Rene Guenon on “democracy”…

If the word ‘democracy’ is defined as government of the people themselves, it expresses an absolute impossibility and cannot even have a mere de facto existence — in our time or in any other. One must guard against being misled by words: it is contradictory to say that the same persons can be at the same time rulers and ruled, because, to use Aristotelian terminology, the same being cannot be ‘in act’ and ‘in potency’ at the same time and in the same relationship. The relationship of ruler and ruled necessitates the presence of two terms: there can be no ruled if there are not also rules, even though these be illegitimate and have no other title to power than their own pretensions; but the great ability of those who are in control in the modern world lies in making people believe that they are governing themselves; and the people are the more inclined to believe this as they are flattered by it, and as, in any case, they are incapable of sufficient reflection to see its impossibility. It was to creat this illusion that ‘universal suffrage’ was invented: the law is supposed to be made by the opinion of the majority, but what is overlooked is that this opinion is something that can very easily be guided and modified; it is always possible, by means of suitable suggestions, to arouse, as may be desired, currents moving in this or that direction. We cannot recall who it was who first spoke of ‘manufacturing opinion’, but this expression is very apt, although it must be added that it is not always those who are in apparent control who really have the necessary means at their disposal. This last remark should make it clear why it is that the incompetence of most prominent politicians seems to have only a very relative importance; but since we are not undertaking here to unmask the working of what might be called the ‘machine of government’, we will do no more than point out that this incompetence itself serves the purpose of keeping up the illusion of which we have been speaking: indeed, it is a necessary condition if the politicians in queation are to appear to issue from the majority, for it makes them in its likeness, inasmuch, as the majority, on whatever question it may be called on to give its opinion, is always composed of the incompetent, whose number is vastly greater than that of the men who can give an opinion based on full knowledge.

~The Crisis of the Modern World, pages 74-75, by Rene Guenon

Zionism controls and destroys the U.S.

The suicide of our peoples

Entrepreneurialism & Community Service

Entrepreneurialism & Community Service: A Strategy for Ethnic Interest Activism

By Andrei Kievsky

Entrepreneurialism, Economic Sanctions, and Tribalism

Prior to attacking Serbia and Iraq militarily, the US used so-called “economic sanctions” against these countries. One hears the term, “economic sanctions,” and thinks that it only applies to whole countries. Think again.

On October 29, 2009, the MetroWest Daily News, which covers the area west of Boston, published an article called:

Anti-Defamation League calls Jim Rizoli Holocaust denier

Rizoli does a public access cable television show, and on one of his shows he provided a link to the web site One Third of the Holocaust. So now we have a large, well-funded, ethnic interest organization publishing an article in a major local newspaper attacking this individual, Jim Rizoli, by name. A particularly chilling quote in the article by an apparently Jewish woman with a hyphenated name calling for “economic sanctions” against Jim Rizoli:

She sent a link to the Framingham Community, or Framcom, e-mail list this week and suggested people boycott Rizoli’s carpet-cleaning business.

Now if Rizoli had been an employee somewhere, this highly aggressive and organized effort would have most certainly sought to get him fired, and probably succeeded.

“If way to the better there be, it exacts a full look at the worst.”–Thomas Hardy

As a regular reader of TOQ, Occidental Dissent, and Occidental Observer, I see in the writers a true desire for ideas to translate into effective action. These aren’t people writing for writing’s own sake, as many are.

This is no longer the time for mere incitement to passion at outrage and wrongdoing. This is the time for cold eyed strategy, and the hard work of implementing it.

Economic sanctions is the enemy strategy that needs to be defeated before we can make progress. Everything else depends on countering economic sanctions, which our enemies are able to implement with minimal cost. If we can defeat economic sanctions, then we up the ante.

The reason economic sanctions are so effective against European-Americans is precisely because we are less tribal, less collective-minded, less organized, than those who put our names in newspapers for the purpose of holding us up to community condemnation. And the reason we are less tribal is because we choose the mobile, “highly skilled professional” life rather than the more drab but stable life of “shop-keeping.” This is not a vice; it was perfectly understandable. Being a skilled professional offers the promise, though perhaps not the reality, of doing something heroic, or at least “meaningful.” The shop-keeper cuts an amiable but unheroic figure; usually chubby and friendly, and maybe a little bit bored.

