The Racists At The UK Independent

This is linked to Drudge. It is one of the slide shows popular for fill space on sites. This one lists the sites top-10 cities in the world. What’s striking about the list is that it is almost exclusively ultra-white cities. The exceptions are Vancouver (Asian) , Toronto (Asian) and  Calgary(Asian). The rest are nearly all European, with a trivial NAM population. Helsinki just about glows in the dark. The other feature of the list is the dominance of cities down under. Australia and New Zealand have tiny NAM populations, trivial in demographic terms. The people who cooked up this list seem to think that’s a critical metric for a city.

One of the more hilarious bits is how each city is described in Wikipedia. Even though most are whiter than a Klan rally, they list “diversity” at the top of their list of attributes. Yep, they have every type of white person the world offers. Throw a few Chinese guys in and that’s the sort of diversity the diversity crowd likes to see. I have a friend who is a moonbat living in Arlington Mass. That’s a typical whites-only town in Mass. Very liberal and very white. The guy told me with a straight face they moved there because of the diversity. He seems to think the three Indian PhD candidates in the rented house makes the town into 1930’s Casablanca. Even pointing it out to him, he refuses to accept it.

Everything But The Obvious

I’m relaxing after a tortuous week and catching up on some reading. For some reason I still get the Weekly Standards  and there is at least a few month’s worth on the shelf so I decided to power through them tonight. The first article to catch my eye is this one. It’s not a great read, but it is an interesting subject. The rise of the e-cigarette is one of those things the tobacco people sort of knew was needed, but never could figure out how to create. Their best effort was the smokeless cigarette, that smelled like fertilizer.

Like thick walled tomatoes, electronic cigarettes are a great example of suppliers finding a novel way to meet the demand of customers. Way back in the olden thymes, the government cracked down on illegal immigration (no, really) and there was a shortage of farm hands. In one sector, tomatoes, science was the answer. A breed of tomato that was engineered to have slightly thicker pericarp solved the problem of machine harvesting. All of a sudden, farmers no longer needed an army of hands to bring in the crop.

The e-cigarette is another fine example. It is just about impossible to smoke anywhere these days. The days of sitting at the bar with a pack of Marlboro Reds, a beer and your thoughts are long gone. The screeching lunatics that haunt our daily lives have turned smokers into a class just north of child molesters. The taxes and harassment have forced smoking rates down below 20% and dropping fast. Still, Short of public flogging, there’s not much else to do to stop people from trying to enjoy the benefits of nicotine.

As the article points out, the anti-smoking fanatics see it otherwise. They have invested everything in being an anti-smoking crusaders. They will not give it up easily. They are trying to harangue government into banning these things or at least treat them as unpredictable explosives that cannot be safely handled in public. Hilariously, the author of the linked piece is totally stumped as to why this is the case. He dances around it at the end, but he remains the man in the room searching for the elephant.

That elephant, of course, is culture. The beautiful people see smoking as low class. It is what you do at NASCAR events or while hunting. Good people, moral people, the people like them, don’t indulge in such vices. It’s an odd thing, given Jewish hostility to WASP morality, that the writer does not see the reason for the hostility to vaping. On the other hand, Jewish intellectual are prone to the most hilarious myopia. There’s often a narrowness, along with a lack of self-awareness, that blinds them to the obvious.

As with so much of American history, the war on smoking is really a proxy for the war on proletarian white people, particularly southern white people. Like the abolitionist movement, the anti-smoking movement started in the northeast. The first place I recall seeing a ban on smoking indoors was in Cambridge Massachusetts. Even then it was obviously not about public health. That’s just an easy excuse to push people around and take away their freedom. It was always about cultural hegemony.

This is another example of the strange cultural blindness that has settled in on our intellectual class. Read old books or even old magazines and newspapers and even the low-brow commentators understood the regional, class and racial divisions that drove public debate in the country. Today, the public intellectual is someone who is studiously unaware of the country’s history and its divides. You would think that people who line up to sing songs about diversity would be keenly aware of it, but you would be wrong.

Higher Ed

One of the more frustrating debates in modern America is the one over student debt. It seems like the mere mention of the subject turns smart people into blithering idiots. The president has come forth with a “new” proposal to address student debt. The gist of it is a laundry list of government created metrics that schools will have to post for public view.  The assertion is that this will “empower” students to make better choices, thus avoiding debt for worthless degrees.

