Over at the Guardian, Ewan Morrison is pissed off that young-adult novels don’t preach a left-wing, progressive vision. In fact, he writes, many of the most popular titles actually undermine the collectivism at the heart of so many utopias-gone-bad. . . .
Jeebus, the sourness runs strong in this one. Morrison is in such a rush to denounce the neoliberalism of the books that he manages to misrepresent them. Far from being anti-community, these books are anti-collectivist, at least when the group is based on involuntary servitude, perceived mental and physical capacities (mostly the result of genetics in these books), or accidents of geography. To the extent that they—like virtually all novels—rely on individual protagonists, those heroes are all about political and social equality rather than any sort of elevation of the great man or woman at the expense of others. None of the books he cites is against community per se. They are against reactionary states that rule by dictate rather than democracy (whether in a the voting booth or the marketplace).
So, yeah, they’re poison for “progressivism.”
Plus, from the comments: “What, they forgot the Harry Potter series? The Ministry of Magic is the epitome of socialistic incompetence and there is very little standing in the way when Voldemort shows up to take over. Hogwarts is practically a bastion of libertarianism – until the Death Eaters kill Dumbledore and take over the school.”
And, amusingly, from the original Guardian piece comments: “The truth is that the masses are increasingly right wing with an antagonism to politics and to the state. They need to be confronted.” Confront away, big boy.
See Harry Potter And The Half-Crazed Bureaucracy for more along these lines. There’s also discussion from Bill Whittle, Stephen Green, and Scott Ott in the latest Trifecta.