"Elites" - Who Are They and Why Are They to be Despised?

[Skull Pilot]

Come on, guys - this is meant to be a serious thread with some serious discussion. There is a point to it that I will be making after we get a few serious posts. So come on - name a few people you would classify as elites and tell me why you think they are elites.

And also, what make up an "elite" as far as you are concerned?

In the liberal loony moon bat vernacular an elite is anyone who makes more money than you.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Right wingers worship the rich but despise the educated. Someone like Bush, rich enough for his father to pull strings to get his son into Harvard where his grades were C minus. See? They love him for being rich, identify with him for being dumb. There you have it. The "elitist" divide.

This is really spot on. I find the entire thing amazing how we vilify smart politicians and promote the "average joe" politician. Why? Do you want your doctor or lawyer or company's CEO to be the "average joe" American? Or do you want the smartest professional best positioned for the job?

Never thought I'd see a comparison but this disdain for the educated seems like a Right Wing version of the Cultural Revolution.

At least we Libs have the "conservatives".....

.....OUT-GUNNED!!!

 

[LoneLaugher]

Thanks for the memories, Shaman.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Thanks for the memories, Shaman.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNK4byQkn7w]A Bully Gets Bullied - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[chanel]

The term "elitist" to me, is synonymous with "snob". Whether it's money, status, or academic degree, they know better than the rest of us and therefore can tell us how to live and what to think. Of course, the rules don't always apply to them though.

Arrogance and superiority I suppose.

 

[Defiant1]

Congress is full of elites who do not have to live by the same rules and laws that we commoners do.

Yeah, I laugh when someone says 'we' need to give them a pay cut. The members themselves are the only ones who can vote on their pay, so 'we' can't do a damned thing about it!

Actually they cannot give themselves a raise or a cut. Any changes are subject to the next Congress.

 

[editec]

I gather I am not supposed to like the "elites." OK - I'm on board for that. "Elites" doesn't sound good going in. Damn "elites" - who needs 'em anyway, with their superior airs and their . . . well, God knows what else they have or do.

But I'm wondering - just who ARE these "elites" everyone seem so bent on vilifying? And exactly what is it about them that MAKES them "elites"? Would anyone care to define them for me?

Give me some examples of people you feel are objectionable "elites." And then, more importantly, let's discuss WHY you feel they fit the description. What is it about the people you might nominate as "elites" (or about all "elites" in general, for that matter), that makes them so despicable?

Good question.

Elite is as much an adjective as a noun.

I am one of the elite in SOME respects.

Most of you probably are in SOME respects, too.

Usually hereabouts when people discuss "the elite", they mean those folks who, thanks to money or influence, control the economy and the state.

 

[George Costanza]

The term "elitist" to me, is synonymous with "snob". Whether it's money, status, or academic degree, they know better than the rest of us and therefore can tell us how to live and what to think. Of course, the rules don't always apply to them though.

Arrogance and superiority I suppose.

I agree. Very good analysis (or, otherwise, why would I be agreeing with it? )

 

[George Costanza]

OK - fair enough.

This thread got started due to some guy I heard on Public Radio. He was talking about elitism and the tendency of people (mainly Republicans) in today's political world, to attempt to demonize their opponents by referring to them as "elitists" or "elites."

He said, isn't it interesting - here we have people who are generally very well off, people who live in gated communities, who own yachts, who occupy the fancy suites overlooking baseball parks and football stadiums, who are the CEO's of big corporations, i.e., generally Republicans, calling other people "elitists." He asked, does this seem somewhat ironic to anyone?

But then he went on to DEFINE elitism and, in so doing, he pointed out that there are various aspects of elitism that are quite different. For example, he noted that much of the Republican hatred for "elites" seemed to be aimed at intellectual people - the extremely well educated, college and university professors, scientists, etc. In other words, intellectual elitism.