That sounds nice and maybe would impact student choices at the fringes. Without proof that students are making mistakes because they lack this knowledge, it falls into the realm of wishful thinking. I think it is easy to prove that this information is easily attainable. Thirty years ago when I was a student we were regularly given information about future earnings, job prospects and debt consequences. Only willful ignorance kept English majors from knowing they were not going to get a six figure job out of college.

Today, the Interwebs makes it easy to know just about anything about everything. Not only can you easily learn what you can expect in salary with a given degree, you can break it down by region and get some sense of lifetime earnings. Granted, that takes effort and it people have a way of gaslighting themselves on these things. But, they would do that with whatever the government is going to provide. You cannot get around the fact that white people have to be brainwashed into believing college is a requirement.

Now, it would be nice, if like calorie counts on menus, the realities of college were printed on the front of the brochure. Everyone loves convenience. Like those calorie counts, however, there’s no evidence it changes behavior. That’s what makes this post from the former Half Sigma blogger so weird. His enthusiasm is misplaced. His casting it as a “conservative idea” is the sort of sloppy thinking we see on the Left. There are plenty of dumb ideas with the conservative stamp of approval.

Yuval Levin offers some good questions in this posting at NRO. He does not mention it, but government standards turn the regulated into rent seekers. It is axiomatic. In this case, the universities suddenly need to bribe politicians to get the standards they want. As Levin points out, it is not clear what should be measured and by whom. That opens up the door to all sorts of shenanigans. The best way to ensure rational markets is to eliminate the number of intermediaries between the supplier and consumer. Another government agency to set standards is just going to make this more dishonest that they are now.

That’s the fundamental problem with higher education debates. Everyone is trapped in the old paradigm of government financing. No one ever asks why tuition has risen at five and six times inflation since the government got into the student loan business. The two markets that have seen the greatest amount of government intervention are higher ed and health care. In both prices have rocketed up, basic service levels have declined and massive amounts of debt have been accumulated. That’s called a clue

Not a Hate Crime

There’s talk of charging the three animals who hunted down and shot a white kid in Oklahoma with a hate crime. Obviously it is coming from whites tired of hearing blacks whine about fake hate crimes like Trayvon Martin. It is the good for the goose/good for the gander tactic. I’m sympathetic. I’m tired of hearing rich black people like Obumbles and Oprah piss and moan about racism. Frankly, I’m tired of race as a subject entirely. The magical thinking is just too much. As long as we keep pretending it is still 1955 in the South, we will never have a meaningful conversation about race. In this case, the animals did not kill the kid because he was white. They killed because they are black. This demographic constitutes 1% of the population and commits 27% of the murders.

Their God is Dead

I love stories like this one. The staggering lack of self-awareness by our elites is breathtaking at times. A good bookend to that story is this one from earlier in the week. Put the two together and we have smart people holding all the same prejudices as everyone else, but acting on them in a covert way. That is unless they try to automate their decision making, then those prejudices come percolating up as the efficiency of the machine drops the pretense, signally and customs. The HAL9000 in question was just following the logic of its programming, which will always reflect the logic of its programmer.

I posted a comment on Marginal Revolution where I saw the story. The longer version starts with the understanding that all human societies have an organizing ethic. Religion has usually filled the role to one degree or another. The Greeks had a range of cults based on capricious gods. They also had philosophical schools that reinforced the generally accepted morality. Athens also had a civic ethic that was centered on the assembly. All of this reflected the general understanding, the beliefs, of what it meant to be a Greek and what it meant to be a good Greek. It also provided the enforcement mechanism to keep good Greeks in-line and exclude non-Greeks.

For 1500 years, European people relied upon Christianity to provide the framework of the organizing ethos of the people. The Catholic Church defined what it meant to be moral and elites of Europe particularized it to their time and place. In the 11th century, the life of the peasant, the merchant and the noble was the same across Europe. Language differences and minor customs were different, but the big stuff was the same. Civil society was organized along the same hierarchical lines as the Church. The elites were all devout Catholics and derived their identity from their faith.

