Tactics of the Elites to Promote Their Vision

Author: Tim Platnich

Date: August 4, 2024

This Post is inspired by Thomas Sowell's 1995 book: "The Vision of the Anointed". It is also informed by the writings of Friedrich Hayek and Thomas More ("Utopia").

Sowell calls certain elites the 'anointed' or, more pointedly, the 'self-anointed'. These are members of the 'intelligentsia' that have a particular shared cosmic vision. This is a vision of how the world should be, compared to how it actually is. It is the mission of the elites to impose that vision on the rest of us, reality be damned. I alternatively refer to these people as the 'anointed', the 'self-anointed', the 'elite' or a cominbation of the foregoing. Those that aren't part of the anointed class are what Sowell calls 'the benighted'. Ouch.

So what is this cosmic vision? It is a vision of an ideal world, an 'utopia'. Some elements of this utopia are: a welfare state; no poverty; perfect equality of both opportunities and outcomes; no sickness; no hardships; affordable housing for everyone; borders open to the migration of people around the world; the end of violence and crime; no discrimination based on any human characterics whatsoever.

The means to this utopia are also part of the vision. The means to utopia is central planning by the elite and their control of all aspects of the economy and society.

This cosmic vision is not a conspiracy. Rather, it is a shared ideology. The ideology may be well-intentioned. However, the implementation of this ideology often leads to results worse than the problems to be solved.

There are critics of the cosmic vision of the elites. According to many of these critics: the values of the elites are not necessarily the values of everyone; the vision of the elites collides head-on with reality; no person or group of persons has sufficient knowledge, or is even capable of having sufficient knowledge, to order all the affairs of a modern, complex economy or society; central planning and control inevitably leads to coercion and tyranny; individual liberty and responsibility are more important than the promises of a welfare state; a market economy, with appropirate tweaking, maximizes both economic success and individual freedom; democratic decision making, with appropriate checks and balances, is preferable to rule by the few.

The anointed seek to implement their cosmic vision incrementally, one issue at a time. The cosmic vision and its basic tenets are more like guiding principles than a detailed plan.

In this Post, I will outline the tactics used by elites to impose their vision on the rest of us - the benighted - with examples both given by Sowell and that have arisen since the writing of his book. I will also talk about their underlying assumptions. Many readers may agree with the self-anointed elites. Indeed, many may be so self-anointed! Whether you are one of the anointed, or one of the benighted, read on and consider!

Tactic 1

As Sowell points out, the first stage (as he calls it), or tactic, as I call it, is to create a crisis. This is a well established tactic. Churchill is credited as saying 'don't let a good crisis go to waste'. Some say the tactic actually should be attributed to Machiavelli. A crisis creates an opportunity - the opportunity for the anointed to use their positions to impose their values and preferences on the benighted. Who would object to the use of power to solve a crisis? A true crisis may or may not exist. But a 'fashioned crisis' can be created from whole cloth.

Sowell gives examples of fashioned crises back in the 1960s and 1970s: 1) the crisis of poverty; 2) the crisis of teenage pregancies and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs); 3) the crisis of crime; and 4) the oil crisis.

Since 1995 (the date of Sowell's book), the anointed have fashioned other crises including: the crisis of climate change; the Covid epidemic; the opioid crisis; the affordable housing crisis - to name a few.

Sometimes 'emergency' is used in place of 'crisis'. The effect is the same. The City of Calgary, for example, has recently declared a 'climate emergency' notwithstanding the last extreme weather event was a 'one-in-one hundred year' flood back in 2013. What was the purpose of this declaration of emergency? Perhaps, as its turning out, a better declared emergency would have been one related to infrastructure.

Tactic 2

Propose the solution for the crisis. This tactic is based on the assumption (or perhaps the noble lie) that there is only one solution and only the elite can provide it.

Proposed solutions invariably call for government action and more expansive government. The underlying assumption is that government is good and the more expansive the government, the better off the people will be. Also, an expansive government is necessary for the implementation of cental control.

