Thng Yiren / Writer
Always a hot topic of debate and even bitterness, elitism and general attitudes of snobbishness has frequently been featured on the spotlight especially when youths are concern. This is a legitimate cause of concern. However, I feel that if we were to engage this topic meaningfully, we would need the establishment of certain premises before an objective view can be generated. As such, allow me to humbly suggest possible “assumptions” that could possibly hinder this discussion.
The Branding of Elitism
Fundamentally, the branding of elitism begs the question: Who determines the labeling? I would venture so far to suggest that while certain groups of individuals from the top schools behave in an elitist manner, the branding actually originate from the man on the street rather than the elites themselves. We have to recognize that “elitism” may simply be a label, a collective term superimposed by others onto students in top schools. Or consider the brand “Atas”, which means top or high up in malay. “Atas school”, “Atas people”. Now I don’t think that an individual would go so far to create such a title or label from himself. “Atas School” actually originates from the man on the street himself.
Therefore, the next consideration would be why people label certain groups as being elitist. Allow me to be the defense attorney for students in top schools today. With the exclusion of the minority bunch of snobs, a layman’s benchmark of elitism may simply be speech. Perhaps the usage of proper English may be considered stiff and inflexible as compared to the hard-hitting impact of Singlish.
For example, “The lecturer is simply unable to engage his audience! I’m simply astounded by this farcical waste of time, where it is evident that the lecturer is ill-prepared and perhaps intellectually vacuous.” Compare this with “ Wah Lao! The lecturer cmi (cannot make it), I’m very sian!”. Both touch on the same aspects and carry the same message, but the packaging could possibly result in the labeling of “Elitism”. Beyond the Wee Shu Min saga, we may have to go all the way down to deal with the subconscious levels of perception.
Now, I’m not suggesting that individuals who speak Singlish are less capable. My point is that the manner of presentation of one’s thoughts combined with the prior biases of the reputation of a top school can result in this branding. This, I feel, would actually constitute to the root of the problem, where the general attitude in my humble opinion is one of “Elites do things this way lor”.
Elitism will always exist
With all due respect to many who point out that the Singaporean system of the GEP and IP programs result in social stratification, I humbly beg to differ. I think that while their intentions may be noble, they miss the point. To advocate that the system is flawed in some extents is true but inadequate. Transcending beyond systemic technicalities and schemes, we have to recognize that perception is build upon binary opposites.
BAD / GOOD
GOOD / BETTER
BETTER / BEST
BEST / BEST OF THE BEST
You see, no matter what academic system is adopted, the best among a particular group would naturally surface. Therefore, while promoting elites and not elitism may be the most desirable, how far can we promote that?
I think that critics have been too harsh and unrealistic. The propensity for one’s “head to grow big” is a flaw that we have to acknowledge. While one may argue that that there are individuals who actively contribute to society in humility, there would always be groups who would actively embrace their identity as an elite, thus leading to a proliferation of elitism. Even in young children, a kindergarten teacher would observe that some children are naturally selfish and would try to, for example, collect the most colour pencils or finish a piece of work faster. When praised for a job well done, there is already a smug look present. From young, some already receive accolades but lack the coping mechanisms to handle the “fanfare” from fellow peers.
Egalitarianism cannot be attained
Potentially, this would be a very sore point for many, so if I happen to offend anyone out there, I offer my sincere apologies but I feel that this is a pivotal point on the issue of elitism.
Simply put, egalitarianism means an equal treatment of individuals, which in context here, would mean equal funding and opportunities for each student.
However, we know that this is not the case, where certain schools do offer more privileges to the students, as they are deemed “more receptive and capable”. As such, I think that one major part of the issue on elitism is jealousy.
No doubt certain individuals may behave in an obnoxious manner, but as I have stated in my first premise, we have to consider the person who is doing the labeling. Could he be possibly sore that he does not get to enjoy the privileges accorded to others? In other words, students from top schools get many opportunities, thus making them elitist as they feel they have more than others, or is it the other way round, where students from top schools are the elite, therefore they should be exposed to maximize their potential?
