The Vision of the Anointed

1. The Anointed's Vision: A Self-Sealing System

Today, despite free speech and the mass media, the prevailing social vision is dangerously close to sealing itself off from any discordant feedback from reality.

Dogmatic Beliefs. The core danger lies not in the specific errors of the vision, but in its resistance to correction. This resistance stems from a prevailing attitude among the intellectual and political elite, where their assumptions are so ingrained that empirical evidence is often dismissed if it contradicts their vision. This dogmatism prevents necessary adjustments and perpetuates flawed policies.

Moral Superiority. The vision offers a special state of grace to its believers, deeming them morally superior. Those who accept the vision are seen as enlightened, while those who disagree are viewed as benighted, selfish, or even evil. This moral high ground insulates the vision from critical examination and fosters an environment where opposing arguments are dismissed rather than engaged.

Ego Entanglement. The vision becomes intertwined with the egos of its adherents, making it difficult to separate personal identity from the vision's validity. This ego investment further reinforces the resistance to discordant evidence, as questioning the vision becomes tantamount to questioning one's own moral standing.

2. The Four-Stage Pattern of Failed Policies

A very distinct pattern has emerged repeatedly when policies favored by the anointed turn out to fail.

Recurring Cycle. When policies favored by the anointed fail, a predictable pattern emerges, characterized by four stages:

• Crisis: A situation is declared a "crisis," often without empirical evidence of its severity or uniqueness.
• Solution: The anointed advocate policies to end the "crisis," confidently predicting beneficial outcomes.
• Results: The policies are implemented, leading to detrimental results that critics had foreseen.
• Response: The anointed dismiss criticism as "simplistic," attribute the failure to "complexities," and shift the burden of proof to the critics.

Examples of the Pattern. The "War on Poverty," sex education programs, and lenient criminal justice policies all followed this pattern. Despite failing to achieve their stated goals, these policies were defended by redefining success, claiming moral merit, or asserting that things would have been worse without them.

Ignoring Feedback. The pattern highlights a fundamental flaw: the failure to acknowledge and learn from empirical evidence. The vision of the anointed remains sacrosanct, hermetically sealed off from the contaminating influence of facts, perpetuating a cycle of ineffective and often harmful policies.

3. Statistical Gymnastics: "Aha!" Moments and Fallacies

Anyone who looks through enough statistics will eventually find numbers that seem to confirm a given vision.

Selective Use of Data. The "Aha!" approach involves cherry-picking statistics that support a pre-existing vision, while ignoring contradictory data within the same set. This selective use of information creates a distorted picture and reinforces biases.

Common Statistical Fallacies:

• The Residual Fallacy: Attributing unexplained disparities to discrimination after "controlling" for other variables, without acknowledging potential unmeasured factors.
• Changing Assortments: Failing to account for the turnover of individuals within statistical categories, leading to misleading conclusions about "the rich" or "the poor."
• Correlation vs. Causation: Assuming that a correlation between two variables implies a causal relationship, without considering alternative explanations.

Intergroup Disparities. Media and academic comparisons often focus solely on black-white disparities, ignoring data on other groups that would challenge the prevailing narrative of discrimination. This selective focus reinforces pre-existing biases and prevents a more nuanced understanding of social phenomena.

4. The Irrelevance of Evidence: Teflon Prophets and Fictitious History

Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence....

Teflon Prophets. Some figures, like John Kenneth Galbraith and Paul Ehrlich, maintain their reputations despite repeated failed predictions. This is due to their alignment with the prevailing vision, which shields them from accountability for factual inaccuracies.

Fictitious History. The anointed often rewrite history to fit their narrative, attributing social problems to convenient scapegoats like "a legacy of slavery" or the policies of the Reagan administration, even when historical evidence contradicts these claims. This manipulation of the past serves to reinforce their vision and justify their policy prescriptions.

