Elitism
Elitism
Elitism exists everywhere – as long as capitalism exists, elitism will. Those who are better off will scorn those who are worse off, one way or another. Capitalism splits societies into stratas, those at the top end the “haves”, those at the bottom the “have-nots”. Obviously, elitism should not be encouraged as it will cause anti-social behaviours and antipathic feelings within society; in other words, it splits up the society.
As I said, capitalism encourages elitism, and to eliminate elitism requires a country to eliminate its capitalist principles. In laymen terms, resources will be owned by the state, not by individuals and firms. Political methodologies such as authoritarianism and communism practice that. And history has shown that these methods of governance are nothing but mere ideals where everybody is given an equal status. The elite ruling class oppressed its citizens and they were much worse off than they would have been under other forms of governance.
Democratic governments are largely capitalist in nature. Well, mostly. Not adopting capitalist principles causes disincentives to work hard and thwarts creativity. Obviously that would stagnate a country’s growth, which in turn will cause a country to lag behind in this extremely competitive globalised world. It is difficult to find a democratic country that is able to resist the tremendous benefits that capitalism promises and delivers. It can thus be safely argued that elitism exists in most, if not all, democratic countries and it will be extremely difficult and almost impossible to eliminate it whether or not you like it.
Even (pseudo) democratic Singapore is by no means free from elitism. In fact, elitism is so profound that it is clearly reflected in the youths of our country. “Get out of my elite uncaring face” is not an unfamiliar phrase amongst Singaporeans. Apathetic attitudes of the privileged and their self declared superiority are worrying. Even more so if all these "values" are deeply rooted in our children. Common folks in Russia once rebelled against the privileged class of insensitive elite oligarchs. Who can be sure that the same will not happen in Singapore?
The narrowing of the income gap between the rich and the poor should be one of the major key concerns of our government. The growth of our country should be enjoyed by all, leaving nobody behind. That, of course, is difficult – but at least the amount of people left behind could be reduced. Schemes should be in place to aid the poor, not suppress them further. The GST is one such example; it is clearly a regressive tax. The poor carry a bigger burden than the rich. I’m not sure about the counter-argument by the government, but I trust that they are fair and just; not blind to the longsuffering of its people.
Elitism cannot be eliminated. But it can be reduced. A way to reduce elitism is to help the poor more. Methods to break out of the cycle such as greater healthcare benefits and educational assistance should be given to less privileged families. “It is better to die than to fall sick in Singapore” is not something unheard of among the common masses. Though the government repeatedly (and seemingly proudly) proclaim “Affordable healthcare for all”, that may not be the exact case. I’ve heard stories of people given potassium laden drugs to quicken their family member’s death just because they cannot afford the healthcare costs. Though the sources and the stories are of questionable nature, expensive healthcare costs are clearly evident. How many times have one heard about other's medisave wiped out with just one hospital stay?
Though meritocracy should be the guiding principle of our country, we have to think of the potentially consequential results of over-indulging in this previously-very-workable model. The poor is part of our society and we have to look after them. It is not their fault that they were born poor, it is not their fault that they fall ill (unless they practice physically damaging activities like smoking) and it is not their fault that they will require treatment and not be able to afford them.
Unless more help is rendered to the helpless, the society will degrade. The rich will continue lining their pockets, growing indignant towards the “less worthy” individuals of our society. These individuals may even be viewed as a stumbling block towards our growth, and be prejudiced more than what they are already receiving unjustly from society.
And the poor will continue to struggle to make ends meet, which is oft worsened by the influx of foreign talents competing with them for the less knowledge intensive jobs.
I understand the principle behind not having a welfare state and I agree with it. However, at least help those who help themselves. It's not as if they aren't trying their best.
Elitism exists everywhere – as long as capitalism exists, elitism will. Those who are better off will scorn those who are worse off, one way or another. Capitalism splits societies into stratas, those at the top end the “haves”, those at the bottom the “have-nots”. Obviously, elitism should not be encouraged as it will cause anti-social behaviours and antipathic feelings within society; in other words, it splits up the society.
As I said, capitalism encourages elitism, and to eliminate elitism requires a country to eliminate its capitalist principles. In laymen terms, resources will be owned by the state, not by individuals and firms. Political methodologies such as authoritarianism and communism practice that. And history has shown that these methods of governance are nothing but mere ideals where everybody is given an equal status. The elite ruling class oppressed its citizens and they were much worse off than they would have been under other forms of governance.
Democratic governments are largely capitalist in nature. Well, mostly. Not adopting capitalist principles causes disincentives to work hard and thwarts creativity. Obviously that would stagnate a country’s growth, which in turn will cause a country to lag behind in this extremely competitive globalised world. It is difficult to find a democratic country that is able to resist the tremendous benefits that capitalism promises and delivers. It can thus be safely argued that elitism exists in most, if not all, democratic countries and it will be extremely difficult and almost impossible to eliminate it whether or not you like it.
Even (pseudo) democratic Singapore is by no means free from elitism. In fact, elitism is so profound that it is clearly reflected in the youths of our country. “Get out of my elite uncaring face” is not an unfamiliar phrase amongst Singaporeans. Apathetic attitudes of the privileged and their self declared superiority are worrying. Even more so if all these "values" are deeply rooted in our children. Common folks in Russia once rebelled against the privileged class of insensitive elite oligarchs. Who can be sure that the same will not happen in Singapore?
The narrowing of the income gap between the rich and the poor should be one of the major key concerns of our government. The growth of our country should be enjoyed by all, leaving nobody behind. That, of course, is difficult – but at least the amount of people left behind could be reduced. Schemes should be in place to aid the poor, not suppress them further. The GST is one such example; it is clearly a regressive tax. The poor carry a bigger burden than the rich. I’m not sure about the counter-argument by the government, but I trust that they are fair and just; not blind to the longsuffering of its people.
Elitism cannot be eliminated. But it can be reduced. A way to reduce elitism is to help the poor more. Methods to break out of the cycle such as greater healthcare benefits and educational assistance should be given to less privileged families. “It is better to die than to fall sick in Singapore” is not something unheard of among the common masses. Though the government repeatedly (and seemingly proudly) proclaim “Affordable healthcare for all”, that may not be the exact case. I’ve heard stories of people given potassium laden drugs to quicken their family member’s death just because they cannot afford the healthcare costs. Though the sources and the stories are of questionable nature, expensive healthcare costs are clearly evident. How many times have one heard about other's medisave wiped out with just one hospital stay?
Though meritocracy should be the guiding principle of our country, we have to think of the potentially consequential results of over-indulging in this previously-very-workable model. The poor is part of our society and we have to look after them. It is not their fault that they were born poor, it is not their fault that they fall ill (unless they practice physically damaging activities like smoking) and it is not their fault that they will require treatment and not be able to afford them.
Unless more help is rendered to the helpless, the society will degrade. The rich will continue lining their pockets, growing indignant towards the “less worthy” individuals of our society. These individuals may even be viewed as a stumbling block towards our growth, and be prejudiced more than what they are already receiving unjustly from society.
And the poor will continue to struggle to make ends meet, which is oft worsened by the influx of foreign talents competing with them for the less knowledge intensive jobs.
I understand the principle behind not having a welfare state and I agree with it. However, at least help those who help themselves. It's not as if they aren't trying their best.
Total Comments 0
