Eyes of the World

The idea of a “public intellectual” is open to wide interpretation. Generally considered the highest authority in their respective field, the public intellectual also faces the stigma of being regarded, often scornfully, as self-importantly elite. Throughout history, public intellectuals of sorts have existed and have often been criticized by society. In more tyrannical times, intellectuals such as Socrates or Galileo have been persecuted for their strong belief in their ideas. Today, public intellectuals have unprecedented access to means by which research and promote their ideas.

Yet the public intellectual walks a fine line between proliferating their discoveries and theories, and self-promotion. Additionally, many have addressed the issue of the “decline of the public intellectual” in recent times. In his essay entitled, “The ‘Decline’ of Public Intellectual?” Stephen Mack critiques self-proclaimed public intellectual Richard Posner’s article about the demise of the public intellectual. Mack uses Posner as a “quintessential example,” of a modern public intellectual, “hyperventilat[ing] about class purity, or the ‘appalling decline’ in quality of most other public intellectuals.”

I agree with Mack that the quality of the public intellectual is not in decline. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, there arises an array of issues that affect a greater number of people. In the past, public intellectuals were likely to analyze issues which affected only their local society or domain. Yet with the technological revolution that has occurred since the creation of the internet and the personal computer, diverse and complex issues that affect the global society have surfaced.

Issues such as climate change and nuclear proliferation have the potential to have devastating impacts on our entire planet and have paved the way for a new generation of public intellectuals to study their potential impacts and courses of action that the global community can take to avoid future calamities.

One such public intellectual is Graham Allison. A lifelong Harvard scholar, professor, and one-time dean of the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Allison is one of the foremost scholars on the topic of nuclear proliferation and nuclear terrorism. In addition to his work at Harvard, Allison has also served on the Council of Foreign Relations and contributed to Foreign Affairs magazine.

But while Allison has published his fair share of work on the topics of foreign policy and nuclear proliferation, he has gone beyond the realm of academia and has served as an analyst for the United States government. Recognizing that the threat of nuclear proliferation to rogue states or terrorist organizations is one of the gravest dangers facing Americans and the global community, Allison has served as an adviser to the Pentagon since the 1960s. He has recently served on the Congressional Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism, and is the only person to ever have been twice awarded the Department of Defense's highest civilian award, the Distinguished Public Service Medal.

In all of these ways, Allison is truly a public intellectual. It is difficult then, with such examples, to deny that the public intellectual community still very much exists.

I believe there is in no way a decline of the public intellectual, but a hyper-increase in information in the world. In my previous post, “The Times They Are A-Changin’,” I cited the issue of an information overload from the internet and social media as the damaging factor in the public’s interest in the political process. I would argue that the same problem exists with regard to the public intellectual.

The quality of the public intellectual has not decreased. What has declined is the public’s interest. In the same way that political apathy has grown, interest in academic matters, even ones that will eventually affect the entire world, is equally sluggish. While I agree with Mack on the fact that the public intellectual is not in decline, I would disagree with his quote, “The measure of public intellectual work is not whether the people are listening, but whether they’re hearing things worth talking about.”

In his most recent Foreign Affairs article, Allison says that the odds of a successful nuclear or biological terrorist attack in the next five years are greater than ever. He goes on to describe how Pakistan likely poses the greatest danger in the proliferation of nuclear materials to terrorist groups. Yet the American public, a majority of which are most likely unable to find Pakistan on a map (even though we’re fighting a war next door), doesn’t seem to know and doesn’t seem to care.

But although the public intellectual may no longer be the public’s intellectual, individuals like Graham Allison are proof that such a profession still exists.

I Love College

In January of 2008, I stood in a packed high school gymnasium in Nashua, New Hampshire waiting to see presidential candidate Barack Obama speak following that state's Democratic presidential primary. As thousands of others and I waited for what would eventually become known as the "Yes We Can" speech, we anxiously watched the results come in on the large projection screen in the corner. As Hilary Clinton gathered momentum, the fleeting hope that remained was "they haven't called the college towns."

Attending college is a privilege. I consider myself lucky for the educational opportunities that I have been afforded and recognize the power of a college degree in today's society. I have also recognized the correlation between level of education and political preferences.

In recent elections, the tendency of college-educated voters to cast more liberal ballots has been apparent. In the 2008 election, Gallup reported that those with a high-school education voted for McCain 53-47 while college educated voters preferred Obama 55-45 with a staggering 65-35 percent of voters who had completed post-graduate work voting in the same fashion. In last week's special election in Massachusetts, exit polls compiled by Hart Research indicated that Democrat Martha Coakley won the vote of college educated voters 50-46, while those without a college degree voted overwhelmingly for Republican Scott Brown, 57-37.

