Elites: the arrogance of the European Union establishment

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30237669.post-41774058206396947012007-05-27T15:20:00.000-07:002007-06-08T13:50:27.574-07:00Elites: the arrogance of the European Union establishmentOne of the most salient features in modern politics and society is the notion of the "elites". that is, media and political personalities who are above and beyond us mere mortals, and who thus are better qualified than ourtselves to decide how a country should be organised, and what public policy should and should not be. This is particularly pronounced in Europe, but increasingly so in other parts of the Western world. The concept of a political elite The first people to suggest the need for a political elite were the ancient Greeks. In their city states, it was believed by some thinkers that the everyday people were not sufficiently intelligent or morally developed to be trusted with any kind of power or authority, and that therefore they were not fit to rule. Instead, an all powerful elite would rule over them, known as the arete. Whilst ancient Greece is often thought of as the cradle of democracy, it has also been conversely the cradle of tyranny. Indeed, every tyranny is essentially based on the notion that the people are inferior to their rulers, and need to be guided and controlled by them. In a state where an elite rule, there are several features. One is that this elite regard themselves as superior on a variety of dimensions, most notably a belief that they are more intelligent, wise, kind and morally developed than their subjects. Another salient pyschological characterstic is their paternal attitude to the population: they view themselves as wise, long sighted parents who have to guide and cojole rebellious populations for their own good, as if the citizenry of their states are moody toddlers. Whilst the people may protest, they lack their "elite's" wisdom and long sightedness, and therefore have to be forced to accept it's will. This contrasts with genuine democracy. In a genuine democracy, whilst there are leaders, they are selected by the people on a popular mandate. That is, candidates whose views are popular and shared by the majority of the people are placed in power. These people then rule, by the consent of the people, and are public servants, not rulers. If and when they displease the people, this consent can be withdrawn, and the office holders are replaced with others who are given a chance. The Real World versus Ivory Towers Another important difference between elitist states and democratic states is the personal and professional background of political figures. In an elitist state, the leaders are all from a very similar background of priveledge and "elite" circles. Most went to the same elite universities: indeed, both the British Prime Minister and the Opposition leader went to the same university (Oxford) and the next British Prime Minister, who takes over next month, went to a similarly elite university (Edinburgh). Many also have the same professional background, and this is particularly true in France, with a vast percentage of politicians from both left and right having attended the Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris. This is essentially a finishing school for the future political figures of France, and is very typical of the way most European politicians spend virtually their entire careers right from leaving university being prepared by elite schools and training centres and job posts for their eventual succession as a member of the ruling elite. Again, this contrasts very sharply with the professional background of the figures in a genuine democracy, most of whom have spent decades working in "the real world", and whose professions have rarely if ever had anything to do with politics. This means that when these people become politicians, they will understand and appreciate the populations hopes and fears more keenly. It also means that they trust "common sense" over the extremely complicated and abstract theories so loved by the "elites". Where do they get their ideas from? In an elitist state, all the elitist figures share similar views, attitudes and dare I, say values, regardless of their party political affiliation. These views are largely formed by the teachers and professors they are exposed to at their ivory tower colleges, where they learn the gnostis, that is hidden knowledge that we mere mortals cannot understand. For example, the elites believe that crime occurs because of poverty and societal inequality, and therefore the elites must re-engineer society to prevent crime from occuring. This is totally false of course, and most ordinary people reject this bunk gnostis, that is actually little more than 1960s flat earth sociology. But to the elites, this is superior knowledge that must be implemented at the first opportunity, hence the disastrous anti-crime measures taken by various Western governments in the last few decades. Indeed, most Western governments abolished the death penalty, but not because the people wanted it abolished. Instead, the elites took control of the political system, and having had their heads filled with criminologist nonsense whilst at college, believed that by abolishing the death penalty, they would impress the criminals with their superior morality, and the criminals would emmulate this by stopping killing people. The elites also viewed the objections to abolition from the people as little more than petulant "populism", and this "p word" will be discussed in more detail. There are few slurs that leap from the mouth of an elitist more easily than "populist". In their eyes, what most of us would regard as common sense is little more than a knee jerk, simplistic reaction to a problem they insist needs long, complicated "solutions". Indeed, they regard views that oppose their own as not deserving of discussion or debate. In the European Union (EU), this attitude is particularly pronounced amongst its media and political "elites", who have declared a number of topics, from mass immigration and the abolition death penalty as being beyond discussion. This reveals their cowardice at being unable to defeat an opponent in a debate. Conclusion As we have seen, the EU elites are drunk on their own perception of themselves has moral and intellectual giants, who do not need the approval of the people they govern. Indeed, they rarely even bother to ask them, and on the rare occassions they do ask their people to vote, simply ignore their wishes if it contrasts with their own. This is an intolerable situation, and only by voting the "elites" from the established political parties out of power, and replacing them with men of the people will they get the message that we are not going to be bullied anymore.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/30237669-4177405820639694701?l=thewwp.blogspot.com'/></div>Michaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09619064001919499834noreply@blogger.com