The problem is, mobile professionals don’t establish life-long friendships, generally don’t live near their relatives, and don’t develop strong ties in whatever community they keep their car parked. So it’s very easy to pick off these highly atomized individuals.

Meanwhile, the white working class has less and less guidance from the middle class, and it shows. Tattoos, piercings, methamphetamine, and sexual license are all too typical of the less educated whites. Thus they are not disposed, or even capable of organizing for their group interests.

Because we didn’t grow up in tribalism, only a small minority of us are able to be reliable enough to one another to actually be a tribe. Those who grew up in tribalism have the benefit of habit and custom, and thus know what to do to maintain community cohesion. But it’s a totally new thing for most of us. The writer personally knows dozens of people who have some motivation and some interest in being part of a tribe, but are not able to “follow through” on the hard work, commitment, and integrity that it takes for a newly founded would-be tribe to function.

Those who are able to be consistently “tribal” have two characteristics; they are very industrious, and they are patient and diplomatic in dealing with others. I have these personality characteristics because I am driven by a vision of what could be, if we have a functioning tribe with dozens or hundreds of members locally, who each have a role to play and find great satisfaction in being part of a group.

White Americans are very lonely, but they only have a vague understanding that this is what they are missing in life. Professional sports purposely took the place of tribalism, and combined with the mobile lifestyle, we got totally disconnected from each other as a people. It’s already a cliche that modern life has seen a massive increase in use of anti-depressant drugs in our group.

Once the better sort of person gets a taste of tribal living, he likes it and values it and becomes a fully contributing and functional member of the tribe. If you’re broken down on the side of the road in your local area, can you dial someone on your cell phone and have a ride out of there in less than an hour? Do you have any friends in your town or a nearby town that you talk to every day? Or are all relationships, except maybe with a spouse, maybe with children if you have them, based on economic transactions?

This is truly what’s missing in our lives, and yet there’s an implicit idea, probably implanted by mass media, that it’s unmanly or uncool to admit it. I have a vague memory from childhood of seeing Barbara Streisand on television on the 1970’s singing her song, “People . . . people who need people, are the luckiest people in the world” and scoffing, “Nonsense, I don’t need anyone!” And the real message I learned is that “people who need people, are icky needy people who are weak.” I think we all heard that message, loud and clear. The chains of consumerism and individualism were clapped on us, from within our own brains.

Individualists are not so rugged any more. Now they are getting their lunch eaten by tribalists who always took it for granted that people need people.

The modern tribalist should strive to be a small business owner, rather than an employee, for several reasons.

First, an entrepreneur generally stays put. You aren’t going to be transferred to the branch office 2000 miles away if you want to keep your job. You own your own life, and own your time.

Second, an entrepreneur is more confident and gregarious. He lives by his wits, meets lots of people, gets out and about town, so he has an opportunity to develop a more sociable personality and actually develop long-term relationships with local people. Eventually this translates into influence.

Third, an entrepreneur is able to hire fellow tribalists or probate tribalists, and see what kind of character they possess. See if they show up for work, see if they steal from the cash drawer, see how they interact with the public, and have many hours to converse with the probate tribalist to get to know him or her very well. For that matter, the entrepreneur may coach the probate tribalist on human relations, which is something we need to systematize and teach anyway.

Fourth, being an entrepreneur sharpens the survival instinct, and pairs it with the creative faculty. Like a wild animal, the entrepreneur is always alert and looking out for the next opportunity to “eat.” A person whose creative-mindedness would go underutilized at a “job,” will make full use of this talent as an entrepreneur. He or she may open multiple businesses, or find that one business that worked for a while, no longer is profitable, and transitions to a new opportunity in a smooth and timely fashion. He’s every bit as alert to his surroundings, and to society in general, as a cheetah on the hunt.

Fifth, and to get back to the above case of Jim Rizoli, the ADL can’t get an entrepreneur fired from his job. The punchline of the story about the ADL calling Jim Rizoli a “Holocaust Denier” in the local newspaper, is that it won’t even hurt his business. Entrepreneurialism is the solution to economic sanctions and is also the economic model for building a modern tribe.

