I linked to an article, “The Intellectual as Courtier,” from Arts and Letters Daily and thought “Hey, that reminds me of what Rothbard wrote about ‘Court Historians‘ and the like.” Sure enough, I get to the bottom of the piece and see it’s written by Paul Rahe, professor of history at Hillsdale College, a bastion of conservatism.
I know the Left has its critics of intellectuals and their particular proclivities – Mao comes to mind – but the idea of the intellectual as inherently prone to wrongheadedness, even without the corrupting influence of money or mere lack of exposure to the correct sources of information, is a pronounced conservative theme.
Advertisement
Like this:
One blogger likes this post.
March 14, 2011 at 8:56 pm
few people positively imagine centralized power without themselves or someone very much like themselves at the helm.
March 16, 2011 at 1:15 pm
I must be very unusual, because I always imagine centralized power as bad even when I (or my vicarious imagination-self) have the throne.
March 14, 2011 at 9:27 pm
I first heard this critique of intellectuals during one of Eric Sevareid’s televised conversations with Eric Hoffer.
March 14, 2011 at 9:35 pm
Didn’t read the link, and I get that this is about “intellectuals” but there’s something so shticky to me about nonexpert critiques of expert power.
March 14, 2011 at 10:08 pm
This critique appears to be made by one abstract and “big picture” thinker of others of the same type, rather than the more technical expertise (“scientific priesthood”) you might be referring to.
March 15, 2011 at 2:37 am
All humans crave power. We did, after all, evolve from chimps. The difference is that intellectuals convince themselves their motives are pure and unselfish, and that they just want to help us poor, benighted plebians.
March 16, 2011 at 12:01 am
I see two possible explanations (well more than two, but I will stick to two):
1. The left has dominated for so long. Intellectuals are part of the power structure therefore… They do as the left does. Power hungry, oppressive, and whatever else the right ascribes.
2. The right typically believes that human nature is bad.
March 16, 2011 at 3:06 pm
The intelligentsia has historically tended to attach itself to the politically powerful person or group of the moment. This is reflected in the old song “The Vicar of Bray,” written in a period when the clergy was the educated caste. Its protagonist was one who trimmed skilfully to the prevailing political wind, and thereby gained preferment.
The classical discussion of the relationship between intellectuals and the powerful is “La trahison des clercs” by Julien Benda (1927). Benda’s is not a “right-wing” critique, at least as right-wing is ordinarily understood today. It is rather about the seduction of the learned by power, and the use of ideology (cujuscunque generis) as a means to that end.
March 17, 2011 at 11:39 am
Almost as if on cue, confirming the Right-wing meme, Martha Nussbaum has written an essay about her temptation to reach for power:
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/85078/obama-government-harvard-brown-amherst
It’s high status for an academic to work for government, but not to leave for two years to work with a private company. Hal Varian ought to be praised more than Larry Summers.
March 18, 2011 at 2:34 am
Didn’t click the link, but it’s not hard to think of counter-examples -the “torture” professor (I think his name is Yoo?) and I don’t think it’s currently lower status to work for Google like Dr. Varian did (and still does?). Prof. Summers working for D.E. Shaw (did I get it right?) is probably lower status than when he worked for Clinton or Obama.
I think it comes down to several factors, but the big one is what I think of these days as the precious element Puritanium. There’s generally less Puritanium in a private company than in a Western government, but it depends on the particulars. Google has an unusually high concentration of Puritanium and the 2nd Bush White House had Antipuritanium in many parts of it.
March 18, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Yeah its John Yoo. He’s now a regular contributor to THIS neocon site.
March 24, 2011 at 2:00 am
You may be interested in this as an addition to the discussion (from a liberal intellectual): http://metaphorhacker.net/2011/03/do-science-fiction-writers-dream-of-fascist-dictatorships.
March 24, 2011 at 8:54 pm
I’ve replied over there.
April 22, 2011 at 5:32 pm
Not just a conservative theme, libertarians for the most part are in agreement. It’s the knowledge problem – people on the right don’t believe that the intellectuals possess or can ever possess the knowledge they claim to have.
April 23, 2011 at 11:12 am
True. But conservatives tend to stress it because libertarians, like lefties, spend relatively more time engaging in political economy (“who benefits, and at who’s expense?”) rather than criticizing intellectuals, part and parcel of the conservatives’ general “cultural elite” theme.