Power is the fundamental element that drives politics. Those who get to make decisions in this country are often a source of controversy, especially when individuals who influence public decisions are not elected officials. Much of the debate surrounding public intellectuals stems from their celebrity-like power within civic domain. Many feel cynical about the aristocratic status of public intellectuals and believe their authoritative expertise devalues the duties of citizens. Many believe that the careers of a public intellectuals are outdated and are in a state of decline because their beliefs are elitist, and the broadcasting of these opinions conflicts with democratic principles of self-reliance.
In Professor Stephen Mack’s article, “The ‘Decline’ of Public Intellectuals?” he states that “we need to be more concerned with the work public intellectuals must do, irrespective of who happens to be doing it”. This brings forth the question, what ‘must’ these intellectuals do?
First, we must realize that the public intellectual is on our side. The real issue is not that there is a decline in effective public intellectuals, but a decline in political interest in general. Therefore, the public intellectual must revive public interest and represent those who the government fails to account for.
The United States’ alarmingly low voter turnout confirms this dissatisfaction amongst the population. The majority of Americans are skeptical of campaigns corrupted by ulterior motives and biased funding, intimidated by the growing polarization between the two main political parties, discouraged by institutions like the electoral college and political practices like gerrymandering, which dilutes the potency of their vote, or they are confused by all the red tape that is required to register in the first place. All of these contributing factors have resulted in growing apathy amongst Americans when it comes to issues involving their government.
The public intellectual can help renew faith in politics by balancing extreme opinions. Public figures such as Susan Estrich are identified by their expertise instead of their political party. This means that the population has the opportunity to be enlightened by a different perspective other than that of the actual politicians themselves. Estrich bridges the political gap. She spreads her rather liberal opinion as a political commentator on Fox News, which is a right-winged news provider. Further, she represents minority groups as a Jewish feminist herself, providing a prominent voice for the often overlooked opinions of Jews and feminists in the U.S.
Estrich has acted as a pioneer for females. She was the first female to head a national presidential campaign and the first woman president of the Harvard Law Review. Public intellectuals should fall in line with this sort of inspiring activism, working with the institution and leading by example.
Currently, Estrich is the Robert Kingsley Professor of Law and Political Science at the University of Southern California. She writes for several outlets, including USA Today and the “Portia” Column for American Lawyer Media, as well as edits for major news sources including The Los Angeles Times.
Her activism through the use of her knowledge includes a long list of books about controversial social and political issues featuring titles such as, Getting Away with Murder and her latest, Sex & Power.
The public intellectual is, in fact, not in danger as long as they remain effective and utilize their power, as Susan Estrich does, to represent the various factions of society. Public interest is what is truly at risk, and the public intellectual ideally will nurture the needs of its unofficial constituencies.