Entrepreneurialism and Community Service

One thing that characterizes the tens of thousands of foreign owned convenience stores is their lack of involvement in the local community. The Indian and Pakistani owned quick-stop stores rarely sponsor local Little Leagues or soccer leagues or scholarships. This is why there is an incredible opportunity for European-American activists to begin taking back the convenience stores. Ordinary Americans will vote for a store that cares about the community, over some jibbering foreigner who is sending all his money back to his own tribe and his own tribal territory. A nativist-minded convenience store need only drop the most subtle hints, like stenciled lettering on the plate glass window, “We speak English,” “We give directions” (be sure to have high speed Internet and a printer for Google maps), and “Clean public bathrooms.” Also, have a wall dedicated to all the community service activities such as team pictures of the sponsored Little League teams, a scholarship contest to the local community college, references to activities such as “Walk for Cancer” and “Can drive for the homeless” and the like.

Nativist convenience stores are an idea that’s been staring us in the face for years, but we have ignored it. Once people start overwhelmingly patronizing a nativist convenience store, the nearby foreign owned one will suffer and hopefully go out of business. And then we buy up more and more stores for our own tribal members and give them “nativist” themes.

There are many other businesses we can be doing besides convenience stores, though that one is a good “anchor” for a European-American tribal community. One way to do research on “the next business” is to volunteer around the community so as to be in contact with hundreds of local people, and get to know them better. This way, you can get a sense of what is most needed around the community, and how you might be able to provide a solution.

A very useful community service organization to get involved in, that is, if you aren’t too paranoid about getting involved peripherally with the US government, is “Community Emergency Response Teams.” A European-American tribalist organization, “Bay Area National Anarchists” are part of CERT in the San Francisco area. From the CERT web site: http://www.citizencorps.gov/cert/about.shtm

About CERT

Introduction

Following a major disaster, first responders who provide fire and medical services will not be able to meet the demand for these services. Factors as number of victims, communication failures, and road blockages will prevent people from accessing emergency services they have come to expect at a moment’s notice through 911. People will have to rely on each other for help in order to meet their immediate life saving and life sustaining needs.

One also expects that under these kinds of conditions, family members, fellow employees, and neighbors will spontaneously try to help each other. This was the case following the Mexico City earthquake where untrained, spontaneous volunteers saved 800 people. However, 100 people lost their lives while attempting to save others. This is a high price to pay and is preventable through training.

If we can predict that emergency services will not meet immediate needs following a major disaster, especially if there is no warning as in an earthquake, and people will spontaneously volunteer, what can government do to prepare citizens for this eventuality?

First, present citizens the facts about what to expect following a major disaster in terms of immediate services. Second, give the message about their responsibility for mitigation and preparedness. Third, train them in needed life saving skills with emphasis on decision making skills, rescuer safety, and doing the greatest good for the greatest number. Fourth, organize teams so that they are an extension of first responder services offering immediate help to victims until professional services arrive.

Background

The Community Emergency Response Team concept was developed and implemented by the Los Angeles City Fire Department (LAFD) in 1985. The Whittier Narrows earthquake in 1987 underscored the area-wide threat of a major disaster in California. Further, it confirmed the need for training civilians to meet their immediate needs. As a result, the LAFD created the Disaster Preparedness Division with the purpose of training citizens and private and government employees.

The training program that LAFD initiated makes good sense and furthers the process of citizens understanding their responsibility in preparing for disaster. It also increases their ability to safely help themselves, their family and their neighbors. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recognizes the importance of preparing citizens. The Emergency Management Institute (EMI) and the National Fire Academy adopted and expanded the CERT materials believing them applicable to all hazards.

The CERT course will benefit any citizen who takes it. This individual will be better prepared to respond to and cope with the aftermath of a disaster. Additionally, if a community wants to supplement its response capability after a disaster, civilians can be recruited and trained as neighborhood, business, and government teams that, in essence, will be auxiliary responders. These groups can provide immediate assistance to victims in their area, organize spontaneous volunteers who have not had the training, and collect disaster intelligence that will assist professional responders with prioritization and allocation of resources following a disaster. Since 1993 when this training was made available nationally by FEMA, communities in 28 States and Puerto Rico have conducted CERT training.

Your own town may very well have a CERT team, and if it doesn’t, you can start one by getting the free training. The people who volunteer for CERT are generally in the helping and skilled professions — nurses, electricians, construction contractors, veterinarians, and older people who retired from a hard driving career and need to keep some challenge in their lives. My impression is that it’s a very good group of people, and almost totally self-selecting. And these are people you will see on a semi-regular basis. CERT is not a terribly burdensome commitment, and if there’s a disaster in your area you will be much better off being involved in the rescue and recovery efforts, rather than a hapless victim and refugee.

