A Strange Endorsement of Edwards
(written by Lancelot Finn, during Democratic primaries, February 2004)
I am not eager to see Bush defeated. On the contrary, I admire a lot of what he’s done. I was passionately supportive of the liberations of Iraq and Afghanistan. My sympathies lie broadly with Republican principles. I think the exercise of American power abroad mostly works for good. I believe in the free market, and oppose the welfare state. I support voucher schools and privatization of Social Security, and mostly oppose environmental legislation, such as Kyoto. And yet, strangely, I find myself thinking that if the Democrats nominate John Edwards, I might well vote for him.
Why? The main reason is to make the Democrats feel better. Things are going pretty well in America right now. We’ve had a couple years of slow economic growth, true, and unemployment has risen, but that’s only by comparison to the last years of the 1990s bubble. Everybody knew that that degree of prosperity was unsustainable. The question that haunted economists back then was: was there a soft landing or a hard landing in store for us when the bubble burst? No one predicted how 9/11 would influence how that story played out, but by and large, the landing was fairly soft, and now we’re in the midst of a strong recovery.
Meanwhile, in foreign affairs, things are looking even better, unless you’re so short-sighted that you can’t see past the casualties in Iraq. The difficulties there must be juxtaposed against three decades of the disgusting and murderous tyranny of Saddam Hussein; for all its problems, life is better now, and Iraqis know it. Elsewhere in the Middle East, from Iran to Syria to Saudi Arabia, the impulse to democracy is stirring. Even in Palestine, the scene is changing, with the Israeli withdrawal from some settlements making new possibilities for peace. India and Pakistan, too, are talking peace. Libya now wants to disarm. The “empire of liberty” is moving forward.
Yet the good times don’t feel that good. We don’t have the sense, as we did in the late 1990s, that we’re in the midst of a Golden Age. Why not? Because the intelligentsia (journalists, academics, and so on) has taken it into their heads that Bush is all sorts of nasty things; corrupt, a fascist, a pawn of corporate interests, “unilateral,” and so on. The intelligentsia, you know, is sensitive, vain, stubborn, and easily outraged when it doesn’t get its way. Right now it is in a very grumpy mood. And by being so grumpy, even in good times, the intelligentsia spoils it for all of us. They’re so articulate, they control the media, it gets to the point where just for being happy with the present, hopeful for the future, and supportive of the administration, you’re some kind of pig. It doesn’t matter how good your arguments are. In most social settings where the intelligentsia are present, arguing in favor of Bush is not considered appropriate. Bush supporters must know their place: to keep quiet, or to state their opinions and be seen as a pig.
That’s why the idea of John Edwards for president is appealing. I disagree with him on some issues, particularly trade; but at least with someone else in the White House, the intelligentsia would hopefully be less grumpy, and quit spoiling it for the rest of us.