The Revolt Against the Masses: How Liberalism Undermined the Middle Class

Oscar Wilde and D.H. Lawrence turned up their noses at the bourgoise, while praising poets, according to the author. It won’t take a lot of convincing to tell me these men were full of themselves, because bourgoise money is what paid for their education and financed the production of Wilde’s plays. F. Scott Fitzgerald and Sinclair Lewis satirized the middle class, but it was middle class money that paid for their education. The author uses the heroine of Lewis’ novel Main Street as an example of dissatisfaction with small town life. But would she prefer living in a subdivision? Remember the town of Maycomb, Alabama, from To Kill a Mockingbird? That small town may seem dull, but there was plenty of social life for everyone, and the kids could walk to and from school.

   In the 1920’s, the New Republic’s Waldo Frank (NY born) voiced his disgust with the “human waste” that rode the subway home. But what had he done to contribute to progress? When Lewis turned up his nose at small town life, would he have preferred to live in one of Eugene O’Neill’s plays? Would he have preferred an apartment above the Last Chance Saloon, in a strip populated by hookers, crooked cops, gamblers, and drunks?

   I agree with the author’s criticism of society’s critics. Everyone chooses to live where they feel the need. Some like the city, some prefer a house, some don’t mind the long drive to work. F. Scott Fitzgerald and Sinclair Lewis were within their rights to satirize the middle class, but they never worked to make positive changes. Nowadays, it’s not unusual for Ivy League graduates to become teachers in rough, failing schools. Who’s opinion counts more?

    I don’t, however, agree with his use of Leopold & Lobe as an example of elitism run amok. Both men got life in prison, and although they were spared the death penalty, they didn’t get special treatment just because their families were wealthy. Clarence Darrow’s argument that they killed to satisfy intellectual desire didn’t influence the judge, who was probably against the death penalty anyway. A better argument for the author would be the Jack Henry Abbott case, now that was an example of intellectual stupidity gone wild. Norman Mailer fought to free a convicted murderer, over the psychiatrist’s objection, and a month later he committed another murder. Call it “radical chic” if you like, but Mailer was so awed by Abbott’s writing talent that he overlooked the man’s violent nature. At least the author rails against Amiri Baraka and other black intellectual hucksters who’ve killed any chance of progress.

    Keep in mind, in the early 60’s, Baraka was named “LeRoi Jones” and was living in Manhattan’s west Village, married to a white woman and a staple in the beatnik scene. With the death of Malcolm X, he suddenly became a great black radical.