NRL News

The dead-end of pro-abortion elitism

by | Jun 7, 2017

By Dave Andrusko

When you pile through as much copy as I do, you eventually learn there are good reads (lots), even better reads (a few less), great reads (fairly rare), and must-reads (distressingly hard to find). William McGurn’s “Why Elites Hate,” which ran Tuesday in the Wall Street Journal falls into that latter category. (Unless you are a subscriber one of the few places you can read the essay in its entirety is here.)

I would be robbing you of a great pleasure if I went into lots of detail. So let me make just a couple of points.

McGurn is having a grand time writing about “progressives” who are taking to journals of opinion to warn fellow Democrats that “You don’t win votes by showing contempt for voters.”

His initial point is that while counseling their fellow Democrats to throttle their contempt (“much of what these authors write is sensible”), their advice “can also be hilarious, particularly when the effort to explain ordinary Americans to progressive elites reads like a Margaret Mead entry on the exotic habits of the Samoans.”

If you read some of the advice columns (a kind of “Dear Abby” for out-of-power Democrats), you realize that many Democrats are even more out of touch with (pardon the expression) Middle Americans than you suspected. Referring to a piece written by the New Republic’s Michael Tomasky, under the headline “Elitism Is Liberalism’s Biggest Problem,” McGurn observes

Mr. Tomasky, for example, informs progressives that middle Americans—wait for it—“go to church.” They have friends (“and sometimes even spouses”) “who are Republicans.” “They don’t feel self-conscious saluting the flag.”

Who knew?

McGurn offers a number of dazzlingly insights that help us truly understand why it came naturally to pro-abortion Hillary Clinton to label Trump voters deplorable (“racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it”) and why those kinds of vicious personal attacks were the default response of elitists even before the 2016 presidential election ushered in the Age of Trump.

McGurn argues this is the logical outcome of Democrats’ dangerous embrace of “identity politics,” which is another way of saying that those of us who are pro-life and church goers, and heads of families are “the Other,” who are not merely wrong but evil. And there is great appeal in this for pro-abortion Democrats: “No small part of the attraction of identity politics is its usefulness in silencing those who do not hew to progressive orthodoxy.”

They (we) are viewed “as bigots whose retrograde views mean they have no rights.” In a word it is a fundamentally anti-democratic (and very scary) stance which (to cite two examples) “has led Democrats to regard themselves as the ‘resistance’ rather than the loyal opposition” and “to the progressive use of the Supreme Court as its preferred legislature.”

McGurn is marvelous. Especially his conclusion:

So good luck with the idea that the Democratic Party can restore its relationship with Middle America without addressing the identity politics that fuels it. Especially when it starts from the premise that the Americans they are condescending to will remain too stupid to figure it out.

Categories: pro-abortion