Serving Bel Air, Benedict Canyon, Beverly Hills. Brentwood, Laurel Canyon, Los Feliz, Malibu, Pacific Palisades, Melrose, Santa Monica, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Topanga, Canyon, Westwood & Hollywood Hills.

Name

E-mail

facebook Canyon News twitter Canyon News

Canyon News

Bel Air News

Beverly Hills News

Brentwood News

Hollywood Hills News

Laurel Canyon News

Los Angeles News

Los Feliz News

Malibu News

Melrose News

Pacific Palisades News

Santa Monica News

Sherman Oaks News

Studio City News

Topanga Canyon News

West Hollywood News

Westwood News

Woodland Hills

Celebrity News

State News

National News

World Headlines

Deaf News

Entertainment

Film

Television

Music

On the Industry

Star Gazing

St. John's Confidential File

Theatrical Musings

Life & Style

Event Listings

Tech Talk

Looking Good For Lots Less

Spirit & Creativity

Miller Time

Books

View from the Hill

NY WEST

Chrystal's Recipe Corner

Career and Life Coaching

Gardening With Tony

Life According To Lenson

Real Estate Realities

Food

Sports

Marathon Running

Keeping It Bruin: A Look Into UCLA Athletics

Baseball

Basketball

Football

Hockey

Pets

Vi's Corner

Pet Tips

Point of View

John Armor

Message to America

Critic At Large... Ruta Lee

Labor Week

Ramblings

10 Degrees Cooler

McConnors corner

Edge of the west

The Physics Wizard

Auto

Kyle's Kars

Travel

Susan Michelle's Compass

Advice

Ask Deanna

Dear Lily

Ask Oona

Features

Dancing with Earthquakes

Archives

Sports Schedules

Traveling Beyond the Canyon

Edge of the West

Law Man

Ask Us

Nathan Tabor

The Angry Economist

Truth Probe

As I See It

Columnists

Truth Conquers

The Live Wire

Notes from Exile

Letters to the Editor

Dog Training by Anthony

Canyon Mews

Speak!

Sponsors

America's Most Wanted Dogs

World Recipes

Vegetarian Lifestyle

Humor

News Briefs

Local News

Books

News

Canyon Fodder

Bad Movie Night

Critical Projection

Ed's on the Town

Fitness Quests

Flashback Films

Stories of the Strange

Gourmet Grandma

He Said/She Said

Home Matters with Yvonne

L.A. Etch-a-Sketch

L.A. Ruminations

McConnor's Corner

Mommy Minute

Musically Speaking

My Back Pages

Publisher's Pages

ResourceINK

Scene and Heard in L.A.

Silly...But Wise!

