Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

June 16, 2024, 04:01:53 pm

Author Topic: Elitism should not be a dirty word  (Read 1264 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

brendan

  • Guest
Elitism should not be a dirty word
« on: December 29, 2007, 03:19:36 pm »
0
"WHEN 19th century liberals such as John Stuart Mill made the case for extending individual liberties, they argued it on moral grounds. They believed human beings are put on Earth with talents and potentials which they are meant to develop and exploit to the full, so they urged us to improve ourselves by becoming better educated and more enlightened. To achieve this, they understood we needed to be free.

In the 19th century there were many restrictions on freedom that hindered people from fulfilling their potential. Some of the worst were enforced by law: women, for example, could not own property, had no vote and were legally subordinated to men. Mill and other liberals saw such laws as indefensible, and they fought to have them changed.

Other restrictions were derived from people's social or economic circumstances rather than from discriminatory legal rules. The children of the poor, for example, were often expected to work from an early age, which made it difficult to get a proper education. This limited their opportunities for self-improvement, so children of labourers often grew up tobecome labourers themselves, even if they had the talent to achieve greater things.

Recognising these problems, liberals came to understand that legal equality may not be enough to enable people to fulfil their potential. What is also needed is access to an adequate education and a basic level of material resources so individuals can put their talents to good effect.

Today, most of the restrictions that limited people's opportunities in the past have weakened or disappeared. Race and gender discrimination are both outlawed. A minimum of 10 years' free schooling is guaranteed to every child. The welfare state delivers a basic level of income security and health care to everybody. Competition for jobs is relatively open, and corruption is minimal. There are still inequalities, of course, but if you are bright and strongly motivated, there is little to stop you succeeding.

Yet something is still hindering many of us from developing and fully exploiting our potential. The problem is no longer that we lack opportunity, it is rather that fewer demands are being made of us.

The opportunities are in place but the expectations have been lowered, and because less is demanded, we settle for less and our lives are less fulfilled as a consequence.

In a democratic age, egalitarianism has been redefined as mediocrity. The belief that Jack is as good as his master used to be a liberating idea, encouraging people to strive to succeed no matter what their origins. But the belief that lazy, ignorant Jack watching television all day is as good as his neighbour working all hours to get qualified or build a business is not liberating, it is a recipe for envy, sloth and passivity.

This perverted version of egalitarianism holds that the world owes us a living even if we make no effort to better ourselves. It emphasises our rights but has nothing to say about our obligations. It makes excuses for bad behaviour and derides those who try to maintain high standards. It encourages envy of those who succeed and it treats failure not as a spur to try harder but as evidence of victimisation requiring compensation and special treatment.

Today's egalitarianism makes us reluctant to judge or evaluate people's actions, even when some are clearly better than others. Welfare agencies refuse to discriminate between responsible people who fall on hard times and claimants who bring about their own misfortune through reckless, short-sighted or self-destructive behaviour.

Teachers feel uncomfortable grading students' performances, and they push increasing numbers of low-ability students into university while denying the inevitable dilution in standards this entails.

...

There is only one area of modern life where we still celebrate excellence, demand high standards, insist on the virtues of competition and devote ourselves to self-improvement, and that is sport. The home page of the Australian Institute of Sport unashamedly uses the word elite three times in its opening paragraph.

Search the websites of our leading universities and almost the only place you will find them claiming elite status is in relation to the sporting achievements of their athletes.

So we are happy to praise elitism in sport but not, it seems, in areas of life that arguably matter much more.

John Stuart Mill must be spinning in his grave."

Extracts taken from: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22232019-5013480,00.html
« Last Edit: December 29, 2007, 03:32:20 pm by brendan »

/0

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 4124
  • Respect: +45
Re: Elitism should not be a dirty word
« Reply #1 on: December 29, 2007, 04:15:21 pm »
0
Interesting article... reminds me of how fragile our society really is.

Collin Li

  • VCE Tutor
  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 4957
  • Respect: +17
Re: Elitism should not be a dirty word
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2007, 04:39:16 pm »
0
reminds me of how fragile our society really is.

What do you mean?

/0

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 4124
  • Respect: +45
Re: Elitism should not be a dirty word
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2007, 04:54:23 pm »
0
Well... it's always got to be in balance for us to live comfortably. There's always the battling between totalitarianism and freedom (anarchy in disguise), and it seems that no matter which way the scale tips the standard of living will go down. And even though we should think of freedom as something to be revered, the fact that it is in itself inherently flawed leaves you to wonder what isn't, and how the world will ever live in harmony.

Ok I realise most of that is nonsense that is extremely obvious, sorry
« Last Edit: December 29, 2007, 04:57:24 pm by DivideBy0 »

brendan

  • Guest
Re: Elitism should not be a dirty word
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2007, 04:59:38 pm »
0
Well... it's always got to be in balance for us to live comfortably. There's always the battling between totalitarianism and freedom (anarchy in disguise), and it seems that no matter which way the scale tips the standard of living will go down. And even though we should think of freedom as something to be revered, the fact that it is in itself inherently flawed leaves you to wonder what isn't, and how the world will ever live in harmony.

Ok I realise most of that is nonsense that is extremely obvious, sorry

Whats "anarchy"? Whats it got to do with the article? and why is individual freedom "inherently flawed"?