Criticizing Elites, Cultivating Excellence
Conservative media stars have gotten good mileage out of elite bashing. Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck, who together reach tens of millions through radio, TV, and New York Times bestselling books, have argued robustly that our elites are arrogant, insulated, and obtuse. To a significant extent, the conservative media stars are right.
Overall, their sweeping indictment, which inspired a good deal of Tea Party activism, has been good for democracy in America. By rousing large numbers of citizens of differing political inclinations last November to demand more effective and responsible representation, the indictment served the cause of self-government.
But dwelling on the vices of contemporary elites can also present dangers to the cause of freedom. For all the salutary attention it has focused on the American founding and Beck’s propulsion of Friedrich Hayek’s 1944 classic The Road to Serfdom to the top of the Amazon bestseller list in June 2010, the contemporary critique of what Angelo Codevilla calls “the ruling class” can cut too crudely. It frequently runs the risk of obscuring the dependence of constitutional democracy in America on the cultivation of excellence.
Elites — persons of the highest class or groups controlling the reins of political power — are a common feature of social and political life. They are inevitable in free societies, which make a priority of giving individuals the opportunity to develop their varying talents and to cooperate for mutual benefit.
Unfortunately, it is far from inevitable in free societies that those gifted in acquiring power will be the wisest and most adept at exercising it. Yet today more than ever conserving liberty and maintaining democracy require an elite whose members possess advanced learning, professional expertise, and wisdom born of extended experience.
As House Budge Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future 2.0 demonstrates, effectively tackling our major domestic challenges — job creation, taxes, health care, Social Security — will depend on policy analysts and economists of the highest caliber delving into and making sense of the intricate details of a multi-trillion dollar federal budget and then finding ways to curtail spending while providing for fundamental governmental responsibilities and maintaining essential services.
As General — and Princeton PhD — David Petraeus proved in devising and implementing a winning counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq well after the supposedly best and brightest concluded that all was lost, refined knowledge of the history, culture, religion, and everyday material needs of our allies as well our adversaries is vital in the struggle against Islamic extremism.
As the Obama administration wrestles with questions concerning targeted killings, the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, and trials in federal court of enemy combatants, it seems to be learning that in the continuing struggle to balance liberty and security while defending the nation against jihadists and other transnational terrorists, proper application of the law of armed conflict calls for lawyers not only superbly trained in the conventional areas of constitutional law but also well-versed in military affairs.
And, as the disgraceful attempt — first without a shred of proof, then in defiance of overwhelming evidence — by progressive journalists to blame the Tucson shootings on Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, and Tea Party activists reminds, to form reliable judgments citizens need tenacious journalists who are trained to respect their primary and overriding professional obligation, which is to report the truth.
The author creates a straw man – the idea that Limbaugh, Beck and Palin, and others who are tired of the “self-announced” elite dictating policies inimical to the Constituion and individual liberty – that these people are opposed to the idea of excellence in leadership. This idea has not been expressed by Limbaugh, Levin, or the others to my knowledge. They don’t even necessarily oppose the idea of being educated at elite institutions. Thomas Sowell attended Columbia and Harvard (I think). Angelo Codevilla who wrote the book defining the “ruling class” had an elite education.
What the author fails to comprehend in his characterization of the attacks on the ruling elite is the simple idea of self-announced elite/leadership status. Code villa clearly defines how the Ruling Elite attain their privileged status by adopting the entire liberal worldview. That is the ticket. If you go to Harvard and don’t accept liberal dogma (you do the evil act of adopting conservative ideas) you are not part of the Elite. Limbaugh, Levin, and other thoughtful conservatives do nothing to disparage excellence in leadership. As a matter of fact, Limbaugh is every bit the Conservative thought leader that William Buckley was – he just has a lot larger audience. But I think the author has a problem with the fact that Rush does not have an Ivy League degree. Now, who is doing more to prevent the real emergence of excellent leaders, Rush or this author, who probably would have looked for a leader with a stronger intellectual pedigree than Ronald Reagan, who attended lowly Eureka College. At least he had the good sense to rely on Bill Bennet for his ideas.
