-felt love of his fellow revolutionaries.

At the end of the column, however, Mr. Kristol reveals his true purpose when he correctly states that our freedom was secured by the "brave leadership" of a few members of the Colony's elite, who had the courage to initiate and carry through with rebellion against King George. Extrapolating from that, he asserts that the founders' loyalty were to each other and not to the masses of people who are ill-inclined to throw off the bonds of subjection.

And the pledge has to be supported by a sense of honor — even of sacred honor. The declaration’s assertion of equal rights, one may say, is supported by what is necessarily unequal, the sense of honor of those acting on the people’s behalf.

In essence, Mr. Kristol is simply following the lead of Mr. Strauss and other intellectual mentors who advocate for the promotion of a sort of democracy of elites that promotes a new age of plutocracy. The transformation to rule by the wealthy and powerful is made palatable by couching its policy objectives in the sanctified construct of enlightenment values, liberal philosophy and free market principles.

Ironically, if Mr. Kristol and his fellow intellectual cohorts are successful in their project, Western governance will shift to a form of leadership that resembles the antithesis of enlightenment values, the subordination of the individual to the body politic and a oligarchical marketplace that discourages competition.

One need not trust my analysis of Mr. Kristol and his ilk. Simply read a sprinkling of the writings of Mr. Kristol, Mr. Strauss and the policy positions of think tanks associated with the neo-conservative philosophy (e.g., Project for the New American Century, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, etc.). Further, if one follows the timing of Mr. Kristol's pronouncements, one can get a feel for the ultimate objectives of the project.

Mr. Strauss advocated for the use of Plato's noble lies as a necessary way to maintain a cohesive society. The theory is that the masses need mythology to help them obey the norms of the body politic (i.e., patriotism, religion, fear of the unknown and different). Mr. Kristol's father, himself an intellectual proponent of noble lies, once wrote that:

[t]here are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn't work.

Which truth is appropriate for you?