Dan Payne, the author of the Boston Globe piece highlighting these recent statistics, referred to this as a "working-class revolt."

"The most troubling message that Democrats should take from the data was this: 'The Massachusetts election signaled a working-class revolt, and reveals the danger to Democrats if workers’ economic concerns are not addressed.'"

While the use of the term ironically induces the ideas of a Marxist proletariat revolution (given that demographic's criticisms of the Obama government as Marxist or Socialist), the statistics remain confusing. Why would the working and middle class so strongly support the candidate of a party who has long aimed to provide tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% and has been supported and influenced by Wall Street corporations?

Maybe that's why.

Brown's attempts to appeal to a populist base didn't stop there. The Boston Globe recently put together a photo report about Brown's "everyman's" barn jacket that he was seen wearing throughout the campaign. Although the coat reportedly goes for around $600, the public's perception of Brown as an everyday, working-man's candidate likely is what determined the election.

Populism has been the aim of the recent conservative movement. The aim of the Tea Party movement has been to capitalize on a base of "average Americans" who aim to take back the country for the people. The populist anger, which has been fueled by incendiary media, translated into a Brown victory in one of the nation's most liberal states.

The common denominator is level of education. The economic crisis has taken a toll on everyone. However, it is the working class, and generally those without college degrees, who are likely to be influenced the most by the conservative revolt against big government and regulations. Regardless of the Obama administration's goal of cutting taxes for 95% of middle and lower class families, plans to create hundreds of thousands of jobs, and attempts to make health insurance more affordable for almost all Americans, the United States' less-educated working class has expressed its discontent.

As the conservative media hammers its anti-Obama sentiments home, the "working class revolt" continues. As the middle and lower classes continue to hear venomous attacks from the right, the more deeply entrenched their beliefs become, regardless of whether the controversial issues at hand will affect them or not.

Sadly, without voter education, the schism between the left and the right is likely to widen. Additionally, the right will continue to capitalize on the populist anger of the working class unless the left can determine a way to reach these voters and let them know contrary to what Fox News says, they are actually there to help.

The Times, They Are A-Changin'

Welcome to We The People... The United States of America was founded as a representative democracy on the basis of government for the people and by the people. As citizens of a democracy, we, the people of the United States, are able to vote on issues and elect the representatives that we wish to be our voice in the legislative and executive branches of our federal and local governments.

However, while a majority may rule in a democracy, a majority in our democracy don't care. There is a disturbing political apathy in our political system. A system which hundreds of thousands of Americans have died defending in past and current conflicts. A system which millions around the world crave to be a part of. A system which has been the dominant factor in the formation of our foreign policy and the role that we have chosen to play in the international realm.

Yet many Americans could care less. In fact, lately it seems as though the most interest that the American people have in politics is which TV show the upcoming State of the Union address will conflict with ("American Idol" not "Lost," names which could both serve as ironic social commentaries depending on which side of the aisle you affiliate yourself with).

People have often called the last few decades the dawn of the "information age." But I wonder if there is too much information. Americans obsess over the day to day actions of Hollywood celebrities, reality TV shows, and viral YouTube videos. They immerse themselves in information overloads on Twitter and Facebook. And they neglect the important political decisions and events that directly and indirectly affect them.

Even those who wish to inform themselves about the happenings of Washington are bombarded by the cable news stations of MSNBC and Fox News which present such biased views that they border on propaganda. At the same time, the masses of Tea Partiers rally against President Obama, the federal government and reforms that will almost undoubtedly make most of their lives better.

Perhaps I am wrong in thinking that Americans of the past cared more than we do today. Perhaps it is the naiveté of a child of the information age or the cynicism of an American who believes that he cares more than most. However, the images in my head of families gathered around the radio to listen to Roosevelt's Fireside Chats, Bobby Kennedy being held around the waist in his car as thousands reached and grabbed in the attempt just to touch him, or millions of Americans lined along the train tracks to view the train carrying Lincoln's casket, lead me to believe that something has changed.

With this publication, I will explore the happenings of politics in the United States and the effects on this country, its people, and the rest of the world. I will attempt to reveal details of people and events which I think are important in today's political landscape. I will investigate what has caused the politically apathetic trend. I will try to determine what can be done using the products of the information age to reinvigorate a passionate (and educated) interest in politics to the American people.

There is a problem in the American political system today, and only We, The People, can fix it.