That began to change in The 100 years War. National identity began to supplant religious identity. As is always the case, the ruling elites went first. By the end of the war, the idea of an English king of France or even part of France was absurd. The French could only be ruled by the French. The Thirty Years War brought this to the remainder of Europe. More important, national identity became the dominant organizing principle of the ruling elites in Europe for the next 400 years. The blood bath that was The 30 Years War convinced them that war over who defines the one true faith was madness. Christianity began to die in Europe, starting with the ruling classes. The new organizing faith was nationalism.

In America, Christianity remained a central component of the ruling class through the Civil War. If you read the propaganda of the Abolitionists, it is shot through with Christian appeals. The elites of the north truly believed they were on the side of God. The lyrics to the Battle Hymn of the Republic are a good example of the religious fanaticism behind the abolitionist movement. By the end of the war, no one with the IQ of a goldfish could believe they were on the side of angels. From that point on reformist Christianity ceased to be the central organizing tenet of the American ruling class.

Today, the organizing faith of America is what Jonah Goldberg labeled Liberal Fascism. It is a mix of cultural Marxism, managerial socialism and economic corporatism. The proper American is judged by his antagonism toward Christianity and nationalism. You see it with Obama. He is our first overtly non-Christian President. His attendance at the racist church in Chicago was a way to signal to his peers that he understood the impulses of the prols, but rejected their primitivism. His early rejection of American Exceptionalism was a nod toward the elite’s loathing of nationalism. Obama is the quintessential member of the ruling elite.

Of course, it animates the elite’s desire to reshape society. One of the strange aspects of America’s adoption of European socialism is how it is spiced with those old puritan and evangelical instincts. Our rulers live like Victorians and are always proselytizing about restraint. Mayor Bloomberg has made his final term about self-denial as a virtue. Then there is the evangelism. Like 17th century Puritans, our elites spend a lot of time making sure we are thinking the right thoughts. Bias is the witchcraft of the 21st century.

Thus I have circled back to the start of this post. The religion of our ruling elites is like all religions at all times. A big part of it is the claim that if we organize things the right way, conduct ourselves the right way, we will gain salvation from the human condition. Their belief they can purge themselves of tribal bias is as superstitious as believing elves and sprites occupy the forest or that demons take over young girls causing them to break the rules. The shock for the folks in the first story is that they were confronted with the fact they have been lying to themselves. God is not, in fact, on their side.

That Left Side of the Bell Curve

A topic that will become increasingly important is what to do with low-IQ workers in a modern, technological society. For most of human history, there was a demand for most if not all of the low IQ population. Farming required a lot of labor. Maintaining buildings, roads and so forth required loads of guys willing to take direction. Then there was the demand for men willing to dress up and kill men loyal to a different ruler. It’s not that there has been a demand for dumb guys, it’s that there was always some way to put them to use.

Once we moved into the industrial age, manufacturing soaked up most of the low IQ workers, along with middling IQ workers. When the usual suspects decided to sell off the manufacturing base to Asia, retail and services were seen as the cure for excess unskilled labor. We would have an economy based on selling one another insurance and doing each others laundry! Of course that could never work, but it worked for a while as easy credit allowed us to pull forward GDP. Now, it is not working.

The evidence at this point suggests two things. One is that the technological revolution along with an extended recession has changed the approach of business. The old pattern was that businesses hired up in good times and cut staff in lean times. The new pattern is that business invests in technology in good times to get more from the same staff. In lean times they may do the same, but looking for ways to cut staff. In other words, technology is cutting jobs at the peak and the trough of the economic cycle.

The other thing that I think we see is the lagging effect of technology. For 25 years technology raced ahead of what users could use. By the time of the Great Recession, we had an enormous amount of excess technology. The old joke in the 1990’s was that 90% of Microsoft Word users utilized 10% of the product. Few companies utilized 25% of their IT investments. Companies have been sitting on all the tools to automate big parts of the business, but they never deployed the technology. That’s changing now.

Of course, there is something else that never gets discussed. That is the high cost of cheap labor. Government policy has made it expensive for employers to recruits and train the working class of America. On the other hand, government has made it easy to import indentured servants who work cheap. This has become so common, the servants and their masters are now important constituencies. The unemployed white working class is not an important constituency, so no one bothers to speak for them.

This brings me back to the point of the post. We have a lot of people on some form of government assistance. In fact, the government claims that nearly half of all homes have at least one person on the dole. I think we can assume that a big chunk of that number is for retired people. Another big chunk is the poor and stupid. Simply putting them on welfare does not solve the problem. Unless we are willing to have large scale reservations for the low skilled, this economic problem will soon be a very serious social problem.