Very nice riposte. Emphasising the snobbery of the “best and brightest”and disregard for the vaunted intelligence of the self chosen “elite”. They toe the line drawn by the cocks of their particular barnyard. And pretend it’s the only line in town.
Marshalled by sheepdogs of Media and “elite” educational societies into the cul-de – sacs of these mentors. Instead of educating themselves for their take on the world. Using better, more thoughtful, more variously experienced mentors with many sided history of success and failure. Without which these “elite” are little more than privileged spoiled 13 year olds. Ivory towers, being closed societies, are not best examples for varied experience. Ditto establishment Media. It’s why when entering the open job market an entry stage apprenticeship is required.
Having been imposed on for the past few decades by such swaggering adolescents, it’s a genuine relief to have adults, with experience and exposure to many types of persons and situations that needed managing
to finally come into the spotlight.
¡Not bad for a _nuevoseñorito_ or ‘conservative’ ‘intellectual’!
What, after all, would the Mark I selfservatives’ Gen. A. X. Hamilton, Esq., from the Gang of Eighty-Seven, make of a Party Neocomrade Governess S. L. Heath-Paling of AK-49? Or of the Archpontiff of Janesville, His Holeyness Ronpaulryan I? Or of such crumby colonial-parochial facsimiles of a proper Old Euro Freelord as Johann von Böhner _oder_ Erich von Kantor?
As the competent expecter will have expected, however, compared to the diagnosis, the proposed therapy is a most ridiculous mouse: “the cultivation of excellence in a new generation of leaders,” forsooth! [*]
Happy days.
___
[*] “No rose without a silver lining”: the Hoovervillain of Palo Alto is quight whight to be dissatisfied with the current crop of Party an’ AEIdeology.
The trouble is only that “¡Not like that!” can scarcely afford sufficient guidance for Dr. Goppenstein up at the Castle to galvanize the kiddies a better class of neocritter in his next batch.
“The rise over the last three generations of conservative thinkers determined to restore America’s constitutional tradition, moreover, reflects the importance the constitutional tradition itself attaches to intellectual excellence. Educated to a degree that is today difficult to comprehend, America’s founders believed — and demonstrated through their remarkable political handiwork — that a proper understanding of the principles of self-government and the ability to meet the challenges of the day rested on intimate knowledge of the classics and of the moderns as well as first hand experience of governing and commerce.”
Fat chance of ever seeing that happen in almost all of today’s left-wing universities. It all starts in the schools with young people. So long as they are constantly bombarded with this insanity of “multiculturalism,” liberalism, and self-hatred for our own American history and past, we run the terrible risk of creating a generation of people who do NOT believe in American exceptionalism. But I have a lot of hope that Americans are beginning to learn more about their past and the Founding Fathers. And this new crusade was NOT started in the universities or in the high schools. If was started by people like Glen Beck, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and others. Soon the universities, too, will have to pay attention to this, or else risk irrelevance. But we are changing and the Tea Parties, especially, are proof of that. So there is hope, America.
The multiculturalism that Libertyship rightly deplores was not produced by the left, but by “moderate conservatives”, aka socially responsible capitalists. I agree that their educational policies have been dangerous and conducive to incompetence in every area they touch. I wrote briefly about these fellows here: http://clarespark.com/2011/02/10/multiculturalism-cui-bono/. But my entire website is devoted to exposing and defeating their tender mercies.
Please embark on that task yourself, libertyship. Your recent comments on the 2nd Amendment demonstrate that your knowledge of the Founders is superficial.
Mark, you black helicopter crowd people really need to give it a rest and get a life, OK? I’m sure that in your fully-armed bunker you have a full arsenal of guns to keep you warm at night. Stick with them, because you’re one of those closed-minded fanatics who can never be reasoned with. Bug off, bud.
