Sometime during the past ten years, quite possibly with the Bush presidency, higher education became a pejorative term. Higher education became associated with "elitism," implying that once one acquired a graduate degree, one could no longer understand the travails of "common men and women."
Strange. All of those in power, liberal or conservative, hold higher degrees. Many of them from our most revered institutions. That, in essence, is what trains them to be able to perform higher offices. Indeed, that Bush was a "C" student at Harvard's MBA program demonstrates clearly why the U.S. is in its current predicament.
Moreover, it is assumed that those with advanced degrees are somehow genetically predisposed to eschew children and families: only if one holds a B.A. at the highest can one fully embrace "family values". Oddly, that is defined solely by Euro-Americans and is extremely exclusive: no one of different color, no one with large, extended families, and definitely no one with a religion other than an often Evangelical form of Christianity. Moreover, family values seems to have absolutely no compassion in the hands of these people: they don't care about the less fortunate than themselves because they are a "drain" on the system.
Rather than defending those with advanced degrees, let's consider the other side of the argument. Why should catering to the lowest common denominator be the single-most invoked criterion for measuring a person's ability to lead, in any capacity? Why is it inspirational for someone who has not done well in school to be the U.S. President? Why do we measure our leaders based on whether they are "like me" (they aren't, that's why they are in positions of power) and not whether they are qualified? In short, when did ignorance, depravity, immorality and brazenness become equated with family values? Why is it that if one is vociferously vituperative, the public doesn't question the content of the words?
What happened to critical thinking?
It is interesting that in politics, wealthy Conservatives such as Bush and McCain are not viewed as pejoratively "Elite" while Kerry and Obama are. Even more strange is that Bush and McCain either inherited or married into their money. And yet, given the lack of critical thinking, this seems to be unproblematic.
ReplyDeleteOver the summer, I attended a talk about US Presidents. In the part where the Professor was discussing how limited the pool of Presidents has been throughout US history, he offered a fun fact that blew me away: GW Bush is related to SIXTEEN previous Presidents.
ReplyDeleteSIXTEEN!
Now THAT is elitism.