Elitism, Liberals, and the Poor

[Debater Slayer]

Is it just me, or do many self-identified liberals seem to look down on poor people and others from communities who have low or no access to education?

Almost every time there's a major event such as the pandemic, U.S. elections, or the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I see a subset of liberals quickly blame the "uneducated and ignorant" people who hold certain views about a given event.

Now, make no mistake: there are absolutely many misinformed, inaccurate, and/or downright harmful beliefs that one can hold, but when a portion of society have been disenfranchised, denied access to basic education, and been abused and neglected by the same governmental and media institutions they're supposed to trust, what else can we expect?

People can thumb their noses all they want at a poor person who genuinely believes that a COVID vaccine will kill them or that the GOP have the solution to their poverty, but it seems to me that beliefs don't originate in a vacuum. Moralizing and invariably attributing such people's disillusionment to some condemnable ignorance doesn't help when under different circumstances, many of them would have markedly different worldviews.

I saw this first-hand when I was in the army. A fellow conscript from a rural area, who was illiterate, said that one of his biggest wishes was to be able to read and write. Expectedly, he also had religiously conservative views per the norm in his largely poor rural area.

Blaming him for being "uneducated" would simply miss the point. Of course he is; nobody is born with a master's or a PhD. This is someone the education system, social security, and society at large have largely failed. Realistically, is he going to be a religious conservative, or is he going to listen to liberals in suits and air-conditioned lecture halls talking about how ignorant and reprehensible he and people like him are for having the views that they do?

I feel like some liberals could benefit from studying and understanding the social, economic, and political conditions that shape people's perspectives instead of clinging to a one-dimensional narrative that moralizes more than it makes an effort to realistically analyze why and how people hold the beliefs that they do--and how to go about changing the problematic aspects thereof in a practical way.

Discuss.

 

[Viker]

I never hold contempt for anyone's level of education or income bracket. I do for ill informed opinions.

 

[JustGeorge]

When we were at our poorest, we were wrapped up in a group of liberals, most of whom had high levels of formal education.

One of the biggest problems we encountered? A refusal to listen. "Here, you must be food insecure. Let us feed you." No, really, I'm fine... ate a big lunch.. "No, no. Take this moldy cheese(well, no one ever gave us moldy cheese, but we were often 'gifted' people's expired goods). Just cut the mold off, and you'll be fine." Uh...thanks?

No matter what we said or did, these folks had a picture painted of us, and any time we deviated from who they believed we were, or what they believed we wanted, or what our experiences had been, we'd get a pitiful smile, a pat on the shoulder, and an ended conversation.

We aren't even what you'd call conservatives... I can't imagine the tuning out they'd have had to do for that... I do think there is some liberal bias towards the imagined intelligence of conservatives, though I think there's also conservative bias towards the imagined intelligence of liberals, so it goes both ways, in my view.

 

[Debater Slayer]

When we were at our poorest, we were wrapped up in a group of liberals, most of whom had high levels of formal education.

One of the biggest problems we encountered? A refusal to listen. "Here, you must be food insecure. Let us feed you." No, really, I'm fine... ate a big lunch.. "No, no. Take this moldy cheese(well, no one ever gave us moldy cheese, but we were often 'gifted' people's expired goods). Just cut the mold off, and you'll be fine." Uh...thanks?

No matter what we said or did, these folks had a picture painted of us, and any time we deviated from who they believed we were, or what they believed we wanted, or what our experiences had been, we'd get a pitiful smile, a pat on the shoulder, and an ended conversation.

We aren't even what you'd call conservatives... I can't imagine the tuning out they'd have had to do for that... I do think there is some liberal bias towards the imagined intelligence of conservatives, though I think there's also conservative bias towards the imagined intelligence of liberals, so it goes both ways, in my view.

I've encountered this with some liberals during discussions about Islam and the Arab world. Sometimes I've felt that I've been shoehorned into neat boxes based on specific narratives, where not fitting into the boxes would get me blamed or negatively labeled. I know many Arab ex-Muslims who have felt similarly when talking to Western liberals.

I agree it goes both ways. I suppose it could be a manifestation of tribalism or groupthink (among other things) in humans.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I never hold contempt for anyone's level of education or income bracket. I do for ill informed opinions.

I'm mostly the same way, although I often try to consider why someone holds the views that they do. I've found that this may help not just when talking to them but also when considering whether that person is open to other views.

 

[MikeF]

Is it just me, or do many self-identified liberals seem to look down on poor people and others from communities who have low or no access to education?

Almost every time there's a major event such as the pandemic, U.S. elections, or the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I see a subset of liberals quickly blame the "uneducated and ignorant" people who hold certain views about a given event.

