I know, was that the whiniest column ever? I stopped after the first paragraph but I was hoping it had a point somewhere. I guess not?

Progressives don't believe in free speech?

Well, free speech includes the right to say "Shut up!", which is different than compelling someone to shut up.

Though on second look, the only reason I have for thinking this guy is a self-labeled "progressive" is from the site where I originally saw this linked, at tjic's blog.

So, it all depends on who this guy is. But really, I can still be annoyed at the elitism.

I think that we need to start using different words for elitism and elite-ism.

I want the best of the best to be doing work like guiding the financial industry, corporations, science and the government. Does that mean I'm elitist? Or perhaps I'm a meritist.

I do not want to exclude people from endeavors because they aren't the best of the best. Even from government. But I don't want them running stuff unless they are qualified. I guess that does not make me an elite-ist. In the same vein as I'm not a racist. (Or try not to be).

How is technocracy different from meritocracy?

I suppose I should define "Best" better. I would tend to believe that in some situations I'd pike the "technical expert" and in others the "proven expert".

I actually don't see a lot of different between the two situations. If your difference is "experience", then I expect you'd understand when I say "bah." There's plenty of evidence of late to show that those with "experience" aren't all that much better at their jobs than any other choice (Fannie Mae, GM, Morgan Stanley, etc's CEOs for instance).

Edited at 2008-12-09 11:59 pm (UTC)

Ah, okay. I am not sure whether Egan is a technocrat or an elitist from that particular column (which in and of itself suggests that he's not a great writer). His objection to Palin does seem to be grounded in her being an incoherent user of the English language (which sounds like an attack on competence as a writer); his objection to Joe the Plumber seems to be more that Joe is an all-around loser. The complaint about credentials was an attack on his not having a plumber's license, which might be back towards elitist again, but I've always been told to make sure that contractors who work on my house are licensed...

I can tell someone not to write a book. Telling them they don't have the *right* to write a book, but "I think you're a poopyhead and shouldn't write a book" is completely different.

Honestly, I think anyone can write a book...I'm just sad that people actually will *buy* it.

I am.

You're saying that someone who says "you shouldn't write a book!" isn't a progressive.

I'm saying that "saying" and "doing" are 2 different things. Trying to make it so Joe the Plumber doesn't have the *right* to write a book is not progressive. Saying whatever you want, including "Joe the Plumber is a douchenozzle" or "I don't think my sister should have children" is progressive. (and completely different from "my sister shouldn't be allowed to breed").

I commend your willingness to call BS on someone who shares the same politics but pulls a BS move - we all need to be more intellectually honest like that. So: well done!

However, I must point out the no true Scotsman fallacy. In fact, there are a lot of people who meet all the criteria for being progressives and are still douches, just as there are true conservatives, libertarians, and greens who are douches.

I'll just point out that on top of your point, he's stupid. Writing about the book, regardless of what you say, gives it publicity. And there's no such thing as bad publicity. If he were smart, he'd have ignored it.

(Remember The Bell Curve? I read it precisely because of such shrill and vitriolic attacks from people who claimed to be liberals. I doubt I, or 99% of the rest of its readers, would even have heard of it otherwise.)

Some of the rhetoric was barely this side of burn this book, and much of it essentially came down to people should not discuss the issues this book raises. I consider that illiberal.

Of course, there's the assumption here that Samuel J. Wurzelbacher is actually going to write the thing. I would have assumed that he will instead be providing a job for some reasonably-qualified ghost writer, which tends to weaken Egan's point.