There’s a lot of noise about whether Obama is élitist. I think two things are being conflated here. Someone can be in the “élite” (a station anyone taken seriously as a candidate for POTUS can be said to have attained) without believing that the “élite” deserve special privilege. Thus a member of the élite is not necessarily an “élitist” in the bad sense.
As for whether it’s objectionable that someone is even in the élite, well, I’m not sure that makes any sense. Don’t most Americans favor hiring someone who seems suited for a given job? Don’t most people want a high-level statesman to have a specialized, even “élite” education in statecraft? Isn’t a certain kind of élite-ness desirable?
Well, I’ll agree (I don’t even dare post in that other thread, which is rapidly becomming a flamewar …).
To my mind at least there is a big difference between “being elite” and “being an elitist” - but more to the point, when people accuse someone of “being elitist” they have something very specific in mind - not that the person believes that the best should do the hardest jobs (as in ‘an elite person should be POTUS’), but rather that the target is an intellectual snob who believes that the opinions and persons of the “elite” (however defined) are of greater moral and practical worth than those of the majority.
Thus, it is unimportant whether the person in question actually is a member of an elite or not by objective standards, what is important is the populism or elitism of that person’s opinions - how they value and treat others (or how they are perceived to do so).
I decided not to take part in that other thread for pretty much the same reasons.
I agree with much of what you say here and I’m glad you and others in this thread are talking about the difference between the two words and their meanings in a polical sense.
One can be elite without being an elitist under the definitions you’ve outlined. It’s funny how we somehow want to elect someone (or say we do) who has the elite background, education and personal qualities to represent this country in all forums but want someone who can be the man of the people when he/she deals with us. I think we have that most, right now, in Obama and now everybody pitching a bitch because he fulfills the elite qualifications aspect of the job, but they want to misintepret and hold that against him when it comes to dealing with the people.
Am I the only one (besides Obama himself) to have thought that the term elitist has only been thrown at Barack in the last few weeks by the Clinton campaign and actually applies more to her than him? He wasn’t an elitist until her campaign and the media started telling us he was. He has been around for well over a year and the electorate has had a chance to get to know him but we just found out he’s elitist? There are some on this board who are saying, oh, that they picked out to be an elitist from the very beginning. :dubious:
Pardon the hijack: Aall of a sudden, Clinton supporters are saying Obama is acting like the anointed and has always acted as if he expected the nomination and presidency to just be handed to him. Isn’t it coincidental that another characterization of Clinton’s has somehow been pasted until Obama?
Heh, I have no dog in the fight, being Canadian; from my perspective, all of the people in the race are clearly “elite” and none of them are particularly “elitist” in the way defined above - indeed, it would be kinda refreshing if one was.
The problem as I see it is something of the opposite: an unwillingness of politicians, however elite they may be, to vote their experience, knowledge and concience rather than take carefully considered positions according to what they think will get 'em elected.
I for one would love to have a candidate for POTUS (or indeed for PM here) stand up and publicly state: “although the majority of people in this country believe in X, they are simply wrong; I know better, based on my [elite knowledge]”. It will never happen of course as it would be political suicide …
I agree with Jon Stewart that I want my president to be elite. If the POTUS is not better than me then why the hell don’t I do the job myself? I want a person who, not only is 10 times better than me but who knows it and knows what to do with it.
I don’t just want a candidate that is better than me, I want one who is better than all of you as well and damn sure knows it. Otherwise, hell, I might as well vote for one of you.
Hal Briston and **Inigo Montoya ** for president and VP. Vote the SDMB party in 2012 for some real change.
And of course Obama acts as if the nomination should be handed to him, if a candidate does not fully expect to win then what the hell are they doing running? If you don’t think you’re better than me and you don’t fully expect to win then don’t waste my time, stop interrupting my TV shows and get the hell off my lawn.
Sorry, that sounded a bit rantish didn’t it, didn’t mean to, carry on then.
The word elite means nothing whatsoever to me in regard to Obama. It’s merely poltical manuevering. Surely, having a bright, articulate, personable man as president rather than the cringe inducing buffoon we’ve had to endure recently is a fine thing.
Elite is a term that to the Right is a pejorative when attached to Obama. It is an attempt to make it seem he can not do good for you because he does not share your experiences and values. After all he is a bad bowler and went to ivy league schools. How can he have any interest in your lowly problems. He is well spoken and gives thoughtful answers. How can that compare to “straight talking express”.
Well, most people would like the opportunity to go to an Ivy League school. Most people don’t like being excluded from opportunities because they didn’t go to an Ivy League school.
Obama did take a step in that direction by rejecting the gas tax holiday. He didn’t say it in precisely those words, but he did accept the views of the experts (economists) and his own judgment over the average American’s belief that no taxes = a good thing, more money for me.
Since my support for Obama is based on my belief that he is smarter than I am, and therefore better able to make important decisions for the country, I found his position on the gas tax to be very refreshing and a sign that my belief in him is justified.
Is it possible you mean it might be a good thing that our black candidate for president is considered “elite”? You know, one of the best, rather than “elitist” with the suggestion that he’s above it all and out of touch with the common man.
I would hardly call myself Marxist. I don’t believe that everyone deserves the same oportunities unless they earn them. You don’t go to a top school unless you can prove you can do the work in high school. You don’t get to play on a competetive team or take on a prestigeous job unless you demonstrate the skills and ability.
The problem, however, is that elitism isn’t always based on a meritocracy. Class, race, religeon, geography and economics can play a strong roll. The elite will often attempt to exclude those they do not consider to be elite. I think there is a natural tendency for people to separate into classes and exclude those they belive to be inferior.
When did the idea that the President of the USA had to be a “regular Joe” come about? Was it FDR’s “fireside chats” on the radio? Although he might have been our last unapologetic elitist President.