In a democracy, lots of people with no purpose and not sense of connection to the greater society is going to become attractive to an ambitious politician. That’s always the argument against democracy. Someone always comes along as the champion of the little people, promising to help them as long as he becomes ruler. Most tyrants in human history rose to power on the back of the lower classes. America now has a growing disgruntled class, sitting around waiting for their champion, who will surely arrive one day.

Putting aside the political risks of large numbers of unemployed dumb people, how does a high tech society put these people to use? In a different age, the way to use up extra people was to start a war. These days, the modern military needs smart guys, not dumb guys. Then there is the fact that wars are now vastly more conservative with human capital. Even if we wanted to invade Canada, the war will be fought with robots and drones, rather than infantry battalion. It turns out that war is not the answer either.


Smart Guys With Dumb Ideas

I’ve always been fascinated by the phenomenon of very high IQ people believing utter nonsense. We have been indoctrinated to think that smart people not only believe the right things, they never indulge in crazy fads or nutty politics. The former is obviously the important part of the proselytizing we hear from our rulers. Only dumb or evil people question the Progressive theology. Even putting that aside, most people assume smart people are too smart to fall for crazy ideas, conspiracy theories and so forth.

Way back in my youth I was dating a gal who had a brilliant uncle. The guy worked for NASA and had a PhD in physics. He started out from a working class family and went through college on scholarships and a love of mathematics. He was also very well read in a variety of subjects, which is unusual for math guys. He was also a communist. Every conversation would eventually lead to him ranting and raving about private property and the abuse of the poor by the rich. It was strange hearing a smart guy celebrate Marxism.

Of course, lots of very smart people were communists in the last century. I took a graduate class from a guy who was a Marxist believer. The class was on Marxism, so it worked out pretty well, but it was strange hearing an otherwise smart guy talk reverently about the worker’s paradise. The Cold War was still going so it was even more jarring, especially since he had traveled to the Soviet Bloc. All these years later I wonder how he managed to square what he saw in his travels with what he sincerely believed.

Anyway, I’ve become a fan of Tyler Cowen’s blog Marginal Revolution, mostly because it is that strange conflict of smart people not seeing the obvious.. He appears to do most of the posting, but maybe he has graduate students doing the work. Even though he is in the pseudoscience of economics, he does have a broad range of interests. Being a libertarian economics professor living off the public dime leaves a lot of time to be curious about stuff. Funny how all of the big foot libertarians tend to live off the sweat of others.

Anyway, this post caught my eye today. The first thing was the reference to left-wing blogger Matt Yglesias. I continue to marvel at his ability to fool people into thinking he is smart and interesting. Signalling on the Left is a highly developed part of how they reinforce their faith in Progressivism. Lefties put on the smart, smug guy outfit signalling that they are super smart. Then they go about repeating all the approved bits of the catechism, but with a cheeky twist. Everyone feels good about being in the faith.

A good example of it is the liberal blockhead Janeane Garofalo. She is as dumb as a goldfish, but she has been trained to play make believe on screen. She kits herself in the bohemian outfit, pretends to be smart, while repeating whatever she heard from the TV clown Jon Stewart. Of course, Steward is another great example of the mediocre mind spouting conventional liberal lines in a highly choreographed manner intended to cast him as brilliant. Maybe Yglesias is just doing a form of this that is lost on me.

Anyway, what go me posting about this is how Alex Tabarrok, the other half of the Marginal Revolution blog, starts out great, quickly summarizing that Yglesias post and then his own position on the topic. Then in the last paragraph he veers into the madness of climate change and the need to placate the sky gods. I admit I have a strong bias against the topic of climate change. It’s pretty much just neo-pagan nonsense that fills a spiritual hole for people who fancy themselves as the intellectual elite of the West

That’s the thing. Tabarrok seems like a smart guy, maybe not a genius or even brilliant, but certainly smart enough to be a tad skeptical of climate change. Instead, he is eager to show how deeply he believes in it. It raises the question as to why he, and other above average intellects, feel like they need to repeat this stuff. Maybe it is social pressure or maybe it professional concerns. Politics in the academy can be nasty. Still, simply ignoring this stuff and sticking to safe topics would seem like the better option.