It is a difficult word to hear, but this jealously is predicated upon an inferiority complex. Think about it. Would the average person be intimidated by an individual who achieves “A” grades and regular accolade from external competitions like Olympiads when he himself (the average person) is struggling?
I think so! Therefore, I think that the man on the street has to acknowledge of his capabilities and put in utmost effort, which would be responsible of him, but to keep in mind of his limitations.
Now, once again, I’m not even labeling anyone as man on the street or the average person, but then, the demarcation is already present! There are definitely individuals out there who are gifted beyond the average mind, and they really do intimidate the average man. In light of this, I think that some groups would have to acknowledge that they may not be as capable as others, and yet not dismiss these gifted individuals as “elitists”.
The concept of interpellation is defined by the French philosopher Louis Althusser as the imposition of an identity via addressing someone. The mere act of addressing someone is an act of imposing a subject position for the addressee. In other words, by labeling someone with the title of “elitist”, many connotations come to mind like arrogance and snobbish. However, is it possible that one particular connotation may be “I wish to be like them, but I can’t. Therefore out of jealously, I will denounce them?”
In conclusion, I feel that the three points surfaced are certain premises that need to be kept in mind when discussing elitism in Singaporean Youths. By no means is this a definitive view, but simply some reflections that I garnered from the discussion of the entire issue. In the follow up, I would like to examine students from the other spectrum, that is the students who are not so academically capable so as to obtain an objective view by weighting both sides of the equation. Ultimately, I think that there would be a general consensus that an apathetic disposition would be a great loss to this aspect of education.
PS: The above views may be potentially offending, and I would be happy to engage any individual who vehemently feels that I am grossly mistaken. Please email me at thngyiren@hotmail.com and I would be glad to hear your views. Thank you again for your indulgence with me.
———-
Hmm… I may be mistaken but the sentiments behind this essay seem to echo those found in this blog post.
I find it rather over-simplifying to argue, if I understood this essay correctly, that resentment against elitism is primarily a result of the non-elites’ jealousy of the privileges and benefits that the elite gets to enjoy…
I agree wholeheartedly with this argument. elitism was never invented by the elites, but by those who fail to attain such a status.
I found this article a pleasure to read.
There will always exist segregation; people will want to label and categories people so that they can deal with them better and know how to react to them. Elitism, i feel, is akin to the marginialisation and discrimination like racism and sexism.
We can continue debating about the terms and how we define elitism etc, but i think what might be more meaningful and productive is to discuss how are we going to reduce the negative effects of marginalistion? Like is it more beneficial to society to allocate opportunities such as an overseas learning trip to the “elite”, who might gain more out of the trip, or to the “average”, who needs it more to get by?
@Overseas Singaporean
If it’s sarcasm, I can understand.
Else, it’s as good as saying the rich is invented by the poor.
My common stand is that it takes two hands to clap. But I would reserve from further comments until I read the next article.
Definitely looking forward…
Yes, the “elite” label (with the negative connotation) MAY BE COINED by the man in the street, but the LABEL STICKS, because that BEHAVIOUR is identifiable. A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
And I don’t think it’s MERELY a Have/Have Not divide.
For instance, I have great respect for Lily Neo, who despite her accomplishments, is able to identify with the poor in her district. While she may have successful attributes of someone who is successful in life, she does not display the arrogance and the disconnect of someone we call elitist.
@laserpointer
“rich”the moniker was never invented by the rich. they’re too busy trying to enjoy the pleasures that follow.
The author fails to separate elites from elitism.
Elites refer to a group or class of persons enjoying superior intellectual or social or economic status.
On the other hand, elitism refers to the superior attitude or behaviour associated with an elite (read “get out of my elite uncaring face”).
