I never trusted Jonathan Chait, and I think this Reason piece confirms that I was right:

Over at New York Magazine, which today suffered a website crash that temporarily lowered Internet smug levels by a measurable degree, Jonathan Chaitmakes the bold claim that the Democratic Party is entering a period of dominance. His argument is partially rooted in favorable ethnic and generational trends that have much to do with the relative skills of the two major parties in enticing new voters—something that can confer a very real, but hardly permanent advantage. But Chait also proclaims victory for the donkey party because, he says, “America’s unique brand of ideological anti-statism is historically inseparable…from the legacy of slavery,” and who wants anything to do with that?

It’s tempting to say “what the fuck?” and take Chait’s argument as an exercise in self-congratulatory lunacy—part of the attempt to declare an argument over, and further debate illegitimate—that has become so popular recently.

But Chait links to an earlier piece of his that is both more nuanced and very revealing of a hermetically sealed cultural and intellectual hothouse, one that can make it easy to assume a natural march to victory by his side and inevitable defeat for his opponents.

In “The Color of His Presidency,” an analysis of the (alleged) racial politics undergirding support and opposition for the Obama administration, Chait acknowledged the limits of tying everything the right/Republicans (he tends to group people as “Democrat” and “Republican” and dismiss independents as really one or the other) do and believe to racism.

But he is doing his best, his number one goal being to write out libertarians to the maximum extent possible. Desperate and dishonest politicians and their “intellectual” operatives like Chait see libertarians as a dire threat to the backward equation that power holders and power seekers need.

Chait is very much a Red Team vs Blue Team thinker—deep down, you’re one, or you’re the other. He marinates at New York Magazine, among like-minded thinkers, for whom small government ideas and the Republican Party have largely been “written out of the American civic religion.” Everybody who disagrees is tainted by slavery in Mississippi.

I expect such nonsense to get more and more heated, especially as more and more people self-identify as libertarianish.

For the umpteenth millionth time in all these years of writing this blog, why can’t they just let people think what they think without telling them that they have to be on one “side” or the other?

It’s more tedious than ever.