Investiture Conflict 2.0: Experts vs. Market Populists
The Crown and the Church in the 21st Century
Theology and politics go hand in hand. Theological ideas give rise to political ones and political ideas carry an implicit view about the sovereignty of the cosmos. In a world in which God functions as the “King of Kings,” it is not a far leap to a doctrine of the divine right of kings. And in a world in which, theoretically, everyone is equal, it is not a far leap to imaging heaven as a cacophony of competing factions and special interest groups, leading to gridlock.
Imagining heaven in the image of American democracy means that God’s hands are tied by angelic filibuster. Every four years God builds a frail coalition only to have its very legitimacy questioned.
As I see it, divine right has largely been replaced by two competing worldviews:
One is aristocracy—the best people (however defined) bestow the right to power on others. Patronage is an example of aristocracy. College admissions (and faculty appointments) are another. Any regime where authority comes from expertise and where expertise is guarded and regulated by a handful of insiders can be described as aristocratic.
The other is a free-market view AKA market populism. Instagram and Youtube celebrities and “Influencers” are appointed by the people. Entrepreneurs are anointed by customers.
In paradigm A value is determined by the chosen few. In paradigm B it’s determined by popularity, as expressed in eyeballs (attention) and/or revenue (capital commitment).
The Middle Ages were roiled by an “Investiture conflict” between Crown and Church; one way to think about the conflict between Experts and Populists is that it’s an Investiture Conflict 2.0 Critics of “neoliberalism” (i.e., market populism) tend to be experts who are afraid of ceding power to the crowd. They might be considered Church 2.0 Meanwhile, critics of “elitism” are mostly people who enjoy (or seek to enjoy) credibility on the basis of quantity of likes and shares. To stay in power, kings need to please the people—keeping them from revolt. Bishops and popes are more insulated from external judgment, except when they become corrupt.
The critique of today’s expert class mirrors the medieval critique of the Church leaders—that it was complacent and decadent. Nobody expects kings to be above corruption. A bit of hedonism and gluttony is even expected. Similarly, when an influencer posts a selfie of him or herself shirtless it’s an appeal to mass authority. When an academic, medical doctor, or politician does it, we find tend to find it inappropriate. The inconsistency in our response means the distinction between Church and Crown is still dominant in our thinking—whether or not we believe in God or divine right.
What is Called Thinking? is a practice of asking a daily question on the belief that self-reflection brings awe, joy, and enrichment to one’s life. Consider becoming a subscriber to support this project and access subscriber-only content.
You can read my weekly Torah commentary here.