Pooh-Pooh History. Concerns about declining standards or rising crime rates are often dismissed by quoting similar concerns from the past, implying that these concerns were unfounded. This tactic ignores the possibility that past warnings may have been valid and effective in averting disaster.

5. The Anointed vs. The Benighted: A Clash of Visions

What is intellectually interesting about visions are their assumptions and their reasoning, but what is socially crucial is the extent to which they are resistant to evidence.

Tragic Vision vs. Anointed Vision. Two contrasting visions shape social and political discourse:

• Tragic Vision: Emphasizes human limitations, inherent constraints, and the inevitability of trade-offs.
• Vision of the Anointed: Assumes human perfectibility, expansive capabilities, and the possibility of "solutions" to social problems.

Differing Assumptions. The two visions differ in their assumptions about human nature, causation, knowledge, power, and justice. These differences lead to fundamentally different approaches to policy-making and social issues.

Coherence of Visions. Individuals tend to hold consistent views across a wide range of issues, reflecting the underlying assumptions of their chosen vision. This coherence creates predictable patterns of agreement and disagreement in political and social debates.

6. The Vocabulary of the Anointed: Shaping the Narrative

Men have an all but incurable propensity to try to prejudge all the great questions which interest them by stamping their prejudices upon their language.

Preemptive Language. The anointed use language to preempt issues, set themselves apart from the benighted, and evade personal responsibility. Words like "crisis," "public service," and "greed" are used to shape the narrative and control the debate.

Disdaining the Benighted. The vocabulary of the anointed often denigrates those who disagree, labeling their beliefs as "emotional," "simplistic," or "false consciousness." This creates a sense of intellectual and moral superiority and justifies dismissing opposing viewpoints.

Evading Responsibility. The anointed often use language to deflect personal responsibility, attributing social problems to "society" or "systemic forces" rather than individual choices and behavior. This allows them to advocate for sweeping social changes without acknowledging the potential consequences.

7. Cosmic Justice vs. the Rule of Law: A Dangerous Trade-off

Law has lost its soul and become jungle.

Erosion of the Rule of Law. The pursuit of cosmic justice, or a more expansive and subjective sense of fairness, has led to the erosion of the rule of law. Judges increasingly prioritize their own social theories over the written law, creating uncertainty and undermining the predictability of the legal system.

Judicial Activism. This trend is manifested in judicial activism, where judges stretch and twist the Constitution to achieve desired social outcomes, often disregarding historical context and established legal principles. This undermines the separation of powers and transfers decision-making authority from elected officials to unelected judges.

Consequences of Judicial Activism. The quest for cosmic justice has led to a legal system that is less reliable, more expensive, and less effective in protecting the public. It has also created a climate of fear and uncertainty, where individuals and organizations are hesitant to engage in legitimate activities for fear of being sued.

8. The Allure and Peril of Optional Reality

. . . ideology. . . is an instrument of power; a defense mechanism against information; a pretext for eluding moral constraints in doing or approving evil with a clean conscience; and finally, a way of banning the criterion of experience, that is, of completely eliminating or indefinitely postponing the pragmatic criteria of success and failure.

The Anointed's Self-Contained World. The greatest danger of the vision of the anointed is its self-sealing nature, which insulates it from empirical evidence and perpetuates flawed policies. This insulation stems from a combination of dogmatism, moral superiority, and ego entanglement.

The Illusion of Control. The vision of the anointed fosters the illusion that reality is optional and that social problems can be solved through the application of superior knowledge and virtue. This leads to a disregard for inherent constraints, unintended consequences, and the wisdom of evolved traditions.

The Need for Humility. To avoid the pitfalls of the vision of the anointed, it is essential to embrace intellectual humility, acknowledge the limitations of human knowledge, and prioritize systemic processes over top-down control. A healthy respect for the tragic vision of the human condition is crucial for navigating the complexities of social life and making prudent policy decisions.

Last updated: March 15, 2025