Now, make no mistake: there are absolutely many misinformed, inaccurate, and/or downright harmful beliefs that one can hold, but when a portion of society have been disenfranchised, denied access to basic education, and been abused and neglected by the same governmental and media institutions they're supposed to trust, what else can we expect?

People can thumb their noses all they want at a poor person who genuinely believes that a COVID vaccine will kill them or that the GOP have the solution to their poverty, but it seems to me that beliefs don't originate in a vacuum. Moralizing and invariably attributing such people's disillusionment to some condemnable ignorance doesn't help when under different circumstances, many of them would have markedly different worldviews.

I saw this first-hand when I was in the army. A fellow conscript from a rural area, who was illiterate, said that one of his biggest wishes was to be able to read and write. Expectedly, he also had religiously conservative views per the norm in his largely poor rural area.

Blaming him for being "uneducated" would simply miss the point. Of course he is; nobody is born with a master's or a PhD. This is someone the education system, social security, and society at large have largely failed. Realistically, is he going to be a religious conservative, or is he going to listen to liberals in suits and air-conditioned lecture halls talking about how ignorant and reprehensible he and people like him are for having the views that they do?

I feel like some liberals could benefit from studying and understanding the social, economic, and political conditions that shape people's perspectives instead of clinging to a one-dimensional narrative that moralizes more than it makes an effort to realistically analyze why and how people hold the beliefs that they do--and how to go about changing the problematic aspects thereof in a practical way.

Discuss.

So is it many liberals or just a sub set?
Also, you seem to admonish this group of liberals for pointing out that uneducated people make poor choices while then agreeing with them.
Finally, it is not only the uneducated and poor that believe "the Covid vaccine will kill them or the GOP can solve poverty."
I think the "liberals" you references are frustrated with anyone who does not share their same values or goals, exactly the same way every other human being on this planet does, regardless of their politics or economic status.

 

[Stevicus]

Is it just me, or do many self-identified liberals seem to look down on poor people and others from communities who have low or no access to education?

Almost every time there's a major event such as the pandemic, U.S. elections, or the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I see a subset of liberals quickly blame the "uneducated and ignorant" people who hold certain views about a given event.

Now, make no mistake: there are absolutely many misinformed, inaccurate, and/or downright harmful beliefs that one can hold, but when a portion of society have been disenfranchised, denied access to basic education, and been abused and neglected by the same governmental and media institutions they're supposed to trust, what else can we expect?

People can thumb their noses all they want at a poor person who genuinely believes that a COVID vaccine will kill them or that the GOP have the solution to their poverty, but it seems to me that beliefs don't originate in a vacuum. Moralizing and invariably attributing such people's disillusionment to some condemnable ignorance doesn't help when under different circumstances, many of them would have markedly different worldviews.

I saw this first-hand when I was in the army. A fellow conscript from a rural area, who was illiterate, said that one of his biggest wishes was to be able to read and write. Expectedly, he also had religiously conservative views per the norm in his largely poor rural area.

Blaming him for being "uneducated" would simply miss the point. Of course he is; nobody is born with a master's or a PhD. This is someone the education system, social security, and society at large have largely failed. Realistically, is he going to be a religious conservative, or is he going to listen to liberals in suits and air-conditioned lecture halls talking about how ignorant and reprehensible he and people like him are for having the views that they do?

I feel like some liberals could benefit from studying and understanding the social, economic, and political conditions that shape people's perspectives instead of clinging to a one-dimensional narrative that moralizes more than it makes an effort to realistically analyze why and how people hold the beliefs that they do--and how to go about changing the problematic aspects thereof in a practical way.

Discuss.

I do recall times when such classist, elitist attitudes were not quite so prevalent and were even looked down upon in many circles. I think our culture had more respect for working people once upon a time, but that seems to have shifted somewhat - probably during the 80s, which is when so many things changed course and went awry.

What I don't understand is why so many people feel the need to categorize and classify people in this manner, especially when it's often done in a vacuum and gives no consideration to context or the historical perspective.

Is it just a cheesy, superficial attempt at labeling and ridiculing people, or is there a genuine desire to understand and confront conflicting values and ideals? It sounds more like the former, in my view. It seems it's just a cheap tactic, a political strategy - and not a very effective one at that.

 

[MikeF]

.

Is it just a cheesy, superficial attempt at labeling and ridiculing people, or is there a genuine desire to understand and confront conflicting values and ideals? It sounds more like the former, in my view. It seems it's just a cheap tactic, a political strategy - and not a very effective one at that.

