# What exactly is a "liberal elite"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 28, 2019, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609 "2019-10-28T17:26:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/261 "2019-11-07T16:55:15Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > In your early 30’s, would you have predicted a financial crisis that wiped out your 401K? What if by some cruel fate, you were just approaching retirement and your nice self directed 401K nest-egg was wiped out by a financial crisis. As you recall, many people lost their homes - which was their largest investment. It’s easy to claim that you’d be smarter where they were foolish. Perhaps you possess that superior skillset and intuition that would allow you to avoid financial ruin where others failed to do so. Are you convinced that you would not end up at square one, or worse, on the street with nothing left? If so, I admire your financial prowess. If not, I admire your confidence. Personal responsibility. I am a firm believer in it. If that happened and I wasn’t smart enough to plan for it, then yes I may very well be back at square 1, or worse off but that isn’t your responsibility, nor is it society’s. If it is so bad and I have been contributing to a social safety net, then I may indeed need to utilize it. If I opted out of that as well? Oh well. All these answers were probably forseen, so it comes as no real surprise why the term nanny and liberal elite have negative tones to those wishing to presume to tell others how to live their day to day lives. Save! Go to the Dr! Wear your helmet! ALL good advice, and lots of people would be given the opportunity to buy in. Some wouldn’t, some have no need, and others will probably end up dead or left behind in society. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/262 "2019-11-07T17:05:21Z")
@Bone: Because a large enough society can’t be run from an à la carte menu. But, sure. Let’s drop the libertarian line. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/263 "2019-11-07T17:11:23Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > @Bone: Because a large enough society can’t be run from an à la carte menu. But, sure. Let’s drop the libertarian line. I mean, isn’t that what we have now? You are a la carte helping some subset of our populace to the detriment of the others. And then something else for some others to the detriment of still others. Currently the only people not being hurt by ANY of it is the ultra rich (and the liberal elite crafting said laws) and you can’t fleece them much or they can leave, and they simply do not need the services you’re selling. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/264 "2019-11-07T17:20:04Z")
AFAICT, there’s no real difference in philosophy here – just a difference in degree… i.e. what kind/level of harm to society warrants this sort of intrusion? It’s not a big philosophical difference if one person puts the bar on one side of seatbelts vice the other. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/265 "2019-11-07T17:29:59Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > AFAICT, there’s no real difference in philosophy here – just a difference in degree… i.e. what kind/level of harm to society warrants this sort of intrusion? It’s not a big philosophical difference if one person puts the bar on one side of seatbelts vice the other. It’s never about seatbelts and helmets, is it? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/266 "2019-11-07T17:33:28Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > I mean, isn’t that what we have now? > > You are a la carte helping some subset of our populace to the detriment of the others. And then something else for some others to the detriment of still others. > > Currently the only people not being hurt by ANY of it is the ultra rich (and the liberal elite crafting said laws) and you can’t fleece them much or they can leave, and they simply do not need the services you’re selling. Not quite the same. When choosing à la carte, you’re picking what you’re going to have, not whom you’re going to feed it to or who you’ll stick with the bill. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/267 "2019-11-07T18:10:03Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > Personal responsibility. I am a firm believer in it. If that happened and I wasn’t smart enough to plan for it, then yes I may very well be back at square 1, or worse off but that isn’t your responsibility, nor is it society’s. If it is so bad and I have been contributing to a social safety net, then I may indeed need to utilize it. > If I opted out of that as well? Oh well. You say that, but do you believe you’ll end up like that, and do you have enough experience with hunger and homelessness to know how you’ll react under the circumstances? And what about if you’re not in our right mind? What if you either end up suffering from mental illness or even live long enough to experience Alzheimer’s? It’s one thing to talk up how brave you would be in the face of death and how all these lifeboats that these damn regulations are making you keep cluttered about the neck are screwing up your promenade. It’s another thing to ride the Titanic down into the chill waters of Atlantic. I also am for personal responsibility. In fact, as was discussed in a thread on this very board not to long ago, I suspect most people are. But if nothing else, as noted, your emaciated carcass lying on the sidewalk can drive property values down, whether it’s because you didn’t wear a helmet or you ran out of money and no one is feeling particularly charitable where you happened to have ended up homeless. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/268 "2019-11-07T19:15:37Z")
