Justice

Recently in politics the word 'elitist' has been used in bad connotations; as if it is bad to be elite. Why shouldn't our leaders be elitists?

Comments

An interesting question. The word comesfrom 'elite', obviously, and ultimately from Latin by way of French;originally it meant the 'chosen' or 'elected'. So, in a democracy(and for the purposes of this answer I'll assume that's the positionwe are concerned with) our leaders are indeed the 'elite', andinsofar as we think there should be elections and that the winner ofthe election should be the new leader, all voters are 'elitist'!

But that is disingenuous, because thatoriginal meaning would have had little to do with our modern sense ofdemocracy. Instead, the original meaning would have referred to thoseof high social rank (who were elected by fate, perhaps, to play thathigh born role), or those ministers of state who were favoured by theking, or a figure like the Pope who is (ultimately though indirectly)chosen by God. In fact, it was the transition to democratic modes ofgovernment in recent centuries that gave the word 'elite' a tarnishedreputation. The 'elite' were precisely those NOT chosen by thepeople: those who had power simply because of wealth or socialposition or historical accident.

Correspondingly, 'elitism' has twomeanings. The first is a political theory that says rule by the mostcapable, wise and educated is a good thing. Such a theory can traceitself back to Plato's Republic. It doesn't matter who thesepeople are. It is a historical accident that the people in poweralready were also the ones who got educated, and thus elite in thesense of 'high social rank' tended to overlap with elite in the senseof 'the best to lead'. The second meaning, however, is a descriptionof a person or institution that acts in ways to reinforce theposition of the few. Or, in other words, someone or something thatdoesn't understand, care for, or act in the interests of those whoare not already in positions of interest, who are assumed to be inthe majority. Some accuse certain universities of 'elitism', forexample, in that for one reason or another they tend to acceptstudents from already privileged backgrounds. Calling apolitician 'elitist', then, is tantamount to saying he or she is nota 'man/woman of the people'.

Should our leaders be the 'elite'?Well, yes and no. Yes, in the sense that we all hope the democraticprocess works and thus genuinely capable people are given the job.No, in the sense that they are not chosen from above, by a higherauthority, but 'from below' so to speak, by the people.

Read another response by Douglas Burnham

Read another response about Justice