Are you referring here to the OP poster or the "liberals" he refers to?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I think it's fair to say that people in low income low education areas are more vulnerable to scams, financial, political, religious or otherwise. People who are caught in scams can hurt others and themselves, and that needs to be addressed. But it's trivially easy and not very wise to simply blame people who fall into scams. Even though it's sometimes cathartic for someone who hurt by those people. But the more important thing to focus on is who is benefiting from those scams and why.

And absolutely some of those people doing the scamming are liberals. They didn't get to be rich and powerful any cleaner than the rest who succeeded by manipulation, taking advantage of the weak, or, and this is especially true of liberals like the Obamas and Bidens of this world, talking a big talk but keeping the status quo where they secure their own power.

 

[Stevicus]

Are you referring here to the OP poster or the "liberals" he refers to?

I perceived that the OP was referring to a commonly used tactic of ridicule and mockery which generally tends to attack the person or group rather than the ideas or arguments under discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by "liberals" in this context, however, in my own observation and experience, I've seen liberals change from what they once were. It's not because they're "liberals," but because the culture and direction of the country have changed, and liberals along with it.

 

[MikeF]

I perceived that the OP was referring to a commonly used tactic of ridicule and mockery which generally tends to attack the person or group rather than the ideas or arguments under discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by "liberals" in this context, however, in my own observation and experience, I've seen liberals change from what they once were. It's not because they're "liberals," but because the culture and direction of the country have changed, and liberals along with it.

I put the word "liberal" in quotes to specifically reference the OP's use of the term and his intended meaning.

Are the terms liberal and conservative even that useful? In the United States, what percentage of the population would fall under the label of liberal, and of those so labeled, how uniform would their political beliefs be?

 

[Stevicus]

I put the word "liberal" in quotes to specifically reference the OP's use of the term and his intended meaning.

Are the terms liberal and conservative even that useful? In the United States, what percentage of the population would fall under the label of liberal, and of those so labeled, how uniform would their political beliefs be?

I can't really speak to the usefulness of the terms like liberal and conservative. I think the OP was referring to those who self-identify as liberals. I think it's mainly just related to observations of certain trends in public rhetoric and debate where some people might be upper class and also liberal feel the need to rub the ignorant hillbillies' noses in the dirt. It's a common trope in political mudslinging these days, as it has been for quite a number of years.

It doesn't necessarily speak to the point of what percentage of the population would be liberal, nor would it imply uniformity of political beliefs. I don't believe it's as cut-and-dried as that. It's more of a spectrum of beliefs, along with varying degrees of emphasis on different beliefs and goals. But I've heard it said that people tend to vote more based on what they fear than upon what they love.

And this is likely true on both sides of the spectrum, as both sides have their own sets of fears about the other side. I don't know how many people this affects, but it's enough to be noticeable.

 

[sun rise]

As a self-identified liberal I feel looked down upon, stereotyped and dismissed unfairly by @Debater Slayer 's characterizing liberals if we were all the same with the same intellectual and emotional faults. This is what I expect from Trump supporters and MAGA bigots.

 

[NArdas]

Here in the U.S the illiberals use Black deaths as a political tool to support their anti gun proposals even though Black women are the most at risk.
The poor they seem to see as illiterate and disposable other than a useful and malleable vote, a perfect example is when Joe Biden, a White millionaire politician proclaimed if you didn't vote for him then "you ain't Black". Merriam Webster describes "ain't" as a word that is regularly used by the less educated.
This is what they think of you

 

[Valjean]

I perceived that the OP was referring to a commonly used tactic of ridicule and mockery which generally tends to attack the person or group rather than the ideas or arguments under discussion. I'm not sure what you mean by "liberals" in this context, however, in my own observation and experience, I've seen liberals change from what they once were. It's not because they're "liberals," but because the culture and direction of the country have changed, and liberals along with it.

Good points. The "Liberals," sixty or eighty years ago, were mostly the Democratic party, which represented the interests of the working and middle classes. This is no longer the case, though. The Democratic party abandoned the working class and now represents the technical or professional classes. The working classes -- with very real problems and concerns, were left flapping in the wind, with noöne in their corner, no explanation, and noöne to blame for their job losses, stagnant wages, increased cost of living, &c.

Enter the Republicans, organized and opportunistic. They remain the party of Big Business and banking, but they know how to appeal to the working classes. They present a united front, speak to them in their own language, reflect their values and are sympathetic with their plight. They paint a picture of a once great but now victimized and oppressed class -- and they name the oppressors: The "radical liberals" and Democratic Party. Plus, they offer simple and direct remedies, that will restore their class to their rightful place as the Real Americans.

The Democratic party plays right into this, of course. Not unified, always arguing with each other, not offering simple explanations, remedies or blame. They speak in a techno-babble of studies, statistics, history, long chains of causative factors and multi-step fixes. They're perceived as effete élitists with their heads in the clouds; completely out of touch.