Belief, of course, plays a big role in this stuff. The communist physicist I knew in my youth was not a religious buy, as communism was his religion. For many modern academics, the sub-cultures within Progressivism fill the role of religion for them. Belief is one of those hard to quantify traits in humanity that drives much of what we do. It plays a huge role in social status, which in turn means it plays a role in reproductive fitness. Being seen as pious has always been and important part of establishing social status in settled society.

This is a long way to go to juts point out that smart people often believe nutty things, but it is something that cannot be said enough. People can be wrong and be smart. Even smart people get things wrong. At the same time, even brilliant people need to believe in something and often they believe in crazy stuff. It may be that the lack of a formal, retrained religion for the elites results in smart people searching around for something to fill the void and landing on kooky new age fads and destructive civic religions.


Playing Diogenes of the Blogosphere

This topic over at Marginal Revolution is amusing, mostly for the comments. Much of it brings to mind Steve Sailer’s bit about Occam’s Butter Knife. That is, instead of looking for the simplest answer to a modern social problem, the comments are a hunt for the most complex and least plausible explanation. There’s a healthy bit of solipsism in the post, as well as the follow on comments. They can’t figure out why tough divorce laws evolved in some societies, so they just assume there is no rational reason for it.

The English figured out before most that easy divorce is bad for human society. The people who post and comment over at that site are very bright. Yet, the idea that easy divorce is bad for society has never occurred to them. I guess they have been in a marriage negative culture for so long, they know nothing else. Of course, my taunt about monogamous heterosexual marriage being the best way to propagate the species was a turd in the punch bowl. That upset a few of them.

It also has the benefit of being true. For most of human history, people have understood that strong families make for a strong society. The definition of strong family, however, is not universal and not all people evolved culturally to the point where they can think about things. Africans did not evolve marriage customs like in the rest of the world, as monogamous pairing was never an advantage for the humans living in Africa. In Europe, monogamy is common, which is a reminder that evolution is always local.

As to marriage in the West, it was assumed to be so obvious up to about last week, so no one thought it needed to be discussed. It is like the importance of the sun or the act of breathing. One of those things everyone knows by the time they are five or six years old. Yet, we now live in a time when this has to be explained and many of our brightest cannot accept it. My guess is the typical intellectual under the age of 50 thinks marriage is about having someone to share the bills and a bed. Children are merely a lifestyle choice.

The response to my assertion about the English vexed quite a few of them. Again, a plainly true point that raises hackles. As far as human species go, the English have punched way above their weight. They settled and created five countries in addition to their own. They turned India into a modern state and rescued Hong Kong from the Chinese, which in turn may have rescued China from the Chinese. Their language is a universal tongue. I could go on, but the evidence is clear on that point.

As far as human culture goes, few can claim the same success as the English. Yet, Western intellectuals are hell bent on reversing all of it. That touches on the most taboo of subjects, so there is no point in raising it in a public forum. As soon as anyone starts talking about Jewish influence in American high culture or even something like the Frankfurt School, the pointing and sputtering starts. Even if you are ambivalent about Jews, as I am, you get called an anti-Semite and shut down for even mentioning it.

There are still ways to shine the light on the obvious though and that’s worth doing as long as their are still people worth convincing. The role of the dissident thinker these days is mostly to operate as a subversive, undermining faith in the prevailing orthodoxy. That’s the point of this blog and the point of commenting on other blogs. Throw some sand in the gears, cast doubt on deeply held beliefs, get those who can be saved questioning the dominant culture. Maybe enough break loose to form a useful counter-culture.


Weiner Goes Limp IN NYC

I saw this posted on the former Half Sigma blog. If you were hoping Anthony Weiner would win the democratic primary, it looks like you will be disappointed. There’s a month to go and people tend to forget quickly that one of the candidates is a mental patient, but even New Yorkers have too much self-respect to give Weiner a third chance. The next mayor will be the dreary socialist, the dreary bureaucrat or the flamboyant communist. The New York Times is backing the communist, to no one’s surprise, so he is the pick

The fact is the forces that drive the fortunes of a big city are beyond the control of the political class. A city is measured by its crime rate, public school system, unemployment rate, property values and culture. There’s some other stuff that we judge a city by, but that’s enough. Demographics drive the crime rate. San Francisco is 43% white and 33% Asian. Both groups have very low crimes rates so San Francisco has a low crime rate. Detroit is 80% black and has a crime rate commensurate with the black population.