Some elites subscribe to elitism. Some don’t.
I don’t dispute that a social segregation between elites and non-elities is natural, but discrimination between the elite class and the non-elite class is nevertheless uncalled for and unnecessary.
“You see, no matter what academic system is adopted, the best among a particular group would naturally surface. Therefore, while promoting elites and not elitism may be the most desirable, how far can we promote that?”
I beg to differ. I believe the key lies in finding a way to ensure that the elites mix sufficiently with the ‘average’ people, so that the average people have a chance to learn some skill that they are not naturally endowed with. Basically, it should be where there is a consistent leveling force between the elites of a particular field and the average man-on-the-street. The elites should not just be humble, but should also share their knowledge and skills with others.
So then, the answer is, yes, we can promote it to the fullest.
It must be remembered that jealousy is the result of continuing inequality, whether it is willed or not by the elite. Jealousy in an elitist is a systemic issue, and not exclusively related to either the ‘elite’ or ‘average joe’.
“we have to recognize that perception is build upon binary opposites.”
Perception is multi-faceted and is not built upon binary opposites. It is just as common to feel mixed feelings about a person, which is why stuff like lovers’ quarrels tend to occur.
As long as people are judged on merit, a group that is most talented will emerge and be recognised as the elite. However, things get complicated – people who are elites in one field or aspect can be a total moron in another. For example, a world famous scientist can be a very poor stock market investor, a very poor manager of people or a very poor communicator.
So, the definition of the elites in Singapore is necessarily narrow because it is almost solely based on examination and academic performance. I’ve had the opportunity to meet and acquaint with people in high office, people with multiple postgraduate degrees and scholars of all shapes and sizes. Let me tell you the truth – it ain’t pretty – in terms of the full spectrum of intelligences (abstract intelligence, social intelligence, emotional intelligence, practical intelligence, creative intelligence, moral intelligence, etc, etc), most of them are quite ordinary, if not truly atrocious!
So, the so-called “elites” are at best pseudo-elites. And the elitist behaviour that they manifest is actually evidence of a lack of intelligence, albeit of the social, emotional and moral kinds. In fact, the truly objectionable part of elitist behaviour is the great pretence and presumption of superiority that “ordinary” people like us have to put up with. Come to think of it, such behaviour can sometimes be hilarious!
My opinion is that actually there is no such a thing as an “elite”, unless it is qualified as an “elite in such and such a field”. So, we can have average examination results, but be talented in many other important ways. Realising this is to realise that this debate on elitism is ultimately a moot one.
What is truly important is the degree of competence in the various roles we play in society!
@Overseas Singaporean
the point is that rich, poor, elites and elitism isn’t just a label or brand.
it isn’t there because we call each other that and the same goes for interpellation.
As for the author, I would advice you to read althusser again. If elites or elitism is just plainly a form of difference in behavioural disposition, there wouldn’t be any difference between anyone if they speak with the same gait and language.
The one importance element that was not mentioned is the advantages that come with academic success in Singapore. They earned more and enjoyed a higher standard of living. The people in the street will view them as elite. The Singapore’s culture placed high values on education and parents will sacrifice to support their children through higher education regardless how much they had to suffer. At one time, education was the route to a better future, it may be still true today. However, if one happen to perform only reasonibly well on the primary six examination and not assigned a good secondary school then one future could be affected. Gan Eng Seng Secondary School was one of them. ( I am not sure what is its current status). A minority of late developer could still end up with BSc and MSc later on in life. Our current education system do not make allowance for late developer and many of our youth was branded before they enter adult life. I had known people who were not “bright” student but was extremely successful in binesess. Intelligent come in many forms and shapes.
The right rule to apply here is:
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
And if you feel there’s something not quite right about this rule:
Napolean is always right!
And if you feel the urge to argue:
Napolean is always right!
And if you feel that it would be sad to accept this rule simply because it’ll always exist:
Napolean is always right!