September 22, 2008
"Ask yourself: how has "elitism" become a bad word in American politics? There is simply no other walk of life in which extraordinary talent and rigorous training are denigrated. We want elite pilots to fly our planes, elite troops to undertake our most critical missions, elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite scientists to devote the most productive years of their lives to curing our diseases. And yet, when it comes time to vest people with even greater responsibilities, we consider it a virtue to shun any and all standards of excellence. When it comes to choosing the people whose thoughts and actions will decide the fates of millions, then we suddenly want someone just like us, someone fit to have a beer with, someone down-to-earth-in fact, almost anyone, provided that he or she doesn't seem too intelligent or well educated."- [Sam Harris on Sarah Palin][1] [1]: http://www.newsweek.com/id/160080/page/1
Comments
lawrence.com does not necessarily agree with comments posted below - responsibility lies with the relevant user alone. Read our full policy.
El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) says...
"We want elite pilots to fly our planes, elite troops to undertake our most critical missions, elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite scientists to devote the most productive years of their lives to curing our diseases..."And yet, we do not elect a single one of those; each of them rises to his position by doing it, by being chosen not by ignorant voters* but by superiors in a non-elected pyramid of experts. Perhaps we should accept an executive like we accept a pro quarterback, being satisfied with one who has spent his entire life playing the game, one close to power, studying its application, being chosen from birth to live it and breathe it and to wield it efficiently, hand-picked by his superiors to step into a job he knows intimately and we do not.Kim Jong Il for President! * but I repeat myself. That most voters cannot tell where money comes from, who the members of NATO are, or why we have juries makes their opinions worth ignoring completely. If we elected doctors the way we elect Presidents we would all be dead of hangnails within a generation.
September 22, 2008 at 11:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
El_Borak (Bill Hoyt) says...
Wow, on re-reading that sounded terrible. I guess the point is that we walk a fine line between kings and clowns. The only person truly qualified to be king is a full-grown prince, and likewise all people running for President are in some sense unqualified for the job.So who is to do the picking? Voters, being ignorant of what the President does, are singularly unqualified to choose one, even if they value traits like "experience" (doing what?) or "excellence" (in what? And how do they judge excellence in fields they do not know?) They do not have the wherewithal to choose the best President. Instead they choose the most confident and likeable one. Sometimes they choose well, sometimes not.In the same way having 100 million people trying to assemble a starting lineup for the Chiefs will do far worse than a coach will do - there's a reason he's the coach - 100 million people choosing a President must rely on what they know, their own expertise. Which is why they choose charismatic demagogues.Harris' argument, which applies as well to Obama as to Palin, to McCain as to Biden, is an argument against universal suffrage, the 17th Amendment, and General Presidential elections.Which his why before we had those things, elitism was considered perhaps the main qualification for office.
September 23, 2008 at 12:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )