Third World USA

[Thomas savage]

Hmmm, I'm now not sure either of us understands each other here.

I'm saying that "elite" is about power/money. We don't need to define it scientifically to get at its basic meaning.

There are at least as many members of the elite (the wealthy and powerful) whose politics are "conservative" as there are members of the elite whose politics are "progressive" or "liberal" (in the modern sense of those words, yes).

Therefore I object to the term being applied selectively as you have done.

Iv no clue what you mean by ‘ elite ‘ tbh .

 

[andreasmaaan]

Iv no clue what you mean by ‘ elite ‘ tbh .

Lol, people with money and political power. Could define it in many specific ways but that's the basic concept IMO.

 

[Cosmik]

@svart-hvitt
What do you mean by “the elite”?

I may be stating the obvious, but IMO the 'elite' are not necessarily the 0.1% in terms of wealth, but they are a 'class' who look after themselves and each other in terms of assuming that they are best at running things. Some of them are super-wealthy, but others among them are simply comfortably well off. What they really want is to be part of the class that controls things.

I don't think you have to be born into this class: with suitable education and attitude, and especially a burning sense of superiority and a desire to control, you can work your way into it.

I watched a video a while ago (that I can't find now) of a four way panel discussion at some recent high powered conference where some of the self-confessed 'elite' were mulling over the shock of the various populist revolts that have occurred recently. I found it chilling. They were angry, but completely convinced of their own superiority when it came to running things. 'Democracy' was just a legitimating mechanism - the masses should normally only be presented with people from this class to choose from. Hence their annoyance at the populist revolts.

They use their 'liberal' schtick as a sword and shield of faux virtue that defends against any criticism of their technocratic approach to running things. If you are against them, you must, by definition, be a proto-fascist and any tactics may be used to smear you and warn voters away from you. In this way, they are able to suppress troublesome people power. The internet has disrupted this cosy arrangement - but may yet be harnessed in their favour.

 

[Thomas savage]

Lol, people with money and political power. Could define it in many specific ways but that's the basic concept IMO.

Oh, non of that’s real . They are the ones who have to goto extreme lengths to get off, nothing ‘elite ‘ about that. Just another trap , another type of bind that defines you beyond yourself .

 

[JJB70]

«Fabrication» and «ethnic stereotyping». That are the same accusations Vltchek would hold against the Indonesian regime and their supporters in the West. So you accusing him of foul play would make for a good discussion betweeen you and Vltchek

BTW, I searched on the net for «Vltchek» and «fabrication» and didn’t find anything of substance.

Since this is an audio forum, one last question: How many concert halls are there in Jakarta, a city of 12 million?

I can identify several fabrications in the article. I can also identify several gross distortions. In terms of concert halls I've no idea but that article takes an extremely arrogant attitude that culture means concert halls and art cinema. Slightly ironic that an article which rails against imperialism should essentially be guilty of cultural imperialism in assuming that only things the writer considers to be culture matter and being ignorant or blind to local culture. And I have yet to see an explanation of why a writer who seems to consider himself to be gifted with such insights about Jakarta is seemingly oblivious to the principal tension in the city.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Oh, non of that’s real . They are the ones who have to goto extreme lengths to get off, nothing ‘elite ‘ about that. Just another trap , another type of bind that defines you beyond yourself .

Now I have *not much* idea what you mean Could you explain it again pls?

PS. I don't go around calling people elites FWIW. I don't think it's a helpful or fair categorisation in any context particularly. But I do object to it being levelled at those on one side of the political spectrum who don't hold more political or economic power than the other.

 

[svart-hvitt]

Hmmm, I'm now not sure either of us understands each other here.

I'm saying that "elite" is about power/money. We don't need to define it scientifically to get at its basic meaning.

There are at least as many members of the elite (the wealthy and powerful) whose politics are "conservative" as there are members of the elite whose politics are "progressive" or "liberal" (in the modern sense of those words, yes).

Therefore I object to the term being applied selectively as you have done.

Because there is no exact definition of «elite», one needs to use gross examples:

USA: The elite lives mostly on east or west coast. And/or in cities.

Europe: The elite is against Brexit, against Poland, Hungary, against Catalan independence.

Global: The elite thinks nation states are gone in say 50 years. They wish sovereign states go away long before that, however. We now simply live in an interim phase before they will realize heaven on earth.

Intellectual capability: The elite loves the wisdom of crowds concept when it comes to setting prices of toilet paper, but hates the same concept when setting the political course (if that course is not compatible with their agenda).

One could use the character gallery of Orwell’s «Animal Farm» to try and imagine who fits the bill.

 

[SIY]

The modern elite are those of «progressive» and «liberal» positions.

I read an interesting statistic today that 42 out of the 50 richest counties in the US are solidly Democrat.

edit: Congressional districts, not counties, sorry. And all of the 20 richest districts are Democrat.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Because there is no exact definition of «elite», one needs to use gross examples:

USA: The elite lives mostly on east or west coast. And/or in cities.

Europe: The elite is against Brexit, against Poland, Hungary, against Catalan independence.

Global: The elite thinks nation states are gone in say 50 years. They wish sovereign states go away long before that, however. We now simply live in an interim phase before they will realize heaven on earth.

Intellectual capability: The elite loves the wisdom of crowds concept when it comes to setting prices of toilet paper, but hates the same concept when setting the political course (if that course is not compatible with their agenda).

One could use the character gallery of Orwell’s «Animal Farm» to try and imagine who fits the bill.

The reason those animals in animal farm were "elite" was because they held the power.

There's a (what I consider) disturbing trend lately to divorce the term "elite" from its basis - power - and to connect it to the liberal-left, who happen to be only about as powerful than the conservative right who tend to label them in this way.