If the modern day Liberals “think” the Academics aka the “Elite” / “Ruling Class” will give a rats ass about how they live and what their income level will be? Trust me they won’t. That is why they are called “The Ruling Class”. The “Power” is what they are after. The young little liberals have been molded through indoctrination for years in our schools and colleges (to hate their country – Why?) and, now are being “used” as the ultimate doormats in order for the elites to gain more ground.
Points to Ponder..
Ever noticed that those who demand “power to the people” also believe that people can’t do anything right without government supervision?
How exactly does dependency on the government increase “people power”? And how exactly are poor people getting any “richer” on government subsidies? And how is their lives any better? Aren’t they just “existing”?
Why is there never a headline that says “Government program ends as its intended goal has been achieved”?
How come so many anti-American radicals are wearing American brands, listen to American music, watch American movies, and play American video games on computers designed by American engineers?
I think the liberals have had their time. I just saw Ben Bernakie on C-Span I cannot quote him in full, but he basically said if we think things are bad now, by 2050 things will be a whole lot worse. Encouraging huh?
I know Republicans have had their share of failed policies.
But none have lead us to the brink we are living now… and as far as debt the Liberals have created a whole new meaning to “cutting off your nose to spite your face”.
Liberals/Progressives are maladaptive to the impending economic doom “they” created for the last 40 years. They created an ever looming ‘social justice’ ‘system’ that is slowly imploding, becoming unsustainable and the proverbial well is running dry. Obamacare is only going to make things worse. And I believe Obamacare was on Ben Bernakie’s mind when he said
what he said.
We will be feeling ‘their’ emotional malaise with themselves and the world for decades to come. I have nothing but contemn for them at this point.
A quotation I got second-hand:
“Optimism is cowardice”
- Oswald Spengler in “The Decline of the West”
They aren’t failed policies. They have accomplished exactly what the architects intended.
We now have an underclass of 30% of the country, and growing, that thinks it is totally dependent on the government. That puts the progressives very close to an unassailable majority.
When that happens, possibly in 2013, the elites will allow the economy to collapse. At that point, everybody really WILL be dependent on government. In other words, everybody except a tiny percentage of feudal lords will be serfs.
As intended.
You may find the description fanciful. As reference material, please review human history.
proreason…You are exactly right! They are exceeding in their socialist strategies of intended consequences. Year-by-year for decades they have endeavored to produce more and more functional illiterates while perpetuating educational experimentation in the name of advancing education for the masses. Thats why you NEVER hear them speak to the quality of graduates but rather, to the quantity of graduates. Obama’s “Race To The Top” initiative is yet another education advancement fraud IF you’re an enlightened classroom teacher and can understand the underlying intent. Anytime you’re required by a State (following federal mandates) to teach specific limited content rather than cover-to-cover to satisfy a standards test…it is a fraud!
Without a majority of illiterates dependent upon the government its more difficult to transform the nation to any greater degree of socialism.
I want to correct the post above, where the phrase, “self-annointed” was changed by my iPad to “self-announced”. While I love my iPad, my MacBook, my Airport Express network that gives me wireless internet and wireless music in every room, I must blame Steve Jobs for the above two mistakes. The auto-correct feature is the product of a high school drop-out, who probably figured it was needed to correct the mistakes of the masses, who do not always have an editor from an Ivy League school to review their 6AM posts. If Steve Jobs had gone to Harvard or Swarthmore, he probably could have amounted to something of substance.
My HTC EVO cell-phone does the same thing. Also,I agree completely, with your earlier post. Well said/written.
Well said. A sweeping vision. I never heard about “aristoi,” but I have a strong faith in the common man and common sense and a universal high standard of knowledge, which enables us to communicate and speak the same language, so to speak.
Humans are galvanized when we have problems to solve, like how to get to the moon. Humans react positively when we see that we can work together to reach a goal. The drifting, rudderless ship in Washington has no clue that Americans would roar to life if challenged and encouraged to reach Mars or
to provide cheap energy for all (not green; only green if it’s cheap, which it is not)– without the mind-numbing and soul-crushing politically driven regulations, taxes, enforced lack of competition in certain industries and huge, redundant bureaucracies.
