As I work through Domination and the Arts of Resistance, I find myself thinking about the hidden transcripts of the dominant group. I don't know what they are, not really. Well, I know what they may be for some types of 'dominant' group, i.e. I hear what various white people have been saying in response to the most recent shootings. But I don't really know what the very, very wealthy are saying to each other behind closed doors.
I do, however, know what the rest of us are afraid they say. Some of it's obvious in political arguments (i.e. the "poor people are to blame for their own poverty because they made bad choices" that many on the left take issue with), though I generally don't see the wealthy blaming the poor for their poverty quite so explicitly.
I wanted to highlight some others, though, that are less politically fraught and have more to do with why I believe so many elites live in a bubble. There was a recent article where someone discussed what it was like going to an Ivy League school when he had grown up a poor kid from the rust belt. The whole thing is worth reading, but I wanted to focus on one thing in particular -
And here's the thing. It is a good thing to get into those schools, and I would expect a graduate to be bright. Well, unless they're a legacy student. Actually, I probably wouldn't want to make that assumption, but I understand why anyone would expect more from one of these graduates. But they are not the only ones who are bright. The attitude of the professor above, the attitude of Ted Cruz...that goes beyond simply acknowledging that graduates from these schools display talent and goes into snobbery, prejudice, and poor decision-making.
Yes, poor decision-making. I have run into far too many bright and brilliant people who have never gone to an Ivy League university to believe that Ivy League schools have a monopoly on talent. Some bright kids choose not to attend for rather intelligent reasons, like the kid who turned so many of them down because he didn't want to take on too much debt. I have even heard someone point out that you can get a first rate college education at many universities, and that the real reason you should pick an Ivy League school over the others is to make the connections that will help you out after graduation. The opportunity to network, in other words, is the real value added of going to these schools. (And for those who are uninterested in that, or not ambitious, the additional cost and prestige may not be worth it.)
If you believe that only someone with an Ivy League degree is worth hiring, or studying with, or talking to, not only are you missing out on all the talent that didn't go to an Ivy League school, but you may give someone a false halo just because they went to that school. That is supposedly part of how Andrew Caspersen was able to defraud friends and family. (The key quote in the article was "It depended on a desperate confidence game, in which he supposedly exploited his victims’ refusal to believe that someone of his pedigree and education, someone who was part of the Club, would betray them.")
All of which is a way of saying this - getting a prestigious degree is a great thing. It says good things about you. But using an Ivy League degree to judge who is worth your time is a sign that you've turned off your brain and are using yet another faulty heuristic. Limiting your interactions only to people who went to those schools and earned those degrees means you are dealing only with people who have experiences like yours, and on occasion perhaps giving them too credit. At the same time, you are ignoring those who may be just as bright and talented but for one reason or another had a different life path.
To bring this back to hidden transcripts, I think those of us who are not in the elite have this fear that behind closed doors they are basically laughing at us, dismissing our thoughts and concerns, and believe that they know better. That the average American is an idiot who clings to guns or religion, or is a lazy grifter voting for the free money that comes with welfare.
And if you don't live in that bubble, if you know people close to poverty who are working two or three jobs just to make ends meet, if you know how much of a struggle it is for people to save up for retirement when they are living from paycheck to paycheck, it becomes obvious that the elite may think they are smarter and can make better decisions. But it's not because they actually do know better (sometimes. I do not like the Republican trend of outright distrusting an education, that's just as bad of a heuristic as using Ivy League degrees).
This is how we get, over and over again, the mistakes made by the 'best and the brightest'. Whether it's JFK's 'whiz kids', or Enron, or the invasion of Iraq, we've seen bad decisions regularly get made by people who supposedly should know better.
And then, in this crazy election year, the elite wonder why nobody trusts them or respects their alleged expertise.
I do, however, know what the rest of us are afraid they say. Some of it's obvious in political arguments (i.e. the "poor people are to blame for their own poverty because they made bad choices" that many on the left take issue with), though I generally don't see the wealthy blaming the poor for their poverty quite so explicitly.
I wanted to highlight some others, though, that are less politically fraught and have more to do with why I believe so many elites live in a bubble. There was a recent article where someone discussed what it was like going to an Ivy League school when he had grown up a poor kid from the rust belt. The whole thing is worth reading, but I wanted to focus on one thing in particular -
It reminds me of an article about Ted Cruz, and how he only wanted study buddies from Princeton, Harvard and Yale.I heard through the grapevine that this professor thought Yale should accept only students from places like Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Princeton: It’s not our job to do remedial education, and too many of these other kid need it
And here's the thing. It is a good thing to get into those schools, and I would expect a graduate to be bright. Well, unless they're a legacy student. Actually, I probably wouldn't want to make that assumption, but I understand why anyone would expect more from one of these graduates. But they are not the only ones who are bright. The attitude of the professor above, the attitude of Ted Cruz...that goes beyond simply acknowledging that graduates from these schools display talent and goes into snobbery, prejudice, and poor decision-making.
Yes, poor decision-making. I have run into far too many bright and brilliant people who have never gone to an Ivy League university to believe that Ivy League schools have a monopoly on talent. Some bright kids choose not to attend for rather intelligent reasons, like the kid who turned so many of them down because he didn't want to take on too much debt. I have even heard someone point out that you can get a first rate college education at many universities, and that the real reason you should pick an Ivy League school over the others is to make the connections that will help you out after graduation. The opportunity to network, in other words, is the real value added of going to these schools. (And for those who are uninterested in that, or not ambitious, the additional cost and prestige may not be worth it.)
If you believe that only someone with an Ivy League degree is worth hiring, or studying with, or talking to, not only are you missing out on all the talent that didn't go to an Ivy League school, but you may give someone a false halo just because they went to that school. That is supposedly part of how Andrew Caspersen was able to defraud friends and family. (The key quote in the article was "It depended on a desperate confidence game, in which he supposedly exploited his victims’ refusal to believe that someone of his pedigree and education, someone who was part of the Club, would betray them.")
All of which is a way of saying this - getting a prestigious degree is a great thing. It says good things about you. But using an Ivy League degree to judge who is worth your time is a sign that you've turned off your brain and are using yet another faulty heuristic. Limiting your interactions only to people who went to those schools and earned those degrees means you are dealing only with people who have experiences like yours, and on occasion perhaps giving them too credit. At the same time, you are ignoring those who may be just as bright and talented but for one reason or another had a different life path.
To bring this back to hidden transcripts, I think those of us who are not in the elite have this fear that behind closed doors they are basically laughing at us, dismissing our thoughts and concerns, and believe that they know better. That the average American is an idiot who clings to guns or religion, or is a lazy grifter voting for the free money that comes with welfare.
And if you don't live in that bubble, if you know people close to poverty who are working two or three jobs just to make ends meet, if you know how much of a struggle it is for people to save up for retirement when they are living from paycheck to paycheck, it becomes obvious that the elite may think they are smarter and can make better decisions. But it's not because they actually do know better (sometimes. I do not like the Republican trend of outright distrusting an education, that's just as bad of a heuristic as using Ivy League degrees).
This is how we get, over and over again, the mistakes made by the 'best and the brightest'. Whether it's JFK's 'whiz kids', or Enron, or the invasion of Iraq, we've seen bad decisions regularly get made by people who supposedly should know better.
And then, in this crazy election year, the elite wonder why nobody trusts them or respects their alleged expertise.
No comments:
Post a Comment