Book Review by John Derbyshire |
||||
|
|
|||
| The
Age of Bad Ideas Life at the Bottom There
is an odd conservatism in the common perceptions of life in other lands.
I grew up among English people who still thought of France — a
rather stuffy and puritanical country in the 1960s — in terms of the
“Gay Paree” of seventy years earlier, a place of unbridled license and
monocled boulevardiers swilling champagne at the Folies Bergère.
In the same way, many Americans carry in their minds an image of
England as a polite and civilized land, where impeccably courteous David
Niven types sit around at their clubs in antique leather armchairs sipping
port, while, at the other end of society, stoic cockneys converse in rhyming
slang and cheer each up other with cups of tea in the parlor.
In fact today’s England is a rather coarse and violent place, whose
crime statistics now surpass the U.S.A.’s in most categories (homicide
being the principal exception). The
nation’s everyday culture is dominated by the most brutish of proletarian
values: politicians like Tony
Blair from perfectly sound bourgeois families affect the dropped aitches and
glottal stops of the slums, while the old codes of chivalry, patriotism and
restraint have been shoved aside in a snarling, clawing assertion of
“rights”. American
jaws drop when I say, in response to inquiries, how much I enjoy the
comparative tranquillity, security and civility of life in the U.S.A. and
the exquisite manners of Americans — especially in the South, the
best-mannered large region in the English-speaking world. The
older, tranquil England of the American imagination actually existed not
long ago. I am merely
middle-aged, but I can recall quiet working-class streets in the midland
city of Birmingham, where I spent part of my childhood, that are now bedlams
of vice and crime. Birmingham
is, as it happens, the city where Theodore Dalrymple works as a hospital
doctor, with occasional medical duties at a nearby prison.
For some years he has been chronicling English underclass life:
in regular columns in the London weekly The Spectator since at
least 1993 (the limit of my own personal stock of Spectator back
numbers), as a contributing editor for the Manhattan Institute’s quarterly
City Journal, and with occasional pieces in other newspapers and
periodicals, including this one. The
main thrust of Dalrymple’s observations has always been the moral and
intellectual poverty of the people he encounters while carrying out his
professional rounds. He has
observed these phenomena across many years and thousands of instances, and
thought deeply about how they originated and what sustains them.
In Life at the Bottom Dalrymple has put together 22 of his City
Journal articles, written in the late Nineties and early Oughts. Dalrymple
writes with great clarity, slicing through the common gibberish of the
“official” social sciences with the sword of reductionism.
The child-rearing philosophy of the underclass is, he tells us, one
of “laissez-faire tempered by insensate rage.”
The distress that leads to attempted suicide — an everyday
occurrence in the lives of Dalrymple’s patients — is “the consequence
of not knowing how to live.” (A key insight. In
another place he speaks of “the chronic suffering caused by not knowing
how to live.”) The poor, he
writes, “live in a torment of public and private disorder, which I have
trembled to behold every day of the last ten years of my professional
life.” Reading, we tremble
with him. The misfortunes of a
patient result from “a willful chasing after misery.”
Root causes? “Since
the cause of crime is the decision of criminals to commit it, what goes on
in their minds is not irrelevant.” Well,
what does go on in underclass minds?
Not much that is coherent, of course, since the people we are dealing
with here have, either by their own will or under the example or
intimidation of their peer group, rejected all attempts to educate them.
The typical Dalrymple subject is “devoid of either ambition or
interests,” his inner life a solipsistic jumble of “emotions ...
simultaneously intense and shallow.”
It is clear, however, that all the cant of our age, all the doctrines
of moral and cultural relativism that seized hold of the educated classes in
the years after WW2, all those pop-Marxist doctrines that attribute every
worldy ill to some form of material deprivation, or to oppression by malign
political conspiracies, have seeped down into the dull minds at the bottom
of society, turning toxic in the process.
Are our personalities formed in response to our physical environment?