Regarding the poverty crisis, Sowell points out that poverty was decreasing for three decades prior ot the proposal of poverty-stopping policies - so what was the crisis? These policies called for government hand-outs. It was argued that such hand-outs would raise people out of poverty and cause them to be less reliant on government programs in the long-run as it was poverty that was holding back their economic success. The stated goals, therefore, as identified by Sowell, were to 1) decrease poverty; and 2) thereby reduce reliance on government hand-outs in the long-run, saving taxpayers money. These policies were consistent with the vision of a poverty-free society through expansive government aid and dependence. Sowell notes, however, that the policy failed to achieve its stated purpose as poverty increased as did the cost of government welfare.

Regarding the teen pregnancy crisis, Sowell points out that teen preganancies were on the decrease in the decades leading up to the so called crisis. Same with STDs. The policy proposed for addressing these crises : sex education for K-12 students that included, over time moduals on fellatio, cunnilingus, masturbation, anal-sex, gay sex and so on. The stated goal was to reduce teen pregnancy and STDs. What was the true vision of this policy? Could it be the normalization of sexual acts and relations that were considered immoral, if not criminal, at the time? Could it be a more liberal view of sexual activity generally as prefered ?by the elite? If unwanted pregnancy and safe-sex were truly the goals, wouldn't one or two lessons, given at or about the time of puberty, on birth control and the use of condoms, have been sufficient?

Regarding the crime crisis, again Sowell points out crime statistics that indicated violent crime was actually decreasing at the time of the fashioned crisis in the 1960s. The policies invoked by both legislatures and the courts, based upon the untested theories of certain elites, were to focus on the due process rights of criminals and a movement towards rehabilitation rather than punishment. The untested theories were that people committing crimes were victims - victims of an unjust criminal system and an unjust society more generally. Critics have argued that crime is as old as human society itself. There are some people in society, that, for whatever reason, don't play by the rules and cause harm to others. This is the real world. No amount of due process or attempted rehabilitation is going to fix this.

Regarding the oil crisis, the energy shock of the 1970s led to increases in the cost of non-renewables, particularly gasoline for cars. These price increases were the stated crisis. The solution proposed was to regulate gas prices to keep them low for the consumer. This was an attempt by government to take control of the energy industry (as implemented in Canada under the National Energy Plan). This was a baby step. The giant step had to await the climate change crisis.

The climate change crisis is a matter of a whole different magnitude and will not be dealt with in depth here. Suffice it to say, this fashioned crisis has allowed elites to influence governments to regulate every facet of a person's life including by way of examples only: what they eat; how they heat/cool their homes; how they travel and commute; what fabrics they are allowed to wear; how they drink beverages (no plastic straws); and what they use for energy generally, and the cost thereof. There has never been a cause for greater intrusion into the lives of citizens than the climate change 'crisis'. This is further government control over every facet of energy, and thus, the lives of citizens. Other, less intrusive policies such as the mitigation of any harmful effects of climate change, have been dismissed out of hand. Why?

The Covid crisis was not wholly manufactured. There was a world-wide virus epedemic. However, governments around the world took this opportunity: to force individuals to mask and get vaccinated; to restrict travel in many cases to small geographical areas; to deny family members access to other family members; to shut down businesses as they deemed fit; to prevent children from going to school; to prevent landlords from collecting rent; and to experiment with modern monetary policy by borrowing and spending astronomical sums of money with no idea of the consequences. Penalties for failing to get vaccinated were severe and included loss of employment. Was the true vision once again to insert government into everyone's daily lives? In the most extreme cases, whether you could leave your house was a government decision. Once you left, the government was watching you. Were you wearing a mask, were you properly distancing, were you seeing anyone you weren't allowed to see, were you going to a place that you weren't allowed to go to, were you playing where you weren't allowed to play, were you working where you shouldn't be working? Further, citizens were encouraged to turn in fellow citizens for the slightest breaches. Orwell would have been shocked.

The opioid crisis was claimed to be, not one of addiction, but one of addicts overdosing on unregulated street drugs.

The self-anointed came up with the policies to deal with this crisis. The policies encouraged regulated drug use through the free supply of narcotics by government. They also provided that the drugs could be used anywhere, anytime. No strings attached. The idea was to make the drug supply safe and to remove the stigma attached to being an addict by bringing drug use out in the open, even if next to a daycare or elementary school. It was claimed, largely without evidence, that such policies would reduce deaths by overdose.

The elites defined the problem, not as one of drug addition, but one of 'toxic supply'. Was the true vision behind these policies the increase of people's dependency, literally, on the government?

A very recent fashioned crisis is the 'affordable housing' crisis. To be clear, finding housing that one can or is willing to afford is an age old problem. Leaving aside so-called homeless people, which, as a group constitutes a very small percentage of Canadian society, people are living somewhere. The can find housing. They may not be able to find the housing they want. Or, the housing they can find may cost a painful percentage of their income.

In any event, the elite have found the solution: blanket city-wide rezoning. One does wonder how million dollar four-plex units on previously single family housing lots in upscale neighbourhoods is going to increase 'affordable' housing. One would think that any pre-posed re-zoning would have to demonstrate how it will increase housing affordability. Nope. Not with blanket city-wide rezoning. Good for developers. Good for increasing density. The likelihood of increased affordable housing is anyone's guess. Against what metrics will it be measured?

What is really going on is city densification. This is the vision of the anointed. Why shouldn't Calgary be more like Amsterdam, London or Paris? Why all the space? Density makes sense of expensive rapid transit lines and bike lanes.

If it was really about affordable housing, why doesn't the City take inventory of all of its available land and have that developed into high-rise affordable housing where the City can control the costs of buying or renting? Why doesn't the city expropriate derilict and dilapidated houses and develop these properties into affordable housing? Why are these options not being explored if affordable housing is really the goal?

Tactic 3

Refuse to consider alternatives proposed by critics that don't fit with the 'vision'. See above.

Tactic 4

Refuse to consider data that speaks against the proposed polices either before or after their implementation. In other words, refuse to consider whether the proposed solutions actually achieve the stated objectives. Often no mechanisms are put in place to measure the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. Why is this?

Following the anti-poverty policies implemented in the 1960s, according to data reviewed by Sowell, poverty actually went up. Similarly, Sowell reports that sex education did not decrease teenage pregnancies or STDs. Criminal justice reform saw an increase in crime, not a decrease. Gasoline price fixing by government actually led to artificially high gas prices. Once the regulation was removed, gas prices decreased due to market forces. The regulation of carbon emissions, to fight climate change, has not led to a world-wide decrease in carbon emissions. All that has resulted as a matter of certainty is increased energy insecurity and cost. Extreme measures regarding the Covid epidemic had little or no beneficial effect when compared with less severe measures. However, extreme measures harmed businesses, economies and childrens' education. Modern monetary policy has led to extreme inflation, increased costs of living and a diminution of the standard of living. Recent studies have revealed that there was virtually no evidentiary basis for gender affirming case and the argument that it reduces suicide rates.

Tactic 5

Argue that matters would have been worse without the policies as a means of justifying ineffective and disastrous policies. This tactic only works where there are no jurisdictions that used competing policies. Comparing outcomes with juridictions that obtained better results using different polices is a no-no. This is data. This is evidence. If it goes against the narrative, ignore it. The different measures taken by different jurisdictions regarding Covid brought to light how disastrous come Covid policies were.

Tactic 6

Double down on bad policy in the hope that poor results are just an anomaly. This was the tactic used with 'safe supply' in British Columbia until reason started to prevail.

Tactic 7

Claim to be following the 'science', then ignore any science that doesn't support the policy. In other words, follow the cherry-picked science. Cherry-picked science takes many forms. Picking and choosing the scientific evidence one wants to rely upon, is one form. Another form is to pick and choose the scientists that agree with the policy, and disregard the rest altogether or embark upon ad hominem attacks. No consideration is given to the damage caused to science by its misuse in this regard.

Tactic 8

Don't concern yourself with policy inconsistencies or hypocrisy.

Tactic 9

Deny that bad consequences of the policy were foreseeable even when warned by critics and where data exists that shows these consequences were not only forseeable, but likely. For example, elites argued that it was unforseeable that publicly supplied opioids would be sold and the proceeds used to buy an addict's drug of choice - often fentanyl. Yet, this was a well documented result from the legal prescription of oxycontin which was sold by users to buy heroin and fentanyl.

