I’ll try to make this concise and short.
Recently, Obama, who i do not in general support, has received substantial criticism from a variety of sources for being to “elitist”.
My question then is, what is wrong with this “elitism” of sorts? I think of Plato’s republic, where Plato argues for his ideal state–a state which is founded on the idea that some people are just simply better at providing for the state as a whole, and also that “the many” often do not know what is best for either them or the state as a whole.
I do not wish to talk about government size here, and just how much “control” the government should have over the lives of its citizens. I also do not wish to argue over the merits of democracy (though Plato believes it to be a horrible sort of government). Rather, I pose a simple argument of sorts.
It seems to just be a fact that often times, “people” in general do not know what is best for them, let alone for their fellow citizens in general. Given this, is it not possible for someone else to know what would be best for a given group in general (by way of simply being more knowledgeable, or by having more experience).
If this is true, if it is possible for someone to know what is best for others who themselves do not know, then there seems to be nothing wrong in principle with the sort of “elitism” that Obama has been nailed for.
To quickly clarify, I am not arguing that Obama’s latest “elistist slips” have been right. What i am arguing is that Obama has been nailed for being “elitist” at all. Why??