The Political ‘Education Divide’ and Me

All of a sudden the experts are bellowing that the educated are voting for Clinton and the uneducated are voting for Trump. Here’s Tim Alberta in National Review, and here is David Runciman in The Guardian to tell you all about it. Call it the “education divide.”

But where does that leave me? You see, I think of myself as educated, but I am going to vote for Trump. So what’s my problem?

Of course, my terminal degree is a bachelor’s in Civil Engineering from England, with no courses in the liberal arts. I didn’t really get an education until I started reading as an adult. That makes me an autodidact, and you know what they are like. The only time I’ve been in a university since the 1960s is to take one class each in Aristotle, Plato, Kant, and Hume. And I took those classes so that I would know the official liberal line on those ancients.

Actually, it makes complete sense that the educated would be voting liberal. That is the whole point of the ruling class’s program of cradle to Ph.D. education. The idea is to form the minds of the little darlings, as husbands liked to form the minds of their wives and daughters in Austen and Trollope novels.

Back in the old days, universities were seminaries founded by churches for the training of ministers who would then go out and preach orthodoxy to the unwashed. Today the universities are secular seminaries for the training of activists that can then go out and practice peaceful protest on the victims. So nothing has changed.

Any real educated liberal would admit, of course, that education is fascism. Education comes from the Latin ducare, to lead. From thence is the noun Dux, leader, the English Duke, and the Italian, Il Duce. And you know what that means: education is fascism, straight up. Now you know why so many artistical liberals like to wear black shirts.

But I think I understand why I, a self-educated white man born in India and raised in England, don’t go with the educated herd on politics. As they sang in South Pacific,

You’ve got to be taught
To hate and to fear

the bitter clingers and the deplorables. It takes a lot of time and a lot of money -- "From year to year… In your dear little ear" -- as Lt. Cable sang, to develop the proper amount of hate and fear for the racists, sexists, and bigots of the world, and I never got the full treatment.

When a lefty prof. told me I’d taken a university place from a deserving working-class kid, I told myself he could take it where the sun don’t shine. Well, I would have done, except I didn’t yet know how to talk like an American movie gangster. That was part of my adult education.

But there is nothing remarkable about all this hating and fearing. Samuel P. Huntington in The Clash of Civilizations puts it quite prosaically.

People use politics not just to advance their interests but also to define their identity. We know who we are only when we know who we are not and often only when we know who we are against.

That is what all the yelling and screaming is about. That is what racists, sexists, homophobes are about. That is what SJWs shutting down offensive speech is about.

Back in the original eruption of the left, what I call the Class of 1848, the left defined its identity by championing the cause of the workers in the industrial revolution. And they defined themselves against the bourgeoisie who they appointed into the vacant exploiter/oppressor role formerly occupied by the aristocracy.

But the bourgeoisie was perfectly happy to redress the grievances of the workers -- what softies! -- so the Class of 1848 needed new evildoers against which to define itself.

Today the left defines itself as “the educated,” which seems to include the men that used to be called the Robber Barons -- your Tom Steyers, your Bill Gateses, your Sergey Brins, even your Jeff Bezoses, and certainly your Carlos Slims, but not your evil Koch Brothers -- and it defines itself against the uneducated. That is why Hillary Clinton defines herself against the deplorables and the irredeemables.

Obviously, if you align yourself with the left you get a get-out-of-jail-free card to call yourself “educated.” You go to your secular seminary, you get a thorough training in activism and victimism, and then you get sent forth into the world to proselytize your faith in big government and victimism in a meaningful life of activism and peaceful protest.

Somehow, I just can’t get with the program, whatever the mean girls say. Maybe it’s because I’m interested in ideas, not what people think of me. There must be something wrong with me.

Christopher Chantrill @chrischantrill runs the go-to site on US government finances, usgovernmentspending.com. Also see his American Manifesto and get his Road to the Middle Class.

All of a sudden the experts are bellowing that the educated are voting for Clinton and the uneducated are voting for Trump. Here’s Tim Alberta in National Review, and here is David Runciman in The Guardian to tell you all about it. Call it the “education divide.”

But where does that leave me? You see, I think of myself as educated, but I am going to vote for Trump. So what’s my problem?

Of course, my terminal degree is a bachelor’s in Civil Engineering from England, with no courses in the liberal arts. I didn’t really get an education until I started reading as an adult. That makes me an autodidact, and you know what they are like. The only time I’ve been in a university since the 1960s is to take one class each in Aristotle, Plato, Kant, and Hume. And I took those classes so that I would know the official liberal line on those ancients.

Actually, it makes complete sense that the educated would be voting liberal. That is the whole point of the ruling class’s program of cradle to Ph.D. education. The idea is to form the minds of the little darlings, as husbands liked to form the minds of their wives and daughters in Austen and Trollope novels.

Back in the old days, universities were seminaries founded by churches for the training of ministers who would then go out and preach orthodoxy to the unwashed. Today the universities are secular seminaries for the training of activists that can then go out and practice peaceful protest on the victims. So nothing has changed.

Any real educated liberal would admit, of course, that education is fascism. Education comes from the Latin ducare, to lead. From thence is the noun Dux, leader, the English Duke, and the Italian, Il Duce. And you know what that means: education is fascism, straight up. Now you know why so many artistical liberals like to wear black shirts.

But I think I understand why I, a self-educated white man born in India and raised in England, don’t go with the educated herd on politics. As they sang in South Pacific,

You’ve got to be taught
To hate and to fear

the bitter clingers and the deplorables. It takes a lot of time and a lot of money -- "From year to year… In your dear little ear" -- as Lt. Cable sang, to develop the proper amount of hate and fear for the racists, sexists, and bigots of the world, and I never got the full treatment.

When a lefty prof. told me I’d taken a university place from a deserving working-class kid, I told myself he could take it where the sun don’t shine. Well, I would have done, except I didn’t yet know how to talk like an American movie gangster. That was part of my adult education.

But there is nothing remarkable about all this hating and fearing. Samuel P. Huntington in The Clash of Civilizations puts it quite prosaically.

People use politics not just to advance their interests but also to define their identity. We know who we are only when we know who we are not and often only when we know who we are against.

That is what all the yelling and screaming is about. That is what racists, sexists, homophobes are about. That is what SJWs shutting down offensive speech is about.

Back in the original eruption of the left, what I call the Class of 1848, the left defined its identity by championing the cause of the workers in the industrial revolution. And they defined themselves against the bourgeoisie who they appointed into the vacant exploiter/oppressor role formerly occupied by the aristocracy.

But the bourgeoisie was perfectly happy to redress the grievances of the workers -- what softies! -- so the Class of 1848 needed new evildoers against which to define itself.

Today the left defines itself as “the educated,” which seems to include the men that used to be called the Robber Barons -- your Tom Steyers, your Bill Gateses, your Sergey Brins, even your Jeff Bezoses, and certainly your Carlos Slims, but not your evil Koch Brothers -- and it defines itself against the uneducated. That is why Hillary Clinton defines herself against the deplorables and the irredeemables.

Obviously, if you align yourself with the left you get a get-out-of-jail-free card to call yourself “educated.” You go to your secular seminary, you get a thorough training in activism and victimism, and then you get sent forth into the world to proselytize your faith in big government and victimism in a meaningful life of activism and peaceful protest.

Somehow, I just can’t get with the program, whatever the mean girls say. Maybe it’s because I’m interested in ideas, not what people think of me. There must be something wrong with me.

Christopher Chantrill @chrischantrill runs the go-to site on US government finances, usgovernmentspending.com. Also see his American Manifesto and get his Road to the Middle Class.