There is another type of elitism, of course - economic elitism. He posited that when it comes to this type of elitism, it would seem to be mainly a Republican trait, rather than a Democratic one. I don't want this to turn into a "who has the wealth" debate - I'm just saying what this guy said. Whether he is right or not on that narrow issue isn't the point. The point has to do with how we should look at elitism.

Here is the really fascinating thing he said. He asked, WHY do people seem to have more hatred for the intellectually elite, than the economic elite? Good question. He had an answer. His theory is, that anyone, with a little hard work or, better yet, a little good luck (inheritance, lottery winner, etc.) can become an economic elite, whereas you either are an intellectual or you aren't, and no amount of luck is going to get you there if you aren't there already.

The majority of people seem to instinctivley know they are never going to be able to be an intellectual elite, whereas they always seem to see themselves as possible economic elites. Hence, the hatred for something they envy but see themselves as probably never being able to achieve, and the lack of hatred for something they see themselves as possibly being able to achieve at some time in the future.

Interesting, huh? It was to me anyway. Comments?

A lot of what the right wing believes is simply what they "imagine". You can see it in their policies. They aren't based on data or study. They are "common sense" and a "gut feeling". Then when they are wrong, they blame the educated for being "elitist". And they are nearly always wrong. You see it over and over again.

Evolution - between fossils, genetics, geology, and the other many sources of evidence, right wingers refuse to "believe" what is right there and available for them to learn.

Same thing with Climate Change.

Look at the economics. Trickle down doesn't work. When someone describes the policy out loud, normal people guffaw. When do Republicans say the words "supply and demand"? They insist there are the "job creators", like they are gods or something, just give them everything they need and they will "make jobs". They refuse to see the connection between "demand" and "jobs".

Successful economies, like ours in the past, followed a "Triple Helix" partnership of Universities, Government, and Business. Right wingers want to starve government until it's small enough to drown in a bathtub (Grover's words) and they think education is "just a piece of paper". And no matter how much they want to believe it, corporations are NOT people. They just aren't.

So you want a "serious" conversation? You won't get it from the right wing. I don't know how many right wingers right here on the USMB have described scientists as lazy, over educated, on the government dole, people who don't add anything the country, lack common sense and so on. But when you point out that a measly 6%, according to PEW Research, of scientists are Republican, they howl "LIAR". Point out that you can find "Scientific Organizations" of Blacks, of Gays, of Women, of Hispanics and so on, but not a single one of Conservatives or Republicans and the right wing will say, "That's because we don't inject politics into science". That, coming from people who want to teach "magical creation" as "science"? Seriously? Hilarious.

Deanie-do has no idea what the GOP nor what the 'right wing' thinks.

Unless he believes he can read minds. And, if he does, I am not surprised.

Actually, "Deanie-do is spot on. One can only base an opinion on what one sees before him/her, and he is accurately describing what one sees all the time as expressed by the Right - by conservative talk show hosts, by Republicans and conservatives posting on boards such as this on a daily basis, by op-ed pieces in newspapers and magazines, etc.

These may not be your personal views and you may not see Republicans expressing the beliefs listed by Deanie-do, but that doesn't mean those beliefs and views are not being expressed.

 

[Sunshine]

Congress is full of elites who do not have to live by the same rules and laws that we commoners do.

Yeah, I laugh when someone says 'we' need to give them a pay cut. The members themselves are the only ones who can vote on their pay, so 'we' can't do a damned thing about it!

Actually they cannot give themselves a raise or a cut. Any changes are subject to the next Congress.

Well that's a circular way of saying exactly what I said.

 

[Sunshine]

Who are you?

I'm a new guy who has no idea who you are or what you want to say......even though you started a thread. Spit it out already.

OK - fair enough.

This thread got started due to some guy I heard on Public Radio. He was talking about elitism and the tendency of people (mainly Republicans) in today's political world, to attempt to demonize their opponents by referring to them as "elitists" or "elites."

