Elite Deception and the Rise of Inequality
For years we've heard conservatives label their liberal rivals "elitist." And who can blame them, considering how politically effective it has been. The electorate wants a president who is down to earth and in touch with their everyday lives -- someone who will fight for their interests. With this in mind, let's take a moment to examine who the real elitists are.
Merriam-Webster defines elite as "the socially superior part of society" and "a group of persons who by virtue of position or education exercise much power or influence." An elitist politician, then, is one who caters to this stratum of society.
Since the Reagan era, Republicans have been the party of the elites, by the elites and for the elites. Their core philosophy of giving tax cuts to the wealthy and deregulating business activity has fleeced the middle class out of a fair shake. In addition, they've led the charge to bust unions, derail consumer protections, oppose universal health care and fight minimum wage increases. Unsurprisingly, the beneficiaries have been the economic elites.
In 1980, the CEO-to-worker pay ratio was 42 to 1; by 2005 it rose to 450 to 1. In 1980, the richest 1 percent earned 8 percent of the nation's income; since 2005 they've made over 20 percent. By 2007, the top 0.1 (yes, zero point one) percent of Americans owned as much wealth as the bottom 150 million.
For decades, there has been a redistribution of wealth from the working class to the ruling elite. Surely we can all agree that wealth is created, but workers (not merely executives) are vital in creating it. While earnings for the rich have exploded, middle class incomes have been declining for decades, despite longer working hours.
Granted, there's nothing wrong with reaping the fruits of one's labor -- it's the American way. But the wealthy elite have a habit of using their swagger to take advantage of regular folks. Government should keep this power in check, not encourage it. Even Adam Smith, the father of free-market capitalism, declared in The Wealth of Nations that "the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
The psychological term projection describes a "defense mechanism that involves taking our own unacceptable qualities or feelings and ascribing them to other people." If you think about it, this thoroughly explains why Republicans have cohesively worked to assign the "elitist" label to their Democratic nemeses.
In 2008, John McCain, who married into a $100 million fortune and couldn't remember how many houses he owned, leveled the "elitist" charge against Barack Obama -- the African-American who was raised by a single mother on food stamps. Equally incredible was watching George W. Bush, who received tickets to Yale and Harvard on a silver plate before inheriting a country, cast the same label upon John Kerry in 2004.
The GOP's other challenge, beyond having weak policies, is that modern Democratic leaders are more intellectually accomplished than their Republican counterparts (think Obama, Kerry, Edwards, Gore and Clinton vs McCain, Bush 43, Palin, Quayle and Reagan). To conceal this, strategists have morphed intelligence into snobbery.
So why, then, do Republicans get elected, if their agenda only aligns with the few? Two big reasons: First, they're typically far more organized and better at selling their product, flawed as it may be. Second, they've cleverly shifted their campaign focus toward trifling wedge issues like abortion and flag-burning amendments in an effort to distract working Americans from their waning livelihoods.
By deflecting their elitism onto their rivals, the party of plutocrats has for decades held the trust of millions of Americans while simultaneously swindling them. It's a strategy tactfully designed to obscure inferior policies. Democrats, whose ideals recognize the needs of the working class, have unfortunately let them get away with it.
Social conditioning is a powerful thing. It takes adroit mental gymnastics to believe that Democrats are elitists while Republicans are commoners. Thomas Jefferson famously declared that "if a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." For the good of the country, liberals must step up and educate people on who the real elitists are.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Good article. The economic elites most clearly reside on the 'right' side of the political spectrum. It's about money, power, control and greed. It's always been that way through out history. Nothing less, nothing more. The big swindle came when they decided to use the various movements of the 60s and 70s as wedges to gain political control and take over the country. First it was pitting whites against blacks as in affirmative action, then men against women as in abortion issues. Along comes no prayer in school to riled up the religiousity. Forgot the big "Vietnam War". All a perfect storm rising to a climate in last 1970s. Ronald Reagan and conservatives took advantage and stroked the fires creating a majority party built on lies, distortions, misinformation.
Over 70% of the people have woken up to the repubs fraudulent tactics. If the current president had been of a different race he would have gotten over 80% of the popular vote.
Good Article Mr. Kapur
You brought up some good points on how reality differs from the labels that have been used in Politics. Sticks and stones may....Ect. Yeah Right. But they sure hurt in politics.
If Joe Mc Carthy accomplished nothing else , he made Communist, Leftist, Soialist, Liberal, REALLY bad words.
Joe never found a communist, but to the American public; Communist were AGAINST the USA=If you differ with the US government you are a Communist! It stuck.
Civil Rights era split the Democrat party the Christian right poor Refused to be idendtified with the Hippies, Anti War demonstrators,unions, and the label of Commie stuck. Democrat/Liberal/Commie.
So today we have we have a large part of the workforce who identify with the ? patriotic/rightwing/anti commie/god in school/Republican Party.
The Republican party who with Some of our Dems, are working furriously to reduce them and us to worker/serfs Ruled by an ELITE Globalist NeoLiberal Oligarchy.
Where do the Republican elites go from here? Their new mantra will be "redistribution of wealth". What they won't tell you is we have seen the biggest "redistribution of wealth" in the history of man, it's all been "up" . According to the GAO the top 1 percent now own 99 percent of all the weath in this country. A major "redistribution" in the last 50 years! Bet they won't mention that !
Good post. For years, they have shipped jobs overseas triangulating foreign nations into bourgeoisie and sweat shop slaves while hang the American workers out to dry. This is the most unAmerican move in the history of the republic.
This does need to be brought out. I suspect that Republicans are projecting here, as they do on so many things. Projection is unconscious, so they would have little awareness that they are doing it. Also, liked your point about Republicans equating intelligence with snobbery.
I think, that the "elitist" label sticks so fast to Democrats is because the Republican base is under educated and easily brainwashed.
Great article!! The problem is that too many of the working class, the "joe plumbers" of this world have bought this crap hook line and sinker. Hopefully that is changing and their eyes are opening.
Anyone running for president is elite. Trying to say the Repubs are elite and Dems aren't is a ridiculous proposition. But more Repubs than Dems have experience working real jobs. Dems tend to be lifetime politicians who wouldn't know real work if it bit em in the butt.
Oh lord, what reality are you living in!!
Says the man who has no data to back up his assertions. This is exactly the type of ingrained ignorance the post was talking about.
Yeah, like these guys who served America!
http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
You mean like daddy gives you some oilwells on your 12 birthday, Then you Work as an "oilman"
Then Daddys buddies help yoy buy a baseball team to make you look like a businessman.
Oh Yeah, having been a lineman, oil field ( Halliburton), police officer, take it from me , that Dub was just a regular Working stiff! LOL
Please allow me to clarify. I was referring to Dem politicians, not the voters who fall for their lies and then get pissed off when they find out they were lied to. Have you heard the latest plan to move gitmo to the states? What a pisser.
Rolling out of business school into a 6-figure position is not "working a real job." It may be work, it may even be hard sometimes, but it doesn't give you any ability to understand the average american worker.
You mean the "average workers" who no longer pay any federal taxes? My favorite new slogan is "No representation without taxation".
Interesting and thoughtful column.
There are two main reasons, I think, that the "elitist" label sticks so fast to Democrats.
1. Most Democrats are confident that government decision makers have the capacity to make judgments about what is best for the citizens. As a result, they are quick to advocate a system of government in which elites (Congress, regulatory agencies) have the power to make laws and regulations that constrain ordinary people.
2. Many affluent and highly educated Democrats express contempt and disrespect for those of lower socioeconomic standing. The vitriol directed at Sarah Palin and her family (including her minor children) on the Huffington Post is a sad example of this behavior. Democrats will have a hard time convincing voters they are not elitist when so many look down on ordinary people.