#6
Well Said Foreman. Now all we need is to find us a “True Visionary” . A ‘True Leader’. A Miracle.
God Bless
When the country was debating whether or not to accept the Constitution, one of the arguments against it was that it was a product of the Federalist elites, who themselves wanted all final votes taken at state conventions, not in individual towns, where the plebians might well dominate without the “advantage” of being able to hear the case from the Federalist elite.
One of today’s great ironies is that many of today’s non-elite want to “get back” to the document created by elites and often opposed by non-elites in 1787-1790. Back then, the non-elites feared that overreaching hand of the Federal Government. The Federalists, including the Father of our Country claimed that we needed to become a powerful country.
I maintain that you cannot become a powerful country with a powerful army without a huge increase in government across the board. That is simply how power accumulates. It is all a question of degree. Business is so big, government is so big, wheels turn within wheels and insiders at every level have the advantage over most of the rest of us. Some of them get there because they are smarter, some because their parents put them in the business.
How to keep from going broke has occupied every President’s time from Washington to the present. Hamilton and the National Bank; an idea as American as cherry pie.
“Big wheels” keep on turnin’ Ping Pong Tongue is a churnin’.
D-White, certainly, if Noam Chomsky says the Sun comes up in the East, he is correct. No matter what else he represents, he is right. If so called elites created a system of government, the fact that they were what ever they were, does not invalidate what they arrived at. The Pick It Fence But is using association as if it were cause and effect.
“It is all a question of degree.” No, it is not “all a question of degree”, that is, what the government is. There is the matter of trust that has been so thoroughly violated in the present that the so called modern elites are simply not what was, or worse, what could be. The Ping Pong Tongue can draw on numerous historical examples, which will only serve to contrast and confirm the present situation.
This is now, and that was then. Moral relativism and constant equivocation are symptoms of a failed system, failed in the sense of the spirit of what those past “elites” envisioned, and failing now in the most basic of human exchanges, trust. Most modern elite thought excels at presenting a picture of willful dishonesty, propped up by segments of the culture who have been co-opted so deeply, that as some say, this is the new normal.
There is choice D-White, conscious choice. This implies being on one side of the fence or the other, “…an idea as American as cherry pie…”
His mother sent newspaper clippings to him,
About his old friends who’d stopped being boys.
I tip my hat to anyone who can quote obscure Jefferson Airplane songs in contexts that the lyricist would have thoroughly disapproved of.
And what is your interpretation of the lyricist’s intent?
Today?
If the only tool a man has is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
So Dwight finds massive government inherent in the founders brains, since they were elitists, and since elites want power, and the military creates power, and the military is expensive, and anyway, it’s Thursday and marxism is required on Thursday as well as the other days of the week that end in y.
But at least he put some thought into a post for once, if you want to call it that.
The Federalists clearly wanted more centralized power. Do you disagree, or do you even have the faintest clue?
no I don’t agree. The words are correct but the meaning is not, a common libwit trick.
The Federalists saw that the Articles of Conferation were unworkable and that national government needed additional powers.
But those powers were defined SPECIFICALLY to LIMIT THEM. Progressive illiterates turn the intent of the founders on its head.
Next, we can debate the meaning of “is”.
The hard question for me is whether things like the Federalist Papers, which were published anonymously by the elitists Madison and Hamilton against equally anonymous Brutus and other anti-Federalists in order to convince the plebians that they should accept the Constitution, represent what the elites wanted, as current strict constructionists would have us believe, or what they felt they NEEDED to say in order to get the Constitution ratified.
“What difference does it make?” you might ask. Well, they knew that we would not become a real country unless we STRENGTHENED the central/Federal government. They believed that it would all fall apart if we did not do that. Everything else at the time was lower down on their priority list.
Once they gained power themselves, (with te possible exception of Washington) they went for the gusto, did they not?