Schools are similar, but median income pops up here. Areas with a solid middle class composed of families will have good public schools. Areas with a big underclass full of baby mommas and absentee fathers will have crappy public schools. You can’t fix that with good policy. These class and race issues are beyond the reach of government. Even if you gave city government dictatorial power, they could not fix the broken families that make up most of Newark or Camden or Baltimore. Government is not God.

Of course, the local economy is entirely driven by serendipity. If your city is lucky to be based on industry with a future, your city has a future. Cities in New England, for example, that depended upon making shoes or paint were looking good 100 years ago. When the banks sold off those industries to foreigners, those cities collapsed. Lowell Mass was a great mill town into the 20’s and 30’s, but textiles moved South and Lowell went down the crapper. No amount of good government was going to fix that problem.

I could go on, but the fact is the big things affecting a city are out of the reach of politicians, unless they are willing to be immoral or corrupt. For example, Giuliani gets credit for reviving New York by lowering crime. What he really did was ride the financial boom to push out the blacks from Manhattan. The newly rich were willing to look the other way as the cops hassled young black males with the policy of stop and frisk. They also agreed with polices to drive off businesses that cater to the lower classes.

The great credit boom that blew up Wall Street filled NYC with rich people and rich people like a nice places to live. Rudy did fix the police department, but he could not have done it without the support of the army of bean counters filling the ranks of the booming financial houses located in the city. The next mayor will have no impact on the city. As long as the free money keeps flowing and the demographics keep going this way, the next mayor will do just fine, regardless of their ideology. Even a commie will not screw it up.

Our Broken System

Here is an interesting article on the tax reform debate that is part of a larger push to pass a big tax reform bill after the next election. Congress is trying to be serious about fixing the tax system, rather than just grandstand on it. They may even be willing to tackle such touchy things as the mortgage interest deduction, corporate welfare and so forth. The hint that they are serious is that the Democrats are playing nice on the issue. The truth of American politics is that nothing gets passed without the blessing of the Democrats.

Old bulls like Max Baucus on the Democrat side are actively looking for big ideas to fix the tax system. House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp is having his staff draft bills for consideration this fall. When you have big shots in both parties in both houses working on something, it usually means there’s been some deal making done to get past the regular nonsense. When the old bulls are waging their fingers or carping at one another across party lines, you know it is all theater, not a serious effort.

It sounds promising until I get to this:

On the Senate side, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) asked colleagues in both parties to submit recommendations on which tax preferences should be preserved, starting from a “blank slate” where all current benefits are eliminated. To provide senators political cover and deniability, the committee put all recommendations under a 50-year top-secret classification, and restricted access to them to just 10 staff members.

Dullards like Kevin Williamson picked up on this claiming this is why the public seems to be siding with Edward Snowden over the rulers. It is a variation of the Old Testament warning from a prophet about how death is coming because the people have turned away from God. The conservative version of this is that the gods are angry because we have turned away from our constitutional principles. It’s circular reasoning. We are losing our republic because we have abandoned the basics of republic government. No kidding.

It misses an important point. The people in charge resort to these sorts of remedies not because they don’t rust the system They do this because they no longer trust themselves as a ruling class. That’s why they are employing the Cone of Silence. They know if this stuff gets out, members will use it against one another. Put another way, they are afraid to be candid with one another, because they fear their candor will be turned into a weapon against them in the future. Everyone assumes everyone else is a liar and a knave.

They also know the army of lobbyists will start pounding the war drums in order to get their special deal in the final bill. With a man in the White House willing to sell his daughters into slavery to score ideological points, no one can trust that there will be an honest debate or even a discussion if it is held in public. The result is that the elected representatives of the people have to abandon the fundamentals of self-government in order to get anything done in Washington. Is there any wonder they have so little respect for the Constitution?

An essential point that people on our side have to understand is that constitutions and political ideology are the result, not the cause. Principles are the rules the winning side imposes after they win. The constitution was written by the victors of the Revolutionary War and the post-war squabbling among the elites in the former colonies. The mercantile class of the North allied with the planter class in the South, came together to impose a political system on the new country that worked for them as a ruling elite.