Sunset Diaries

Table Options

The Paws Cause

TV Stuff

Cartoon of the Week



Labor Week

Aristocratic Prejudice
Posted by Henry Meyerding on Apr 28, 2012 - 6:17:32 PM

WASHINGTON D.C.—Once human institutions are established, they tend to select new members on the basis of their existing members - they select like for like, whenever possible. This is the way big organizations work. You can see this in government, the private sector, in churches and even in non-profit social service agencies. And despite the fact that politicians must get elected, the selection process for candidates within the political parties ensures that only people “like us” get offered to the electorate for election.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
And in government, the process is even more insidious because for each of those similar politicians elected there are hundreds, or in some positions thousands, of appointed or hired people who tend to conform to the model selected by the leadership. Not to say that there isn’t the occasional different person who gets placed, but such a person is generally an exception and typically doesn’t hang around for 30 years like the other folks do.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
So what? Well, the vast majority (87% according to their required public filing of personal assets) of men and women in top positions in our government are millionaires. What is wrong with that? After all, these are people who are obviously effective, successful and knowledgeable, and most people wouldn’t want their government run by file clerks and garbage collectors.  And there is something to be said for this point of view... but only for those millionaires who were principally responsible for their own fortunes. Those people who inherited wealth or married into it, we can really know nothing about their intelligence or ability based on their financial net worth. It is more difficult to research the ultimate timing or source of individuals based on public tax filings, but the public biographies of the top echelon of government posts indicates that fewer than half of these distinguished people had any hand in creating their own wealth, and almost none started from anywhere other than near the top.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
Much more important than the individual's potential ability is their understanding of basic issues before government. People who work their whole lives in a job for pay have one view of life. People who live marginalized lives in and out of criminal undertakings and incarceration have a very different view of life. People who were born to money and have been millionaires most or all of their lives also have a much different perspective on life than either of these.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
The most stark recent example of this difference was when George W. Bush commented that a woman who had to work three jobs to keep up with her bills was “uniquely American” - as if her chronic fatigue and almost total lack of personal options was somehow a good or commendable thing. I do not believe that Mr. Bush was being intentionally insensitive or that he was in any way natively obtuse; he just didn’t get it.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
The millionaire experience is essentially different from the life experience you and I share. Mitt Romney is a good case in point. He isn’t a particularly egregious example (one could just as easily profile John Kerry, for example). When he talks about some people (like Hilary Rosen) who have never worked a day in their lives, I wonder about this comment. Romney just lacks many of the experiences common to my experience, my parents’ experience and my children’s experience. He has never had to live for years in a desperate race to make rent, food and utilities ahead of demand. He has never had to choose between rent or car payments and medical treatment for a sick child. He was never faced with having to tell his child that no, they could not go on the school outing, or participate in the team sport, or avail themselves of some brilliant educational opportunity because he was unable to come up with the $40 required to participate.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
People in positions of power understand extreme circumstances as necessary motivations that influence the performance and participation of workers: you don’t want to lose the job or the promotion; it’s like you really want to be able to afford the new Mercedes and not have to settle for the Ford. They misunderstand that the negative incentives of hand-to-mouth poverty do not present people with choices; they take all choices away. When you and your family get thrown out of your apartment and have to live in your car, this is not necessarily because you made bad choices. People in this economy are faced with either/or alternatives. Do you want this bad thing to happen or this really awful thing to happen? Choosing between nothing and naught isn’t choice, it is survival. And the game is often rigged to keep people making what are essentially bad choices in the long-term, but which seem easier in the short-term.  Fast food is a good example: it’s quick and cheap, but it has lifelong health consequences, especially when you have no access to meaningful healthcare.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
So we have the circumstance where the tiny minority of haves consistently make decisions about issues that affect the lives of the majority when they have no clear understanding of the impact that those changes will have. This is not a good state of affairs, and it is getting worse. When JFK was in office, there was a much smaller disparity in income between the elected and the electors. Even 20 years ago, many more people in top government positions grew up in working class families. This is becoming increasingly uncommon and the consequences on all of us can threaten the very existence of meaningful democracy in America.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
One of the historical faults of aristocratic elites has always been a patriarchal attitude toward the lower classes - the attitude that they, with their superior education and intelligence, far greater experience of the world and access to information, are so much more able to make the right decisions for the common folk.  Another term for this is shepherding: treating the common people who elected you as sheep. Of course, in the modern world, the historic disparity between education and access to information which formerly differentiated the classes has been eliminated in most developed nations, although there are certain groups working to reinstate it.
”ˆ”ˆ”ˆ
But the important thing to understand here is not just that bad people will make bad government, but that good people will be almost as incapable of making good government. Democracy requires governance by one’s peers. In a democracy all people should be equal - equal under the law and with equal access to government (both to the governors and to the services). When a ruling elite forms with different understanding, different perspective, different agenda, and different interests and priorities, good government becomes increasingly unlikely. And historically all the good government we have achieved has been bought with the demands of the common people wrestling power and privilege away from the elites. The ruling class will never give away anything on their own initiative. Oh, they’ll talk a good line, but their promises will be empty. It takes risk and willingness to suffer (and if necessary, to die) to obtain the good government that we deserve.


 

Cliffside Malibu

-------------------------

-------------------------

 

Serving Bel Air, Benedict Canyon, Beverly Hills. Brentwood, Laurel Canyon, Los Feliz, Malibu, Pacific Palisades, Melrose, Santa Monica, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Topanga, Canyon, Westwood & Hollywood Hills.