CentralVA ,
You have it all wrong on point #2. To say that "Many affluent and highly educated Democrats express contempt and disrespect for those of lower socioeconomic standing" is wrong because they elected Barack Obama, to represent their party last year. For this to be true, they would have had to elect someone who did not get their start as a community organizer. Also, Sarah Palin has lots of money and therefore is not an example of this disrespect. How else did she go on a shopping spree buying designer clothing while campaigning last fall? Wrong again.
Did you see those $450 gym shoes Michelle Obama wore to the food bank the other day?
Obama has a law degree from Harvard, as well as an undergraduate degree from Columbia. In our culture, that makes him part of the elite. His "birth" social standing is irrelevant.
My degrees are quite similar to Obama's, and I spend a lot of time with individuals who have high positions in law, finance, and academia. And I am telling you that the contempt heaped on Palin would curl your toes. Her low prestige schools, her excessive fertility, her husband's blue collar jobs, her daughter's public pregnancy...
And don't think that non-elites do not pick up the contempt in which the elites hold them. Just before the election, my secretary came into my office, upset at what she had overheard two of my colleagues saying about Palin. "They think rural type people aren't real people," she said. I could only agree.
1. Actually I've allways found Democrats, more suspicious of Government,( The civil right era) the old Depression era Dems for sure.They had seen government at it's worst (Hoover) and it's best(FDR). I think the Dem. in the past realized you had to use Government to balance the civil rights of the common man against the Power of Huge powerfull, Corporations. Do you think you by yourself can take on AIG?
2. You can't really use what is a political shouting match between Democrats taking on the Gov. of a State , as beating up little folks.
The Dems in the past, have represented the common working man, the auto worker, the farm hand, the Police Fire/officers, The School teachers.the Unemployeed, the old .
The Reps, represent AIG, Big Business.Big Oil, Big Money,Exporting Corporate/Serf governments worldwide.
Who's elite, the people who represent Saudi Oil or those who represent the unemployed guy sleeping under the bridge?
1. I agree that many Democrats exhibit a very good grasp of the dangers of government power. Lots of the criticism leveled against the excess claims of executive power by the Bush administration was excellent. But in recent months I've not hear much healthy skepticism about concentrations of government power from my Democrat friends-- instead they are in a post-election state of rapture, and refuse to scrutinize the conduct of Obama and Congress. .
2. The Democratic Party does have a fine tradition of respect for working people. But today's Democratic Party movers and shakers do not show much respect for the knowledge, values, and analytical skills of working people. Contrast Hubert Humphrey or Bill Clinton with Obama/Pelosi/Reid.
1. Most democrats are not looking for a "Big Brother" government, which is what you described. There is a difference between wanting an EFFECTIVE, COMPETENT government that can fix problems, and having a government do EVERYTHING for you. Further, your argument falls apart (concerning dems wanting to enact "laws and regulations that constrain...people") since republicans wanting to restrict marriage, and restrict a woman's right to choose. So if this is true for dems, it is also true for republicans. Let's not get it twisted.
2. Hunh? I don't see republicans showing ANY respect for the poor and underpriviliged in this country. And many democrats just have a distaste for uniformed people rattling off various talking points as opposed to doing some actual research into the FACTS of a situation. And do you READ the vitriol directed at democratic politicians on right-wing blog sites? Are you REALLY going to make it seem as if right-wingers don't "look down" on people?
And what, exactly, do you mean by "ordinary people"??
You have swallowed republican talking points about democrats hook, line and sinker.
1. The Democratic party demands a functional and effective government that serves the people. But most democratic voters, while sharing this demand, don't trust government any farther than they can throw it. Republicans, on the other hand, want a government which is too weak to be effective or to do its job - a government you could drown in a bathtub - and hence one which cannot interfere with their grabs for personal wealth and power.
2. The real contempt for people is demonstrated by the plutocrats who swindle and oppress them - the Republican moneyed elite. If/when "contempt" or "disrespect" for anyone of "lower" socioeconomic standing is seen, it is not for the people themselves - but rather their tendency to vote against their own economic interest. Like you do.
Just take this list and see for yourself who has served this country...
http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