Dwight….you stated: ["One of today’s great ironies is that many of today’s non-elite want to “get back” to the document created by elites..."]
Was it for the convenience of your point that you bestowed upon the founders the title of elite? NONE of the founders were ruling elite nor did they construct the constitution to create a ruling elite….quite the contrary my friend! They were escaping a continent of ruling elitist’s. Maybe review the elite requirements to qualify for elected office as they constructed it.
Yes, many of todays citizens do want to return to the constitution as intended and escape once more from a corrupted elitist government and all their corrupted elitist frauds…ooops, I mean friends.
C’mon TT. To the extent that this country had any elites, rich planters, distillers, shippers, lawyers etc, the Founders were elite. They were the “best” of what we had at the time, better than the rest and some of the time they admitted as much. Many were from families who had been here four or five generations. To them, Tea Parties were great AGAINST the Brits, but if you did it against the government, as Shay’s did, watch out!
Geez, what an irrelevant point about elitism. Dwight is probably right that the Founders were the elites of their time.
so here’s how the libwit mind works: Jefferson, elite, good –> John Kerry, enormous ego, abandoned father of children to marry wealthy heiress, shot himself twice to escape Viet Nam, graduated with d’s from harard, elite, good
I mean, really, it’s beyond hilarity to compare the salivating power-mad feudalists of today to the Founders….no matter how often they inform us of their superiority.
Let’s take Dwight’s point one step further. The greatest minds of the 18th and 19th century were great fans of classical music (which was the pop music of the time). Hitler was also a fan of classical music (the Wagnerian kind). Ergo Hitler must have also been a great mind.
And for the slow afoot, the fact that Jefferson, Madison, Monroe and Washington were the elites of their day has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with whether today’s self-styled elites have a right to jam their communists agenda down our throats. And they aren’t elites to anybody but themselves and their paid-off toadies, either.
An excerpt from “There Is No Alternative”, by Claire Berlinski:
“….Gorbachev… once asked Thatcher how she made sure the British People got enough food. She didn’t, she told him tartly. Prices did. By extension, anything that distorts the information conveyed by prices is harmful to the market’s functioning and leads, sooner or later, to oversupply of things that they do want–as Soviet Planners discovered. ” It was a shame”, recalled Gorbachev in 2001, “and I continue to say that it was a shame, that during the final years under Brezhnev, we were planning to create a commission headed by the secretary of the Central Committee, [Ivan] Kapitonov, to solve the problem of women’s panty-hose. Imagine a country that flies into space, launches Sputniks, creates such a defense system, that it can’t solve the problem of women’s panty-hose. There’s no toothpaste, no soap powder, not the basic necessities of life. It was incredible and humiliating to work in such a government.”
“…….command economies of the twentieth century have all collapsed, and free market economies are still here.”
One cannot argue that a good education is essential to effective leadership, however without a sound moral foundation, (i.e. a strong sense of right and wrong and a willingness to place yourself in someone else’s position) all the education in the world will get you the precise kind of “leadership” we have today.
One could argue that wanting power should automatically disqualify a candidate for being power hungry. Indeed, we’ve seen just how destructive those entrenched in Washington can be. Increasingly insulated and never even taking the time to speak to constituents except in the quest for campaign funds, we have truly created the type of government we so richly deserve.
Until we begin to rigorously examine each and every candidate for office on the basis of being a good person with a healthy dose of common sense and establish a method of regularly replacing them to minimize the corruption that power naturally imparts, we’ll be doomed to a future full of Obamas.
#9
Backwardsboy – I think most in NJ did that with Gov Christie. Now many are saying Huh? after the Muslim Judge appointment in Passaic County, NJ. Noon are too happy with that move…. time is going to tell if the move is good or bad… I think when Sharia Law comes up will be the good / bad decision time…
Let’s not forget about the Right-Wing Elites
Thomas Jefferson had talent, but I’m not so sure about virtue. He died deeply in debt, the result of his not being able to control his passion for spending. David McCullough chronicles it pretty well in his book about John Adams.
