A friend of mine has posted a penetrating analysis of the clerisy and the political class of America on Facebook. In it, he coins the portmanteau “Brahmandarin” to describe these cretins, and their sort of hybrid Mandarin and Brahmin nature. They have the permanent bureaucratic nature of the Mandarins, with a large infusion of Brahmin nepotism and in-class favoritism.

Observe:

Consider America’s “New Class”: academia, journalism, “helping” professions, nonprofits, community organizers, trustafarian artists,… Talent for something immediately verifiable (be it playing the piano, designing an airplane, or buying-and-selling,… ) or a track record of tangible achievements are much less important than credentials — degrees from the right places, praise from the right press organs,…

 
In principle, the New Class is more like the Mandarins rather than the Brahmin caste, as in theory (and to some degree in practice) 1st-generation membership is open to people of all backgrounds. Heck, that includes even an electrician’s son with three advanced degrees (this blogger, a professor by day).

 
In practice, however, this class is highly endogamous, and its children have an inside track on similar career paths. Thus one finds 2nd and 3rd generation New Class members, whose outlooks on life tend to be more insular and collectively self-centered than that of their 1st-generation peers. (It is important not to over-generalize about one’s fellow human beings: some of the greatest fellow ‘renegades’ I know were to the manor born.) In that manner, the New Class resembles the Brahmins. Hence my portmanteau “Brahmandarins”.

The takeaway from this is that the hostility to Donald Trump doesn’t really come from his status as a Republican, for as a Republican he is generally accounted relatively moderate, and not even a “true” conservative. Only on matters of immigration is he seen as anything heavily right-wing. On most other issues, he is either ambivalent or sometimes outright liberal.

So why the hostility? It’s driven by caste. Donald Trump is a Vaishya, not a Brahmin. As a real estate guy, he could act as slumlord to the Brahmandarin elite. As an entertainer on TV, he could conceivably entertain the Shudras and the Dalits. All of these things were fine, and so long as Trump “stayed in his lane” (a favorite phrase of the political Left), all was well.

But then he went against an anointed Brahmin in the form of Hillary Clinton. This was not to be permitted. He was jumping caste. This is also why Jeb was the initial favorite of the Establishment GOP types. He was also a Brahmin. Yes, not the chosen of the Left, perhaps, but his running was not a caste jump.

It’s very worrisome that India’s caste system has an almost one-to-one relationship with America’s own unofficial castes, or that the relationship is so readily observable. India is, after all, not exactly a bastion of freedom and prosperity.

Nitay provides more:

While the D party used to be one with which particularly Shudras could identify, over time it has increasingly become a patron-client coalition of Brahmandarins and Dalits. Kshatriyas overwhelmingly lean R, while Shudras and Vaishyas (other than high finance) became increasingly disaffected from D and either moved to the R column or tuned out of politics.

The current iteration of the Democrat Party is an alliance between Left-leaning Brahmins (which is most of them — I wonder how long it will take for the Bush family to switch sides?) and the Dalits, who are fed with their table scraps.

But the election of Donald Trump was in large part possible because the Shudras defected. They were once reliably Democratic, but the Democrats have spent the last few decades maligning them, impoverishing them, taking their jobs, homes, and prospects… and then blaming them for every racially-charged incident. They, apparently, have had enough.

Unsurprisingly, Brahmandarin presidents tend to appoint cabinet and senior aides from among the Brahmandarin caste, while Trump’s appointments came almost exclusively from the Vaishyas (Exxon CEO Tillerson for State, and Kshatriyas (Mattis, Flynn, Kelly). It doesn’t matter that most of these people have real-world achievements to their names than a Robbie Mook type can only dream of: they are “ignorant” (read: insufficiently subservient to New Class shibboleths), “hate-filled”, etc. — All short-hand for “not one of us”.
For those same people who keep on prating about how open they are to foreign cultures (the more foreign, the better to “virtue-signal”) are completely unable to fathom the mindset of their compatriots of a different caste, who might as well come from a different planet as from a different country.

Donald Trump has explicitly denied the Brahmandarins a seat at his table. He isn’t merely disagreeing with them, he’s actively flipping them off and telling them that he will not consult with them in any capacity. And to the Brahmandarins, this is the ultimate sin. The table, you see, is supposed to be theirs exclusively. But if Trump forced himself a seat, well… so be it, but the rest of the seats should still go to the anointed ones. At least, that was their thinking.

The riots? The Faithless Elector ploy? The Russian “hacking” stuff? All of this is nothing more than the Brahmandarins throwing a temper tantrum because they are now required to share power with the others. And as Nitay tells us here, they can’t even be bothered to try and understand people from other backgrounds.

They make a good show of loving foreigners (but really, they just want foreigners to come here in order to vote for them), but they don’t even understand Americans of different castes and classes. After all, one of the most amusing mistakes Hillary made was assigning a man from Brooklyn to run her Midwestern rural outreach campaign, as if the under-employed ex-factory worker was going to listen to a carpetbagger from New York City and say to himself “yeah, I can totally see myself voting for her.” For better or worse, Trump at least spoke their language.

Related Content

%d bloggers like this: