Ramblings of Tungsten

With the presidential election looming it is no surprise that the political rhetoric is becoming increasingly stereotypical from both sides but I have to say the Right is really going whole hog with the generic hype. Where designer coffee used to be the imposed badge of faux elitism we now see the Right invoking produce as the mark of a dyed-in-the-wool holier-than-thou lefty elitist. Because, it is truly the salad that one eats that defines one’s view of the world.

Now, at the risk of actually sounding elitist, who the hell buys into this line of reasoning? These accusations hold no bearing on any of the important issues, of which there are many to discuss, in a presidential election. This form of name calling (and that is what this amounts to) takes away from a much needed serious debate over real and valid policy differences between the candidates, but who wants to talk about policy when you can simply paint your opponent with a broad brush that dismisses he/her ideas out of hand? These tactics simply take advantage of the lowest form of sensationalism and play to fears of a people desperate for some stability and control over their lives. I hesitate to define what I mean by stability and control but suffice to say I believe the government exists to serve and protect the people and that service is not limited to simply providing infrastructure for business and protection from foreign enemies.

Furthermore, when you look at the source of the accusations of elitism you really have to ask yourself, isn’t this a bit of the pot calling the kettle black? Those that benefit most from a supposedly “elitist” administration are those who cannot afford the very amenities the Right claims to be the hallmarks for liberalism while those that benefit most from the “conservative” position enjoy a far more elite lifestyle than 99% of the American people. For instance, McCain contributors, the Hilton family are the pinnacle American elite and yet somehow identify with the side of the political field that decries elites (although it is nice to see that even the Hiltons find this low form of political maneuvering insulting to the American people no matter the source). The nasty truth is, although both sides hold true elitists in their numbers, the Right is far more elitist, in the real sense of the word, and generally seeks to insure their status at the expense of those who, like me, are average.

It would be unfair of me to imply that all Republicans (note: I have deliberately used the party name here and not the term conservatives because both liberal and conservative have lost their true meaning to the point where neither accurately describes either party in the least) in some way seek to ensure the power of the elite because that simply is not true as much as it is not true that all Democrats are elitist that seek to govern from an ivory tower, but the party demographics do not lie and the base of the Republican party certainly fits the bill of “elite” far better than the base of the Democrats.

And, really, when we are talking about presidential candidates we are talking about the elite of the country in terms of education, wealth, and social standing, which in my assessment makes charges of elitism between any candidates meaningless. So, can we just get back to debating the issues where we have real and meaningful differences so that single-issue voters on both sides can piss me off too?