Why, then, the inanimate world is our master, and we cannot fairly be
held responsible for the things we do.
“The knife went in,” three different stabbers told Dalrymple,
when he pressed them, in the prison, to describe the deed that landed them
there. Why should a low-IQ
barely-literate youth believe in the doctrine of free will, when, for all he
can see, his intellectual superiors have given up on it? Dalrymple
is particularly good on the squeaky-wheel syndrome that is so characteristic
of modern social services. Defy
your circumstances; manage to
get some scraps of education; win
some decent, if low-level employment; stay out of trouble;
stay off the dole; maintain
some minimal standards of honesty and chastity; and see what happens to you!
If you are lucky, the authorities will ignore you; if not, they will
actually harass you. Should your less disciplined neighbors make your life a
misery, you will get no help from police or social workers. If, on the other hand, you follow your peers into the world
of dysfunction and dependency, all the attentions of England’s extravagant
welfare state will be lavished on you.
You will be given a free apartment furnished with all modern
appliances, a regular supply of money, free medical attention, and the
doting ministrations of “health visitors,” “case workers,”
“counsellors” and so on. Americans
may find it surprising that most of the people wallowing in this slough of
ignorance, illiteracy, promiscuity, bastardy, intoxication, vice, folly,
lawlessness and hopelessness are white English people.
Much of what is described here is the sort of thing Americans
instinctively associate with this country’s own black underclass.
There is some satisfaction, I suppose, though of a very melancholy
kind, to be drawn from the revelation that sufficiently wrong-headed social
policies, persisted in with sufficiently dogged refusal to face simple
truths, will visit moral catastrophe on people of any race. Not
that racial foolishness is altogether absent from Life at the Bottom.
Thanks to government policies of staggering idiocy pursued across
several decades, England is now both multi-racial and multi-cultural, though
there is no trace of evidence that any detectable number of English people
ever wanted it to be either. This
has, of course, made the country a much worse place to live in.
Social workers, teachers, the police, and all other authority figures
are thoroughly race-whipped, and know that any action they take against a
person of color will bring them under the intense scrutiny of their
superiors, not to mention the press and numerous busybody groups charged
with maintaining the integrity of the “gorgeous mosaic”.
Dalrymple
illustrates this with the horrifying story of 8-year-old Anna Climbie,
tortured to death by her mother, a West African who had come to England for
the welfare benefits. The poor
child had been admitted to hospital twice in the months before she died, and
it was obvious to the doctors and nurses that she was a victim of gross
abuse. However, they could not
persuade the police or welfare services to act.
The child’s condition and the abject terror she exhibited at her
mother’s approach were, the authorities believed — or pretended to
believe, to keep themselves out of trouble — merely facets of West African
culture, on which it would be wrong to pass judgment.
Bad ideas again. Since
people in other lands live contentedly under social norms wildly different
from those of the London suburbs, why then, surely it’s clear that one set
of norms is just as good as another, and it would be wrong of us to find
fault? We are living in the Age of Bad Ideas. I think, though Dalrymple makes less of this, that the hedonism of the postwar middle classes has also been a large factor in the collapse of morality over at the left-hand tail of the bell curve. It is a bad thing, but not an irremediable one, if the daughter of an architect has an illegitimate baby or acquires a minor drug habit. If the daughter of a janitor does these things, she has taken a headlong leap over the precipice into a lifetime of destitution. If any of the people who make social policy in England are aware of this simple fact, they probably regard it as another form of unfairness, to be resolved by lavishing money and attention on the janitor’s daughter. A better remedy would be for the middle classes to behave themselves, and to give a good example to those beneath them, and to stop feeling so all-fired guilty about everything under the sun. That, of course, would be “elitist”: but if there is a lesson to be drawn from Life at the Bottom, it is that a society’s choice is never between having an elite and not having one, it is always between having an elite with a sense of responsibility and a will to provide leadership, and having an elite with neither. |
||||