Tactic 10

Use past wrongs such as the legacy of slavery and colonialism to blame society for current elite policy failures. According to Sowell, for nearly 100 years following emanipation of the American slaves, black families compared favourably to white families for children being raised by two parents. Starting in the 1960s, black children began being raised by a single parent, usually the mother, and often a teenaged mother at that. This trend has been blamed on the legacy of slavery notwithstanding the obvious data to the contrary - a hundred years of data! This blame nicely side-steps blame for social welfare policies started in the 1960s that made single parenting welfare payments attractive.

Tactic 11

Avoid, at all costs, debating the merits of your vision and policies, including the underlying assumptions, logic, data and evidence related thereto. Use avoidance tactics such as self-justifying proclamations or conclusions such as 'everyone has a right to equal economic outcomes' or 'everyone has a right to decent housing' or 'of course poverty leads to crime'. In the case of any push-back on these proclamations, assert that the opponant is a racist, or is otherwise malevolent.

Tactic 12

Undermine the authority and credibility of any person, authority or institution that stand in the way of the elite vision. For example, attack both the justices of the US Supreme Court that enforce the US Constitution and the Constitution itself as they stand in the way of the elite vision. The most egregious example of such an attack in recent times is the threat to 'pack the court' undoubedly with members of the anointed to push through the anointed vision. In the case of Canada, discredit provincial Premiers, through ad hominem attacks and otherwise, that stand in the way of some 'national policy' favoured by the anointed notwithstanding that said national policy is beyond the jurisdiction of the federal government. In both the US and Canada, it is standard practice for the anointed to ignore state and provincial jurisdictions, respectively, as such jurisdictions are barriers to the grand national schemes of the anointed.

Other institutions under attack in the US by the anointed are the Senate and the Electoral College. As each state, regardless of population, has two senators, a group of senators representing less populous states can block national legislation favoured by the anointed and their population bases located in the large metropolitan areas on the west and east coasts. Similarly, the Electoral College system was designed to be a check and balance against tyranny of the more populous states. The Electoral College system prevents the more populous states from controlling who will be President and, as such, may lead to a President who is not among the anointed elite. e.g. Trump.

Tactic 13

Discredit the non-compliant part of the population, the benighted, by using derogatory terms such as 'basket of deplorables', and questioning their intelligence, motives, values and intention

Assumptions and Beliefs Underlying the Vision of the Elites

The first and perhaps most fundamental assumption is that the elites know best and are infallible. The rest of us are too clueless to live our lives without the guidance and control of the elites. They are the experts; the enlightened; the natural leaders. Their values, tastes and preferences are the correct ones. The elites know better than the combined knowlege of humankind developed over millenia as refected in traditional laws, morals, institutions and systems.

According to Sowell, elites do not believe in or accept the 'tragedy of the human condition'. Believers in the tragedy of the human condition accept: 1) not all humans have equal talents, apptitudes, motivations, etc.; 2) humans act in their own interest and are not generally motivated to act for the benefit of the collective without coercion; 3) humans are mortal and fallible; 4) humans are not all-knowing and never will be; 5) no system exists, or can exist, that can fundamentally change the foregoing attributes of the human condition; 6) there are no ultimate solutions, just trade-offs.

Elites assume that a proper system, designed and controlled by them, can eliminate the tragedy of the human condition. Systemic failures of the past, like communism, were not failures of the concept but were only failures of execution. The system was flawed. With proper education and relief from corrupting circumstances, like poverty, people will not commit crimes; they will work efficiently for the benefit of all; they will gladly share the fruits of their creativity, labour and effort with all; their family will be the whole community, not just a spouse and progeny.

A good example of the foregoing tactics and assumptions can be found in a recent paper about the role of academics in leading society: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sustainability/articles/10.3389/frsus.2021.679019/full

According to the anointed, the design of a proper system is within their capabilities. This is not a fatal conceit, nor is it the road to serfdom for the benighted. Hayek would disagree!