The Resurgence of Cruelty: How a Predicted Backlash Fuels Open Bigotry

The Mask of "Free Speech": Cruelty as a Political Tool

The recent saga of Marko Elez, a staffer in Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, reveals a disturbing trend. Elez, operating an anonymous X account, unleashed a torrent of racist vitriol, calling for the "normalization of Indian hate" and boasting about his own prejudice.

Despite resigning after being exposed by the Wall Street Journal, Elez was swiftly reinstated by Musk, seemingly at the urging of Vice President JD Vance. Musk's justification? "To err is human, to forgive is divine." A noble sentiment, perhaps, but conspicuously absent is any sign of remorse or accountability from Elez himself.

This incident highlights a troubling phenomenon: the normalization of cruelty under the guise of "free speech". For some, the ability to express hateful views without consequence has become a perverse badge of honor, a twisted form of liberation.

This sentiment echoes disturbing anecdotes. Brock Colyar, for example, recounted a Trump supporter's rationale for their vote: a desire to freely use slurs without repercussions. Similarly, a "top banker" confessed to the Financial Times feeling "liberated" by Trump's victory, believing it granted license to use offensive language without fear of social censure.

Richard Rorty's Prophetic Vision: Anticipating a Backlash

This unsettling embrace of cruelty was chillingly predicted by philosopher Richard Rorty in his 1998 book, *Achieving Our Country*. Rorty foresaw the rise of a right-wing strongman who would usher in an era of resurgent bigotry and social regression. His words, written almost three decades ago, resonate with disturbing accuracy today.

Rorty envisioned a future where the gains made by marginalized communities would be eroded, where contempt for women would become fashionable, and where hateful slurs would once again pollute public discourse. He argued that this backlash would stem from the resentment of the "badly educated" towards the perceived cultural dictates of the educated elite.

Rorty's Blind Spot: Class vs. Status

While remarkably prescient in many respects, Rorty's analysis faltered in its focus on class. He believed the driving force behind this backlash would be the economic anxieties of those "left behind" by globalization.

However, evidence suggests a different dynamic at play. The purveyors of this new cruelty are often not economically disadvantaged. They are frequently members of the elite – programmers, bankers, and influential figures – who wield slurs as weapons of cultural dominance.

Their motivation seems less rooted in economic hardship and more in a desire to assert social superiority, a yearning for a bygone era where their prejudices faced fewer challenges. Their "liberation" comes not from escaping economic hardship, but from shedding the constraints of social decency.

This suggests a deeper, more complex dynamic than Rorty envisioned, one where the pursuit of status and the wielding of cultural power play a more significant role than simple economic resentment.

Understanding the Roots of Cruelty: Beyond Economics

Understanding this resurgence of cruelty requires moving beyond a purely economic framework and acknowledging the powerful influence of status anxieties and the desire for cultural dominance. It demands recognizing the uncomfortable truth that for some, bigotry is not a symptom of pain, but a tool of power.