In sum, CERT and/or becoming a volunteer EMT, firefighter, town government like the zoning board, or some other such thing, has great value for the entrepreneur and the modern tribalist.

Conclusion

The “way to the better” is to become tribalists, entrepreneurs, and settlers once again. We need to come home in the deeper sense, and home needs to be more than the place we park our cars. We need to put down roots, and defend our territory, both geographical and ideological.

http://www.counter-currents.com/2011/01/entrepreneurialism-and-community-service/

No, I don’t see America becoming a giant reservation for defeated white people…

No, I don’t see America becoming a giant reservation for defeated white people; I don’t see any comparison to what happened to Indians and what is happening to white America. If I have used such metaphors in the past, I recant. There is no similarity. Indians fought like hell for our land and our people! White people are writhing in self-righteous ideology and suicidal superiority, giving away what their fathers fought for. Indians would never, ever do such a thing–not knowingly or intentionally, not as a people.”   ~David Yeagley

The Stranger by Rudyard Kipling

The Stranger within my gate,
He may be true or kind,
But he does not talk my talk–
I cannot feel his mind.
I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
But not the soul behind.

The men of my own stock,
They may do ill or well,
But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
They are used to the lies I tell;
And we do not need interpreters
When we go to buy or sell.

The Stranger within my gates,
He may be evil or good,
But I cannot tell what powers control–
What reasons sway his mood;
Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
Shall repossess his blood.

The men of my own stock,
Bitter bad they may be,
But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
And see the things I see;
And whatever I think of them and their likes
They think of the likes of me.

This was my father’s belief
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf–
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.

My National-Anarchism

People often think that for some reason I am ‘political’ because I am a National-Anarchist. I have to explain to them that my sense of National-Anarchism is not ‘political’ at all. It is beyond anything political and seeks the very root of those things that matter most to human beings and their survival; i.e. culture, religion, shared sense of destiny, race, ethnicity, customs, etc.

It is about building our own communities whether they be in a physical manifestation or simply a locally-based social network. There is no need for a massive societal collapse in order to effectuate N-A principles. N-A can work both within and outside of the state depending upon the commitment of tribal members and their goals.

Start small and local and build from there. Develop a social network with people you trust and first agree on small projects to complete; i.e. barter with each other, donate to a local shelter together, go as a group to visit an elderly home, etc. As more trust and comraderie builds, then much loftier goals can be set; i.e. create a neighborhood watch, develop a community garden, etc.

If one is too obsessed with the large-scale negativity of the world, then nothing will be accomplished. Only focus on what you can control and directly contribute to it. Honor the people around you whom you can depend upon because they are precious. Take stock of yourself and appreciate the beauty around you. Be positive. Act positive.

A New Independence

“No Shame, No Blame” by Epictetus

It is our feelings about things that torment us rather than the things themselves, it follows that blaming others is silly. Therefore, when we suffer setbacks, disturbances, or grief, let us never place the blame on others, but on our own attitudes.

Small-minded people habitually reproach others for their own misfortunes. Average people reproach themselves. Those who are dedicated to a life of wisdom understand that the impulse to blame something or someone is foolishness, that there is nothing to be gained in blaming, whether it be others or oneself.

One of the signs of the dawning of moral progress is the gradual extinguishing of blame. We see the futility of finger-pointing. The more we examine our attitudes and work on ourselves, the less we are apt to be swept away by stormy emotional reactions in which we see easy explanations for unbidden events.

Things simply are what they are. Other people think what they will think; it is of no concern to us. No shame. No blame.

Taken from The Art of Living by Epictetus, interpreted by Sharon Lebell,      page 11.

America’s New Elite

The tea party appears to be of one mind on at least one thing: America has been taken over by a New Elite.

“On one side, we have the elites,” Fox News host Glenn Beck explained last month, “and the other side, we have the regular people.” The elites are “no longer in touch with what the country is really thinking,” Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle complained this summer. And when Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell recently began a campaign ad by saying, “I didn’t go to Yale,” she could be confident that her supporters would approve.