Here are some Americans I admire: Thomas Edison, the Wright Brothers, Abraham Lincoln, Steve Jobs, Henry Ford, Alexander Graham Bell, Dwight Eisenhauer, Ronald Reagan, Walt Disney. Not an “elite” among that group.
Our “elites”? Not so much. By and large, the ruling class today is far far worse than useless. Rid the country of them, and America will be great again in short order.
Didn’t Logic 101 teach everyone to never assume a general term such as ‘elite’ means the same to the speaker that it means to the hearer? It has its Webster’s meaning, as used by the author, but since English like all languages is continually changing, ‘elite’ is often used today to mean people who assume they are superior, due to their wealth, connections or academic credentials, ie, sort of ‘snobs suffering from group think’.
E. Digby Baltzell made a clear distinction between elites and classes,
preferring the latter. The Anglo-American tradition had men (later women)
of upper-class backgrounds STANDING for office (not running), and their
greatest service was simply blocking the incursions of the bureaucratic state and thereby protecting the People. Jefferson once got swoony with Adams about an ideally classless society, being the ‘freest’ of all; but
old Adams said that, given the inequality of talent, the only way to have a classless society was by dictatorship.
#14
ABlackwell said –
Jefferson once got swoony with Adams about an ideally classless society, being the ‘freest’ of all; but old Adams said that, given the **inequality of talent**, the only way to have a classless society was by dictatorship.
Excellent!
Now if only we can drill this into some Liberal/Progressives heads.
To Ponder:
Ever noticed that those who demand “power to the people” also believe that people can’t do anything right without government supervision?
How exactly does dependency on the government increase “people power”?
Angelo M. Codevilla’s “The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It” and other popular conservatives (e.g., Rush, Beck, et al) seem to have inflicted angst amongst our forward-thinking elites. This article reflects a concern that anti-elitism is becoming a part of mainstream conservatism. The author may be right. Conservative elites including the Bush presidents and some other ‘Republican’ blue-bloods have done great harm to this nation with their support of Progressive programs and policies.
Mr. Berkowitz;
“It frequently runs the risk of obscuring the dependence of constitutional democracy in America on the cultivation of excellence.”
There is little evidence of “excellence” in any sense of that word among the overwhelming majority of what constitutes the “elite” in our society.
“They are inevitable in free societies, which make a priority of giving individuals the opportunity to develop their varying talents and to cooperate for mutual benefit.”
While for good or ill the inevitability of Elites is undoubtedly correct yet somehow this process has gone horribly awry, as development for mutual benefit is definitely not what’s occurring, in fact there is no credible argument that mutual benefits is even the goal of the of our current elitists. In the hands of Elitists as opposed to guidance of an Elite, sums up the problem nicely I think.
“As House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future 2.0 demonstrates, effectively tackling our major domestic challenges — job creation, taxes, health care, Social Security — will depend on policy analysts and economists of the highest caliber delving into and making sense”
Ryan is a rare positive example of a member of the elite the problem is that most if not all of the problems the few Ryans must strive so heroically to solve are caused by the rest of Elite. While it would be extremely unfair Paul Ryan’s work would much more sure of success if all, the good and the bad that constitute our Elite participated in a mutual suicide pact. Where would one find economists of the highest caliber? And if they exist in any significant quantities why are there so few guiding our economy.
“As Ronald Reagan, who appointed William Bennett secretary of education and Lynne Cheney chair of the National Endowment of the Humanities, well understood, ideas have consequences and American education should prepare citizens to appreciate them.”
I take some offense at your highlighting of one of Ronald Reagan’s greatest failures so soon after his 100TH birthday, that failure being the continued existence of the Department of Education. While the role of the National Endowment of the Humanities, Public Broadcasting might have been defensible in the eighties they certainly have no justification now.
The problem with your article and your view of the “Elite” is that you believe an elitist government has a positive relationship to innovation and problem solving. Many make the mistake of thinking the government creates improvements in math and science skills. NASA and our space program inspired young people to excel in math and science. Inspiration is not something our current regime is capable of in any positive sense of that word.