> [@ASL\_v2.0](#): > > For the record, I would prefer to default to a “basic services, along with social safety net, to include healthcare” should be covered by taxes. Any sort of opt out with appropriate waivers/fees would be acceptable to me, but only provided the opt out system is not itself detrimental to society. In the case of motorcycle or bike helmets, I think society would get by. In the cases of fires that are allowed to burn out of control, though, and the potential for low income families to bear the burden of that and underfunded public schools disproportionately… yeah, I’m not okay with that. See, now you’re making an arbitrary determination about which services are “basic” and a “social safety net”, and which ones can be ignored and society “would get by”. You’re using your own personal risk and cost-benefit analyses and wishing to impose your conclusions on the rest of society. I believe, per the context of the thread, that makes you an “elite”. > [@Kearsen1](#): > > I don’t know how else to say this: > If the government is TELLING you that you MUST do something, vs assigning your own risk to it and deciding for yourself, that is what I am describing here as Nannyism. > > We keep getting further and further away from the OP though so I think I’ll respond a few more times if necessary, but if no more clarity is reached than shown lately, I’ll bow out. That’s exactly what I said - any damn thing the government tells you to do is nannyism. It doesn’t matter what it is, it doesn’t matter how obvious it is, it doesn’t matter how massively destructive to society or other people it would be if you don’t do the thing. No matter what, if they tell you to do something, that’s nannyism. So we’re in complete agreement. Telling you not to fire a gun into a crowd? Nannyism, yo. That’s just them protecting you from mob justice, when you ought to be able to be able to assess that risk and decide for yourself. And honestly, regarding the thread in general, the “anti-elite” position seems to include a rather startling number of comments along the lines of “and as a result of my preferred plan, a bunch of people will die”. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/269 "2019-11-07T19:15:54Z")
Does motorcycle insurance still pay if the rider got into an accident without a helmet on? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/270 "2019-11-07T20:19:39Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > I don’t know how else to say this: > If the government is TELLING you that you MUST do something, vs assigning your own risk to it and deciding for yourself, that is what I am describing here as Nannyism. Just curious, how do you categorize the situation where the government is telling a woman that she MUST remain pregnant after she and her physician have decided against it? Nannyism, elitism, or something else? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/271 "2019-11-07T21:04:44Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Just curious, how do you categorize the situation where the government is telling a woman that she MUST remain pregnant after she and her physician have decided against it? Nannyism, elitism, or something else? Obviously the rails were jumped long ago and the discussion no longer has anything to do with whether there is or what is “liberal elite” but yes, I was going to mention, what about so-called “morals” or “family values” -based laws. It’s not liberals insisting on those. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/272 "2019-11-07T22:18:41Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Obviously the rails were jumped long ago and the discussion no longer has anything to do with whether there is or what is “liberal elite” but yes, I was going to mention, what about so-called “morals” or “family values” -based laws. It’s not liberals insisting on those. Oh yeah. If we apply the “motorcycle helmet test” to gay marriage, the situational ethics become transparently obvious. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/273 "2019-11-08T00:58:28Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Of course it’s more dangerous without a helmet - I don’t think anyone is disputing this. And I also don’t see anyone advocating for non-helmet wearing. Whereas you seem to be engaging in an outcome based argument - that the results of non-helmet wearing is worse than the outcomes of helmet wearing when measured by injury severity. But the argument in the context of elitism is not outcome based, at least not precisely. > > Because you can’t measure the utility derived by an individual by not wearing a helmet, I don’t think you can say that they are better off. Sure, they are more likely to die and if that’s something they want to avoid, they should wear a helmet. Actually, if that’s the case they shouldn’t ride a motorcycle at all. > > Allowing people to make that choice is a principled position, independent of the outcomes. More people will die. Let them. Sure everyone knows not using a helmet is more dangerous - but 5% more dangerous, or 60% which is what the data shows. Decisions should be made based on information. But I’m fine with them not wearing helmets if they purchase insurance that covers this, and not let the helmet wearing motorcycle rides subsidize their choice. Motorcycle insurance takes into account the higher risk of riding, so that’s fine. > [@](#): > > The response to this is similar. You are focused on outcomes - what are the returns available vs. investment opportunities and which is a better outcome, etc. I don’t think it much matters if people are better or worse off from a financial measure. The idea of elitism is exactly what you are demonstrating - that people don’t know and someone else should decide for them. > > I’m well aware that a great many people make poor choices. People should be able to make those choices, suffer the consequences for bad choices, and reap the rewards for good ones. Taking away those choices because someone knows better than the individual themself represents a type of liberal elitism. Yes I’m focused on outcomes, because I doubt our society would be willing to let the people who didn’t do the right thing for retirement die in the gutter. Since we’d think that this is immoral. And it is not like a society doing away with SS would force employers to give that money to the workers. The argument is this: We don’t want old people to starve to death and be homeless. Yeah, this is outcomes based. It is demonstrably true that a certain percentage of people won’t save independently for retirement. As I said, this is sometimes out of carelessness but often out of economic necessity. You clearly think that people make rational economic decisions in general, and those who don’t deserve their punishment. That’s economic creationism. We are wired to make bad decisions. We are wired to make irrational decisions. This has been experimentally demonstrated. So, you are ignoring the facts in favor of ideology. And I bet you’d be against a big tax increase to feed those who didn’t do what you think they should have done. Sorry, I’d rather have them be forced to pay for their own basic income, more or less. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/274 "2019-11-08T01:16:39Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > The it depends was me thinking that early on in my earning years, I would have contributed to SSN. Probably in my early 30’s, I would have opted out because I knew there were better return options. Better return options implies riskier return options. Which is fine - but the purpose of Social Security it to provide a very low risk option as the base. If you have money left over after paying the SS tax you are welcome to invest it any way you want, with tax advantages. If you screw up, you’ll still be able to live in retirement. Given the number of people whose retirement plan seems to be keep working until they die (even with SS) do you really think that everyone would productively invest that 7%? Seems demonstrably false given the 401K experiment. Sure you might do fine. What about the person without the mental capability to make good choices or avoid scams? Do they starve at 65? We’re talking about society as a whole, not just those with the ability or luck to invest well. True elitism is thinking that everyone is just like you. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 5:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/275 "2019-11-08T05:45:26Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > True elitism is thinking that everyone is just like you. Or thinking that, whenever push comes to shove, you’ll be the one to come out on top, because… you. And to be clear, that’s a “general” you. I’m agreeing with you. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/276 "2019-11-08T15:30:01Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Just curious, how do you categorize the situation where the government is telling a woman that she MUST remain pregnant after she and her physician have decided against it? Nannyism, elitism, or something else? I mean I am pretty firmly pro-choice so I believe the government shouldn’t be telling her that. Now at some point, we do need to look at the viability of the baby as a person as well. I am just fine with the way things stand right now with third trimester abortions off the table. Or was there a particular incident you wished to discuss? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/277 "2019-11-08T15:34:05Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > I mean I am pretty firmly pro-choice so I believe the government shouldn’t be telling her that. Now at some point, we do need to look at the viability of the baby as a person as well. I am just fine with the way things stand right now with third trimester abortions off the table. Why do you think you know better than a woman and her physician that she shouldn’t have a third-trimester abortion? ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/278 "2019-11-08T15:36:56Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > See, now you’re making an arbitrary determination about which services are “basic” and a “social safety net”, and which ones can be ignored and society “would get by”. You’re using your own personal risk and cost-benefit analyses and wishing to impose your conclusions on the rest of society. > > I believe, per the context of the thread, that makes you an “elite”. > > That’s exactly what I said - any damn thing the government tells you to do is nannyism. It doesn’t matter what it is, it doesn’t matter how obvious it is, it doesn’t matter how massively destructive to society or other people it would be if you don’t do the thing. No matter what, if they tell you to do something, that’s nannyism. > > So we’re in complete agreement. > > Telling you not to fire a gun into a crowd? Nannyism, yo. That’s just them protecting you from mob justice, when you ought to be able to be able to assess that risk and decide for yourself. > > And honestly, regarding the thread in general, the “anti-elite” position seems to include a rather startling number of comments along the lines of “and as a result of my preferred plan, a bunch of people will die”. I think the position you take is silly. It stands to reason that the law is designed to protect others vs your autonomy outweigh your autonomy. Firing a gun into a crowd falls into this, among a whole slew of other laws but I think you knew that. Nannyism is the attempt to protect you from yourself, not the attempt to protect others from you. Driving with lights on. Firing guns in a crowd etc ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Kearsen1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen1)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/279 "2019-11-08T15:38:06Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Why do you think you know better than a woman and her physician that she shouldn’t have a third-trimester abortion? I personally do not know better, but the baby at some point becomes a person worth protecting, even at the discomfort of the mother. I would actually probably be fine I we looked at the cases on an individual basis, taking into account the mother, father and the doctors. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2019, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609/280 "2019-11-08T15:55:46Z")
> [@Kearsen1](#): > > I personally do not know better, but the baby at some point becomes a person worth protecting, even at the discomfort of the mother. Stating “I don’t know better”, but then stating a thing you know, is a contradictory statement. You are definitely putting yourself in an elite position to make decisions for others. > [@](#): > > I would actually probably be fine I we looked at the cases on an individual basis, taking into account the mother, father and the doctors. Why does it matter if you are “fine”? Why does “we” have to include anything beyond a woman and her doctor? That’s elitism. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-a-liberal-elite/842609.md?page=15)