He said, isn't it interesting - here we have people who are generally very well off, people who live in gated communities, who own yachts, who occupy the fancy suites overlooking baseball parks and football stadiums, who are the CEO's of big corporations, i.e., generally Republicans, calling other people "elitists." He asked, does this seem somewhat ironic to anyone?

But then he went on to DEFINE elitism and, in so doing, he pointed out that there are various aspects of elitism that are quite different. For example, he noted that much of the Republican hatred for "elites" seemed to be aimed at intellectual people - the extremely well educated, college and university professors, scientists, etc. In other words, intellectual elitism.

There is another type of elitism, of course - economic elitism. He posited that when it comes to this type of elitism, it would seem to be mainly a Republican trait, rather than a Democratic one. I don't want this to turn into a "who has the wealth" debate - I'm just saying what this guy said. Whether he is right or not on that narrow issue isn't the point. The point has to do with how we should look at elitism.

Here is the really fascinating thing he said. He asked, WHY do people seem to have more hatred for the intellectually elite, than the economic elite? Good question. He had an answer. His theory is, that anyone, with a little hard work or, better yet, a little good luck (inheritance, lottery winner, etc.) can become an economic elite, whereas you either are an intellectual or you aren't, and no amount of luck is going to get you there if you aren't there already.

The majority of people seem to instinctivley know they are never going to be able to be an intellectual elite, whereas they always seem to see themselves as possible economic elites. Hence, the hatred for something they envy but see themselves as probably never being able to achieve, and the lack of hatred for something they see themselves as possibly being able to achieve at some time in the future.

Interesting, huh? It was to me anyway. Comments?

And I know another lawyer from 'up north' who says he doesn't understand why we allow Republicans to walk the streets in the south, let alone vote so staunchly for them because it was Republicans who burned us to the ground in another century. How quickly we forget. Around her it is the farmers, many whose family farms are fairly large businesses comparatively speaking, who are so staunchly Republican. My mother wasn't one of them, though. If you were a Republican she would tell you not to every put your feet under HER table! She almost starved under Hoover so my brother and sister could eat, and she had health problems most of her life due to malnourishment as a young woman.

 

[Sunshine]

When I was a girl, an older cousin married a doctor. For months and months before the wedding my mother went on and on about the 'social eeelite' and how my cousin had seriously overstepped herself getting involved with them. She also babbled on and on about all the upper crust who would be at the wedding. Blah blah blah!

Well, the day for the wedding came, and I had listened to her for so many months and was so inferior nervous feeling that I couldn't eat my cake or drink my punch because my hands were shaking so. And to make matters worse, I was so nervous I misspelled my name when I signed the guest register!

How bad is that! It took me years and years to gain any kind of comfort amongst people I felt were my social superiors. And, now I think about it, that may have even been the driving factor behind my insatiable need to get more and more education.

 

[Trajan]

I gather I am not supposed to like the "elites." OK - I'm on board for that. "Elites" doesn't sound good going in. Damn "elites" - who needs 'em anyway, with their superior airs and their . . . well, God knows what else they have or do.

But I'm wondering - just who ARE these "elites" everyone seem so bent on vilifying? And exactly what is it about them that MAKES them "elites"? Would anyone care to define them for me?

Give me some examples of people you feel are objectionable "elites." And then, more importantly, let's discuss WHY you feel they fit the description. What is it about the people you might nominate as "elites" (or about all "elites" in general, for that matter), that makes them so despicable?

I don't hate 'them', do you?

 

[yidnar]

I gather I am not supposed to like the "elites." OK - I'm on board for that. "Elites" doesn't sound good going in. Damn "elites" - who needs 'em anyway, with their superior airs and their . . . well, God knows what else they have or do.

But I'm wondering - just who ARE these "elites" everyone seem so bent on vilifying? And exactly what is it about them that MAKES them "elites"? Would anyone care to define them for me?

