Originally Posted by zebedee63:
“Why are snobs who view a whole class of people as inferior any different from racists who view a whole race of people as inferior. Her elitest attitudes should be unacceptable
in any society that wants move forward in a fairer more just world.”
I think her views are wholly unacceptable and, as far as she pushes it, there are similarities to racism.
The obvious difference of the elitist snob to the racist is that the racist discriminates against a swathe of the population based on an unalterable fact : the colour of their skin.This is wholly unacceptable and always will be.
Some people (social snobs) feel free to discriminate against the lesser off because they believe they are where they are because they are lazy and unambitious, that their status is not an unalterable fact and they are free to bootstrap themselves out of there, a la 'social mobility.' Unfortunately, the, what look like easy, solutions: educational opportunities and social supports are not always available or, because of grinding poverty ,not sought with confidence. A lot of snobs, I suspect, are so because they are aspirational and want to separate themselves from more humble origins.(There is a bit of that in Katie).
Katie does not even allow for' social mobility,' in that she believes it is more efficient to have a system that keeps everybody in their place. I get the impression (from that article) that her views are that the brightest are among the elites anyway, so most of the lower classes are, by design, thick. That comes close to a racist type mindset towards class really.
By design, a capitalist system functions by benefiting some over many, as long as it fools us in to thinking that everyone can benefit , like the 'American Dream'.
In reality it is more akin to how Katie says it is:the better schooled, the ones who have doors open for them and those who are already wealthy maintain the balance of power. So she is not lying (in that
is the way things mostly are. Her saying aloud that this system is desirable and most 'efficient' sounds a bit fascist. (it's not the smartest thing to say either)
I think it was Scarlet who mentioned above that there isn't specifically a history of violence with regards to the lower classes, as comparable to certain races. True in the direct sense of the word but a system that goes from boom to bust while simultaneously making a few richer on the back of the misery of the many at the bottom who through bearing the brunt of recession, unstable employment, unfair pay, crippling economic problems and subsequently evictions, poverty ,mental illness, suicide, etc.... are oppressed by a
violent system. IMO anyway
Katie and her ilk, however, see this as efficiency.
I