I'd point to 1984 more than Animal Farm in describing what is happening here

 

[andreasmaaan]

I read an interesting statistic today that 42 out of the 50 richest counties in the US are solidly Democrat.

And yet Republican voters' average income is higher than Democrats voters.

The idea that one side of US politics is "elite" and the other is not is just not true.

 

[SIY]

And yet Republican voters' average income is higher than Democrats voters.

That's mathematically inevitable if you think about it.

Me, I don't belong to a political party, so I'm broke.

 

[andreasmaaan]

That's mathematically inevitable if you think about it.

Me, I don't belong to a political party, so I'm broke.

Haha

 

[Thomas savage]

Now I have *not much* idea what you mean Could you explain it again pls?

PS. I don't go around calling people elites FWIW. I don't think it's a helpful or fair categorisation in any context particularly. But I do object to it being levelled at those on one side of the political spectrum who don't hold more political or economic power than the other.

If folk want to band about the self apologetic excuse ‘ Elite ‘ they must of at the very least tried. What we have here is a fundamental break with reality.

It’s not hard to influence people , it’s not hard to impose a wilful mind however it’s qutie hard to believe it and it’s even harder to truly share oneself when these are your ambitions.

‘Elite ‘ to me just sounds like a child moaning about how life’s unfair , when ironically it’s fairer than its ever been, certainly for all of us. I don’t think any one here has a mandate for moaning about the ‘elite ‘ in fact it’s quite ridiculous.

 

[svart-hvitt]

The reason those animals in animal farm were "elite" was because they held the power.

There's a (what I consider) disturbing trend lately to divorce the term "elite" from its basis - power - and to connect it to the liberal-left, who happen to be only about as powerful than the conservative right who tend to label them in this way.

I'd point to 1984 more than Animal Farm in describing what is happening here

You do the error here of equaling voters with those who represent them. Say politicians are all pigs (cfr. Animal Farm), and that’s all the people can choose among.

Look what happened to Bernie Sanders, who may not have been a pig skin to bone.

 

[andreasmaaan]

You do the error here of equaling voters with those who represent them. Say politicians are all pigs (cfr. Animal Farm), and that’s all the people can choose among.

Look what happened to Bernie Sanders, who may not have been a pig skin to bone.

It doesn't matter much whether we look at voters or the politicians who represent them. The wealthy and powerful at this point in history are fairly equally distributed across both sides of politics in the US.

Anyway, I'm not saying we should stop calling the liberal left elites and start calling conservatives elites. I'm saying the label is unfair and unhelpful in general, and especially when levelled at only one side.

 

[Cosmik]

If folk want to band about the self apologetic excuse ‘ Elite ‘ they must of at the very least tried. What we have here is a fundamental break with reality.

It’s not hard to influence people , it’s not hard to impose a wilful mind however it’s qutie hard to believe it and it’s even harder to truly share oneself when these are your ambitions.

‘Elite ‘ to me just sounds like a child moaning about how life’s unfair , when ironically it’s fairer than its ever been, certainly for all of us. I don’t think any one here has a mandate for moaning about the ‘elite ‘ in fact it’s quite ridiculous.

I think it's possible to make an observation about the existence of the 'elite' without it meaning you are feeling resentful about them or 'moaning'. They are a fact of life (I think), and it's very interesting to watch how they operate.

 

[Thomas savage]

I think it's possible to make an observation about the existence of the 'elite' without it meaning you are feeling resentful about them or 'moaning'. They are a fact of life (I think), and it's very interesting to watch how they operate.

Nope, it’s a value statement and one that relies on a explicit definition of roles and self imposed restriction. Iv never met anyone I’d term as ‘elite ‘ and Iv met and held conversation with some rare and influential individuals.

It’s a nonsense, a self imposed restriction that I don’t recognise. To me it just sounds weak and self defeating, there’s just people with and without but basically not beyond the reach of any of us. If that’s what you want.

There’s all sorts of traps out there, it all depends on what you thinks important i guess.

 

[JJB70]

Personally I think there are far too many labels which are thrown around and the principal purpose of which is to divide the world into "us" and "them". Few things seem to be as effective as convincing people there is a bogie man, helped by a nice label.

 

[Cosmik]

Iv never met anyone I’d term as ‘elite ‘ and Iv met and held conversation with some rare and influential individuals.

Interesting. You see, I would label the humble ex-footballer Gary Lineker a member of the elite. His virtue signalling twittering is incessant, his salary huge, and his place at the BBC secure.

I think I make a distinction between establishment and elite. The elite are active. They maybe become the establishment over time, but in their dynamic phase they are the elite - and part of their earning the term elite is their overt left/liberal/progressive signalling.

You cannot have genuinely conservative elite, because the term 'conservative' has already condemned them - as some offence archaeology will soon make obvious.

 

[Thomas savage]

Interesting. You see, I would label the humble ex-footballer Gary Lineker a member of the elite. His virtue signalling twittering is incessant, his salary huge, and his place at the BBC secure.

I think I make a distinction between establishment and elite. The elite are active. They maybe become the establishment over time, but in their dynamic phase they are the elite - and part of their earning the term elite is their overt left/liberal/progressive signalling.

You cannot have conservative elite, because the term 'conservative' has already condemned them - as some offence archaeology will soon make obvious.

If it helps make sense of yourself by all means , to me lineker is a picture on tv nothing more nothing less. His twitter is words on a screen, nothing to do with me .

As I walk naked from the sea , all there is are the stones under my feet, the salty air fills my lungs encouraging my step and the chill of dawn frames my insignificance, I’m held captive but I’m free, one state frames the other how else would I know.

But I’m basic so.