Never mind that surveys show overwhelming support for the policies they advocate, among all classes. They are not liked, and are easy targets of blame.

So who really supports the interests of the working classes? These would be those radical Socialists and "Social Democrats" -- who are probably closet commies and not to be trusted.

It was the "socialists" like Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower that created the middle class to begin with, and the prosperity that made America great. But the "robber barons" and "economic royalists" the two Roosevelts battled were not going to accept defeat, and have been steadily clawing their way back to dominance, by any means possible.
Economic disparity is greater today than it was in the Gilded Age -- and it's not the 'liberals' behind it.

I found this Op-Ed in Politico, yesterday. I think it makes some very interesting points: Opinion | How Orwell Diagnosed Democrats’ Culture War Problem Decades Ago

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I think certain liberals do this, while certain conservatives look down on poor folks as "lazy." It appears to be a class issue rather than political.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Is it just me, or do many self-identified liberals seem to look down on poor people and others from communities who have low or no access to education?

Almost every time there's a major event such as the pandemic, U.S. elections, or the Russian invasion of Ukraine, I see a subset of liberals quickly blame the "uneducated and ignorant" people who hold certain views about a given event.

Now, make no mistake: there are absolutely many misinformed, inaccurate, and/or downright harmful beliefs that one can hold, but when a portion of society have been disenfranchised, denied access to basic education, and been abused and neglected by the same governmental and media institutions they're supposed to trust, what else can we expect?

People can thumb their noses all they want at a poor person who genuinely believes that a COVID vaccine will kill them or that the GOP have the solution to their poverty, but it seems to me that beliefs don't originate in a vacuum. Moralizing and invariably attributing such people's disillusionment to some condemnable ignorance doesn't help when under different circumstances, many of them would have markedly different worldviews.

I saw this first-hand when I was in the army. A fellow conscript from a rural area, who was illiterate, said that one of his biggest wishes was to be able to read and write. Expectedly, he also had religiously conservative views per the norm in his largely poor rural area.

Blaming him for being "uneducated" would simply miss the point. Of course he is; nobody is born with a master's or a PhD. This is someone the education system, social security, and society at large have largely failed. Realistically, is he going to be a religious conservative, or is he going to listen to liberals in suits and air-conditioned lecture halls talking about how ignorant and reprehensible he and people like him are for having the views that they do?

I feel like some liberals could benefit from studying and understanding the social, economic, and political conditions that shape people's perspectives instead of clinging to a one-dimensional narrative that moralizes more than it makes an effort to realistically analyze why and how people hold the beliefs that they do--and how to go about changing the problematic aspects thereof in a practical way.

Discuss.

They do. Look how they treat nomads and those who desire to live off grid cheaper and remove themselves from society.

 

[Koldo]

They do. Look how they treat nomads and those who desire to live off grid cheaper and remove themselves from society.

Those people tend to be nuts though.

 

[Revoltingest]

Tis always a good idea to avoid believing & saying
nasty prejudicial things about people based upon
the group one has deemed them part of.

This is far broader than just liberals.

 

[wellwisher]

One big difference between the uneducated people and educated liberals, in the USA, are the educated liberals have huge student debts to go along with their "higher education credentials". They were told to eat the seed potato, learning how to be pretentious.

One of the ironies I see is that educated Liberals boast about their education, but they are the first to censor people who do not agree with them. If they were intelligent, instead of just educated or indoctrinated, they would enjoy the creative challenges offered by free speech. Instead they do their best to prevent free speech, less free speech betray their lack of open minded ingenuity that better education can provide.

I tend to think Educated Liberals are pretentious. This explains why they claim to know best, but never seem to fix anything. Instead they tend to create new problems that did not exist, before they meddled.

The Left runs the education system in the USA. During Obama, the Liberals pushed to increased enrollment into colleges at the expense of the trades. This increased demand for higher education goods and services and drove up the costs leading to huge student debt. Those in the trades, may not have the credentials, but they also have no college debt and many are now working on their summer homes. The latter are being asked to help the educated deal with their debt through the tax payers. Who was smarter?

The "smart" people are not even smart enough to follow the money connected to their student debt. If they had half a brain they would see it ended up in the coffers of the universities and not in the tax payer's wallet. Yet their solution is to steal from the tax payer and not go after those who have their money. They were conned by other educated Liberals who offer an injustice solution.

It appears the Liberals universities are training con artists and thieves. They can't even see through the scams coming from their own kind.

Currently there is a melt down over Twitter allowing free speech under new management. This will make it harder to pretend to be smart. If you are the only show in town, even a poor show is entertaining. Now they will now need to demonstrate intelligence and self reliance in the field, which is not being taught in Liberal Education.