All this has made the New Elite distinctly touchy (see Maureen Dowd’s “Making Ignorance Chic”), dismissive (see Jacob Weisberg’s “Elitist Nonsense”) and defensive (see Anne Applebaum’s “The Rise of the ‘Ordinary’ Elite”).

“Elite?” they seem to be saying. “Who? Us?”

Why are the members of the New Elite feeling so put upon? They didn’t object back in 1991, when Robert Reich said we had a new class of symbolic analysts in his book “The Work of Nations.” They didn’t raise a fuss in 2000 when David Brooks took an anthropologist’s eye to their exotic tribe and labeled them bourgeois bohemians in “Bobos in Paradise.” And they were surely pleased when Richard Florida celebrated their wonderfulness in his 2002 work, “The Rise of the Creative Class.”

That a New Elite has emerged over the past 30 years is not really controversial. That its members differ from former elites is not controversial. What sets the tea party apart from other observers of the New Elite is its hostility, rooted in the charge that elites are isolated from mainstream America and ignorant about the lives of ordinary Americans.

Let me propose that those allegations have merit.

One of the easiest ways to make the point is to start with the principal gateway to membership in the New Elite, the nation’s most prestigious colleges and universities. In the idealized view of the meritocrats, those schools were once the bastion of the Northeastern Establishment, favoring bluebloods and the wealthy, but now they are peopled by youth from all backgrounds who have gained admittance through talent, pluck and hard work.

That idealized view is only half-right. Over the past several decades, elite schools have indeed sought out academically talented students from all backgrounds. But the skyrocketing test scores of the freshman classes at Harvard, Yale, Stanford and other elite schools in the 1950s and 1960s were not accompanied by socioeconomic democratization.

On the surface, it looks as if things have changed. Compared with 50 years ago, the proportion of students coming from old-money families and exclusive prep schools has dropped. The representation of African Americans, Latinos and Asian Americans has increased. Yet the student bodies of the elite colleges are still drawn overwhelmingly from the upper middle class. According to sociologist Joseph Soares’s book “The Power of Privilege: Yale and America’s Elite Colleges,” about four out of five students in the top tier of colleges have parents whose income, education and occupations put them in the top quarter of American families, according to Soares’s measure of socioeconomic status. Only about one out of 20 such students come from the bottom half of families.

The discomfiting explanation is that despite need-blind admissions policies, the stellar applicants still hail overwhelmingly from the upper middle class and above. Students who have a parent with a college degree accounted for only 55 percent of SAT-takers this year but got 87 percent of all the verbal and math scores above 700, according to unpublished data provided to me by the College Board. This is not a function of SAT prep courses available to the affluent — such coaching buys only a few dozen points — but of the ability of these students to do well in a challenging academic setting.

Far from spending their college years in a meritocratic melting pot, the New Elite spend school with people who are mostly just like them — which might not be so bad, except that so many of them have been ensconced in affluent suburbs from birth and have never been outside the bubble of privilege. Few of them grew up in the small cities, towns or rural areas where more than a third of all Americans still live.

When they leave college, the New Elite remain in the bubble. Harvard seniors surveyed in 2007 were headed toward a small number of elite graduate schools (Harvard and Cambridge in the lead) and a small number of elite professional fields (finance and consulting were tied for top choice). Jobs in businesses that provide bread-and-butter goods and services to individual Americans, which make up the overwhelming majority of entry-level openings for aspiring managers, attracted just 1.7 percent of the Harvard students who went to work right after graduation.

When the New Elite get around to marrying, they don’t marry just anybody. One of the funniest and most bitingly accurate parts of “Bobos in Paradise” was Brooks’s analysis of the New York Times’s wedding announcements. Go back to 1960, and the page was filled with brides and grooms who grew up wealthy but whose educations and occupations did not offer much indication that they were going to set the world on fire. Look at the page today, and it is studded with the mergers of fabulous résumés.

Three examples lifted from last Sunday’s Times: a director of marketing at a biotech company (Stanford undergrad, Harvard MBA) married a consultant to the aerospace industry (Stanford undergrad, Harvard MPP); a vice president at Goldman Sachs (Yale) married a director of retail development for a financial software firm (Hofstra); and a third-year resident in cardiology (Yale undergrad) married a third-year resident in pathology (Columbia undergrad, summa cum laude).

The New Elite marry each other, combining their large incomes and genius genes, and then produce offspring who get the benefit of both.

