The “anti-establishment” abstraction is superficially exhilarating, or exhilarating to the superficial, because it fosters the illusion of a simplistic populism or individualism. If it weren’t for that darned establishment, then (left version) the sweet and innocent “people” could flourish in perfect harmony, or (right version) every individual could be left alone to run his own life, or (nationalist version) our country could simply re-assume its inherent greatness.

Each of these versions of the anti-establishment illusion might contain at least a grain of truth, but all must repress a hard fact of the human condition: there will be an establishment. It’s called government. We may be governed more or less wisely, justly, liberally or morally, but we will be governed. At least we had better hope that there is some established government, for without it we are ruled by the strongest criminal on the block, by the fiercest warlord, by chaos.

Thus both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams — the left and the right, one might say, among our Founders — recognized the inevitability of an establishment, an elite, an “aristocracy,” as they said. They understood that some will always have more influence than others; even if a perfectly fair and equal “starting point” could somehow be engineered, Adams observed, in one generation superior ambition and talents would cause a few to gain inordinate influence, which they would inevitably use to the advantage of themselves, their families, and their friends.