Give me some examples of people you feel are objectionable "elites." And then, more importantly, let's discuss WHY you feel they fit the description. What is it about the people you might nominate as "elites" (or about all "elites" in general, for that matter), that makes them so despicable?

you cane be an elite athlete or be elite in your accomplishments or part of an elite unit ... meaning you are a person of rarity ...but i think the word you are looking for is elitist ....someone who is so arrogant as to think they know better than the common man ,assholes like George Soros,Ariana Huffington,Bill Maher and many other left wing American hating faggots that make up the left are members of this communist elitist group !!

 

[SmarterThanHick]

....someone who is so arrogant as to think they know better than the common man

see i like the politicians who are so arrogant that they think they know a lot less than the common man, and that it's a good reason to be elected

 

[rdean]

Right wingers worship the rich but despise the educated. Someone like Bush, rich enough for his father to pull strings to get his son into Harvard where his grades were C minus. See? They love him for being rich, identify with him for being dumb. There you have it. The "elitist" divide.

This is really spot on. I find the entire thing amazing how we vilify smart politicians and promote the "average joe" politician. Why? Do you want your doctor or lawyer or company's CEO to be the "average joe" American? Or do you want the smartest professional best positioned for the job?

Except the right wing want their "leaders" to be the most stupid they can find. Look at McCain. Graduated 5th FROM THE BOTTOM out of a class of 899. That means he had to be the worst student in every class he was in. Who looks at the most stupid person from one of their classes from school and thinks, "Hmmm, that guy is someone I would gladly follow. A real leader. Someone I would vote for, for president"? Of course it's insane, but that's what the right wing does over and over again. And with great "pride". I don't get it.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Come on, guys - this is meant to be a serious thread with some serious discussion. There is a point to it that I will be making after we get a few serious posts. So come on - name a few people you would classify as elites and tell me why you think they are elites.

And also, what make up an "elite" as far as you are concerned?

I'd have to say...... "Carter Pewterschmidt".

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Right wingers worship the rich but despise the educated. Someone like Bush, rich enough for his father to pull strings to get his son into Harvard where his grades were C minus. See? They love him for being rich, identify with him for being dumb. There you have it. The "elitist" divide.

This is really spot on. I find the entire thing amazing how we vilify smart politicians and promote the "average joe" politician. Why? Do you want your doctor or lawyer or company's CEO to be the "average joe" American? Or do you want the smartest professional best positioned for the job?

Except the right wing want their "leaders" to be the most stupid they can find. Look at McCain. Graduated 5th FROM THE BOTTOM out of a class of 899. That means he had to be the worst student in every class he was in. Who looks at the most stupid person from one of their classes from school and thinks, "Hmmm, that guy is someone I would gladly follow. A real leader. Someone I would vote for, for president"? Of course it's insane, but that's what the right wing does over and over again. And with great "pride". I don't get it.

Lemme guess... you think Obama's smart?

 

[SmarterThanHick]

He graduated Harvard Law School magna cum laude as the editor of their law journal.

You may disagree with his politics. You can even claim his ideas are not practically efficient. Claiming he is dumb however tells me you shouldn't be voting. Why would you prefer someone 5th from the bottom of their class? Again, what other professional would you prefer to be the worst at their education? What kind of doctors or lawyers do you use?

 

[Trajan]

Was Steve Jobs an "Elite"?

Good point. I'm still trying to work out how Apple is not an evil corporation. It's built its factory in China, broke child labor laws (but of course that's ok in China) and breached safety standards (but that's ok in China too) and yet... we have no problem with Apple. Why is that?

because they were seen as 'contra' to the evil bill gates who actually enjoyed huge commercial success...so the gov. ( like it does laughably with Google today) favored them over the cheaper more accessible system.

wasn't the factory that made "I" stuff the one where they were committing suicide?

where were the leftys on that one? they took Nike to task for Indonesian sneakers, but I don't remember them killing themselves, unless Phil Knight was a con.