Episode 223: The Counterintelligentsia Strikes Back!

May 23, 2023

Central Thesis

Ad-supported and billionaire-funded media, including academic work, corrupts public discourse by manufacturing consent for policies benefiting the wealthy at the expense of democracy, and simply debunking those corrupted ideas with facts is ineffective.

Key Arguments

• Academia as a vehicle for propaganda: Academic papers and research, especially when funded by wealthy individuals, can be a form of paid speech designed to influence broader public opinion and policy, much like advertising. The inherent bias introduced by this funding is often disguised as objective research.

• Public Choice Theory's Undemocratic Implications: James McGill Buchanan's Public Choice Theory, which frames voters and politicians as self-interested actors encroaching on property rights, serves as a justification for curtailing majority rule and limiting government spending on social services. This disproportionately benefits the wealthy.

• Historical Context and Southern Elites: The episode connects Buchanan's ideas to a historical context of Southern elites seeking to maintain their power and wealth in the face of desegregation and expanding federal authority. They used legal strategies to suppress voter participation and limit labor organization.

• Facts Alone Are Insufficient: Simply correcting people with facts is often ineffective because people tend to double down on their existing beliefs. To change opinions, it is necessary to change underlying narratives.

• The Counterintelligentsia Project: Buchanan's "counterintelligentsia" aimed to transform public opinion away from liberal intellectuals.

Notable Passages

• "When someone pays for speech, be it an ad or sponsored content in a newspaper, or content one finds in academia, more often than not, they're getting more than just speech. They are, quite often, hoping that this paid, sponsored speech will influence speech."

• "James McGill Buchanan was merely one pioneer in a wagon train of many, all paid to organize the wealthy against the deprivations inflicted by democracy."

• "To them, to these Nauvoo aristocrats, liberty, as they know it, meant freedom from democracy. Democracy which recognizes the equality of all. That attitude, though here more baldly stated than most are willing to admit, is still quite firmly baked into people's brains, especially if they have money. Or if they imagine that one day they will have money. Money they might lose, to taxes. Which means to them, democracy must remain in chains."

• "Minds can change one drop of alternative narrative at a time. Which means, we could win this war. And we could do it with ideas."

Rhetorical Approach

Jim employs a mix of historical examples (Brown v. Board of Education, Little Rock, the Gilded Age), detailed analysis of academic arguments (Buchanan's Public Choice Theory), and personal anecdote (his conversation with his brother). A sarcastic tone is used to critique the motivations and impacts of the wealthy elite and their intellectual allies.

Connections

• References to previous episodes criticizing advertising and its effects.
• Reference to Lewis Franklin Powell, Jr.'s 1971 memo, which Jim has discussed before.
• The book Democracy in Chains by Nancy MacLean is central to the episode's analysis.
• Mention of Brendan Nyhan's research on the ineffectiveness of factual corrections.
• Mention of Strangers in Their Own Land by Arlie Russell Hochschild.
• Mention of Kellogg's Six-Hour Day by Benjamin Hunnicutt.