The renewal of “liberal education,” the bedrock of Western Civilization, would require a repudiation of 20th century instrumentalism and a return to classical values. Otherwise, you might as well ask a man to walk with no legs.
As it is, the vast majority of our elites will continue to be credentialed rather than educated, clever rather than wise. The very best we can hope for in our political leaders is common sense.
Berkowitz wants a conservative mirror of the best and the brightest, but that’s the adoption of a progressive mistake. Maybe we need less self validating leadership from eager beaver top school credentialed would be leaders. U.S. Grant’s Memoirs have a great account of a highly educated, successful civilian who in military matters proved unfit for command although the author of the Memoirs, Grant himself, was anything but a credentialed candidate for civil war leadership. Maybe we don’t need schools to say who is the best, who is the brightest. Maybe it’s better when people evaluate their own circumstances and look for leaders who are suited to the place and time. Isn’t the ivy system we’ve got uncomfortably parallel to the way the British Army recruited officers 250 years ago, when class trumped all? Top schools award diplomas to people who take their entry into these institutions as validation of their status as “the best” and “the brightest.” Divine right, of a sort, with all attendant weaknesses, especially overestimation of personal superiority. It’s “meritocratic” as opposed to “hereditary”? Actually, IQ has a strong hereditary component and the real question is by what standards does being good in school justify “aristocratic” status and self image? Oscar Wilde comes to mind imagining the conservative best and brightest looking at secret portraits and seeing… progressives.
BackwardsBoy, re: “One cannot argue that a good education is essential to effective leadership, however without a sound moral foundation…” Many of our problems in today’s America stem from conflating education and credentialism with genuine knowledge and wisdom. Indeed, they repeatedly stated that our constitution was fit only for a moral and virtuous people. Remember your Ben Franklin, “As the people become more vicious, they will have more need of masters.”
“One could argue that wanting power should automatically disqualify a candidate for being power hungry.” This is one of the central paradoxes and dilemmas of power; that those most prone to seek it are often the least-qualified to exercise it responsbility and morally. There are more problems still: It is now all-but-impossible for a decent person of average means, akin to a modern day Harry Truman, to run for office in today’s America. The wealthy elites are the gatekeepers to the political process, and they let only their own into the club. Further, we have little hope of getting good people back into public life, without somehow bringing-to-heel the politics of personal destruction, c.f. of the kind that has been used to attack such figures as Sarah Palin. Love or despise her politics, what has been done to her and her family is inexcusibly vicious. No decent person wants to see his/her good name dragged through the mud.
But poor boys like Clinton and Obama found a way. Hell, Obama’s story is a rags to riches American dream story, although many on PJM sound as if it was the rise of Hitler.
Typo alert: “Indeed, they repeatedly stated that our constitution was fit only for a moral and virtuous people.”
“They” should read “The Founders”…
Precisely upon what terms are our “elites” defined as such? In a free society, it is inevitable that some rise farther and faster than others, and thus that some will ascend to positions of power, influence, and wealth while others will not. That is not the question; the crux of the problem concerns the process by which the “best and the brightest” may be replaced when they fail to live up to the standards of performance required of them… if they can be removed at all. Once in power, most elites are loathe to give up their status, prerrogatives, and position. That is certainly the case in Washington today. Congressional incumbents from both parties have made third-party challenges all but impossible, and have also made defeating imcumbents as difficult as they can get away with.
If the center is corrupt then good and excellent leadership will be rare. Honest and principled individuals will not heed the call if they must compromise their values to a value-less system. If ‘elite’ is defined as having an ivy league eduction alone and the right connections, as it seems to be today, then we are in trouble. But if it means that one’s education as well as their life experiences has enabled them to become a strong and moral person capable of leading then our country has a chance. We need to be vigilant, investigate and not turn the reins over just because someone has the usual elitist credentials.
http://potterwilliamsreport.com/2011/02/10/secular-education-transformers.aspx
Elite: A group of persons who by virtue of position or education [exercise] much power or influence.