We are watching the maturation of the cognitive stratification that Richard J. Herrnstein and I described in “The Bell Curve” back in 1994. When educational and professional opportunities first opened up, we saw social churning galore, as youngsters benefited from opportunities that their parents had been denied. But that phase lasted only a generation or two, slowed by this inescapable paradox:

The more efficiently a society identifies the most able young people of both sexes, sends them to the best colleges, unleashes them into an economy that is tailor-made for people with their abilities and lets proximity take its course, the sooner a New Elite — the “cognitive elite” that Herrnstein and I described — becomes a class unto itself. It is by no means a closed club, as Barack Obama’s example proves. But the credentials for admission are increasingly held by the children of those who are already members. An elite that passes only money to the next generation is evanescent (“Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations,” as the adage has it). An elite that also passes on ability is more tenacious, and the chasm between it and the rest of society widens.

What Herrnstein and I did not fully appreciate 16 years ago was how relentless this segregation would be. It is hard to get numbers — no survey has samples large enough to calibrate precisely what’s going on with the top percentiles of the population that I’m talking about — but the numbers we do have, combined with qualitative data provided by observers such as Brooks, Florida and Bill Bishop, in his book “The Big Sort,” are persuasive.

We know, for one thing, that the New Elite clusters in a comparatively small number of cities and in selected neighborhoods in those cities. This concentration isn’t limited to the elite neighborhoods of Washington, New York, Boston, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley and San Francisco. It extends to university cities with ancillary high-tech jobs, such as Austin and the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill triangle.

With geographical clustering goes cultural clustering. Get into a conversation about television with members of the New Elite, and they can probably talk about a few trendy shows — “Mad Men” now, “The Sopranos” a few years ago. But they haven’t any idea who replaced Bob Barker on “The Price Is Right.” They know who Oprah is, but they’ve never watched one of her shows from beginning to end.

Talk to them about sports, and you may get an animated discussion of yoga, pilates, skiing or mountain biking, but they are unlikely to know who Jimmie Johnson is (the really famous Jimmie Johnson, not the former Dallas Cowboys coach), and the acronym MMA means nothing to them.

They can talk about books endlessly, but they’ve never read a “Left Behind” novel (65 million copies sold) or a Harlequin romance (part of a genre with a core readership of 29 million Americans).

They take interesting vacations and can tell you all about a great backpacking spot in the Sierra Nevada or an exquisite B&B overlooking Boothbay Harbor, but they wouldn’t be caught dead in an RV or on a cruise ship (unless it was a small one going to the Galapagos). They have never heard of Branson, Mo.

There are so many quintessentially American things that few members of the New Elite have experienced. They probably haven’t ever attended a meeting of a Kiwanis Club or Rotary Club, or lived for at least a year in a small town (college doesn’t count) or in an urban neighborhood in which most of their neighbors did not have college degrees (gentrifying neighborhoods don’t count). They are unlikely to have spent at least a year with a family income less than twice the poverty line (graduate school doesn’t count) or to have a close friend who is an evangelical Christian. They are unlikely to have even visited a factory floor, let alone worked on one.

Taken individually, members of the New Elite are isolated from mainstream America as a result of lifestyle choices that are nobody’s business but their own. But add them all up, and they mean that the New Elite lives in a world that doesn’t intersect with mainstream America in many important ways. When the tea party says the New Elite doesn’t get America, there is some truth in the accusation.

Part of the isolation is political. In that Harvard survey I mentioned, 72 percent of Harvard seniors said their beliefs were to the left of the nation as a whole, compared with 10 percent who said theirs were to the right of it. The political preferences of academics and journalists among the New Elite also conform to the suspicions of the tea party.

But the politics of the New Elite are not the main point. When it comes to the schools where they were educated, the degrees they hold, the Zip codes where they reside and the television shows they watch, I doubt if there is much to differentiate the staff of the conservative Weekly Standard from that of the liberal New Republic, or the scholars at the American Enterprise Institute from those of the Brookings Institution, or Republican senators from Democratic ones.

The bubble that encases the New Elite crosses ideological lines and includes far too many of the people who have influence, great or small, on the course of the nation. They are not defective in their patriotism or lacking a generous spirit toward their fellow citizens. They are merely isolated and ignorant. The members of the New Elite may love America, but, increasingly, they are not of it.

See original article here.