There are no shortages of arrogant elites on any side of any matter or in any profession! Interesting is, how they all self profess upon themselves such title. No nation on earth has more self proclaimed ‘experts’ than does the U.S., and look where we as a nation have come from to where we are today….at the hands of all these professed academic geopolitical elites. I refer to them as educated morons!
["Yet today more than ever conserving liberty and maintaining democracy require an elite whose members possess advanced learning, professional expertise, and wisdom born of extended experience."]
That is one twisted and erroneous conclusion! COMMON SENSE will trump the premise of you conclusion.
Law: Having a formal status derived from law often without a basis in actual fact. Recognized or made effective by a court of law as distinguished from a court of equity (My favorite definitions)
Our nation has evolved into a convoluted web of contrived law abating the constitution (intended) and our nations once common moral code (intended). Now, rather than a simple common sense piece of legislation we have 1,000′s of pages of subjective legalese with yet more non ending layers of legal dispute and remedies….and intended consequence of the ongoing socialist revolution strategies….thus the submission of the people to ‘only the academic elite’ are qualified (worthy) of leading and influencing. The greatest deceit, fraud, lie, hijacking….in the history of America.
If you’re NOT an academic elitist in the disciplines of math and science today, you’re essentially a fraud in my opinion and deserve nothing more than harnessed in front of a two bottom 14″ plow and put to work doing something worthy for a change.
Then and only then can the folks with common sense get about the job of dismantling all the messes you’ve created in OUR constitutional house of government and throughout OUR land.
(This applies to all the TV, Radio, print pundits and all the other self professed geopolitical elitists)
Thanks to the author for bringing forth this topic. Yep, I feel much better now and will feel even more better when the majority of people wake up!
Elite: A group of persons who by virtue of position or education [exercise] much power or influence.
There are no shortages of arrogant elites on any side of any matter or in any profession! Interesting is, how they all self profess upon themselves such title. No nation on earth has more self proclaimed ‘experts’ than does the U.S., and look where we as a nation have come from to where we are today….at the hands of all these professed academic geopolitical elites. I refer to them as educated morons!
["Yet today more than ever conserving liberty and maintaining democracy require an elite whose members possess advanced learning, professional expertise, and wisdom born of extended experience."]
That is one twisted and erroneous conclusion! COMMON SENSE will trump the premise of you conclusion.
Law: Having a formal status derived from law often without a basis in actual fact. Recognized or made effective by a court of law as distinguished from a court of equity (My favorite definitions)
Our nation has evolved into a convoluted web of contrived law abating the constitution (intended) and our nations once common moral code (intended). Now, rather than a simple common sense piece of legislation we have 1,000′s of pages of subjective legalese with yet more non ending layers of legal dispute and remedies….and intended consequence of the ongoing socialist revolution strategies….thus the submission of the people to ‘only the academic elite’ are qualified (worthy) of leading and influencing. The greatest deceit, fraud, lie, hijacking….in the history of America.
If you’re NOT an academic elitist in the disciplines of math and science today, you’re essentially a fraud in my opinion and deserve nothing more than harnessed in front of a two bottom 14″ plow and put to work doing something worthy for a change.
Then and only then can the folks with common sense get about the job of dismantling all the messes you’ve created in OUR constitutional house of government and throughout OUR land.
(This applies to all the TV, Radio, print pundits and all the other self professed geopolitical elitists)
Thanks to the author for bringing forth this topic. Yep, I feel much better now and will feel even more better when the majority of people wake up!
The problem is not with elites, the problem is with elites who are disconnected from the values and experience of ordinary people, are narrowly and poorly educated in universities that are closed to outside viewpoints, and who manage the dominant institutions of society in their own interests. The Tea Party is a kind of rebellion against the elitism of an unworthy elite. This kind of politics gets ugly but is our only hope. Let us hope that political leadership emerges that is capable of breaking the monopoly on power enjoyed by our masters.