There is a large amount of discourse surrounding the concept of “The Elite”. and what exactly they are. From the political perspective policy is typically crafted and developed by the persuasive and influential and we may term these developers as the elite. We often talk of how society is run by elites. We may discuss ideas of intellectual elites or economic elites that possess specific knowledge. However, the preface of our discussions never really describe what the elite in society are, how we measure their influence, or more interestingly how we create and replicate them if necessary (or desirable). We don’t even really agree on what it is that makes a person an elite and if they are, then how elite they are. So, what the elite are is of concern but as of now does not have a persuasive enough ontology for me to work with.
We can start by looking at the least persuasive arguments. On the one end of the spectrum of arguments, there are those who would argue that the elite is just someone that possesses a large amount of material means. This is a person who has a lot of money, and possibly a lot of influence or power because of such money. But, we can observe that money itself is a means without purpose. Most money made is just hoarded and not utilized when we really begin discussing the ultra-wealthy. There are those who obtain vast amounts of material wealth and do nothing political or social with it. Most importantly, possession of wealth qua wealth does not convey any specific intellectual or personal talents. But, if it is necessary that the elite possess some ability to levee influence then this must be the actionable part of the argument. So, it is not necessary that a person possess vast wealth to be considered elite only that they possess some influence.
Many people possess influence. In strict hierarchies, all influence is essentially coerced. By nature of the structure, the influence begins at the top and decreases as it moves downwards. The king possesses the most influence by nature of their being king. However, in a liberal democracy, the assumption is that there is no hard constructed hierarchy and that all citizens are mostly equal. So then, how do we go about identifying who the elite are in an egalitarian society? One way is to possibly measure the effects of their actions. We might look to activists, intellectuals, and artists as elites in some way. But then we might say that simply being one of these categories does not necessarily make one elite. Dividing into categories is often done for simplicities sake because it narrows down the necessary conditions to make a thing. When we discuss an intellectual elite, we might think of a person who has written a book about a subject or spent a lot of time developing their thought on a specific topic. They have some kind of unique perspective on something. But to categorize elites is akin to putting athletes on a field. If categories are just the skill positions elites play then they each only reign in a single domain. And it is hard to argue that a person with specific knowledge in a domain possess much influence outside of it even though this may be the case. Academics will readily point out that the vast majority of work being done in universities largely only matters to other academics. And the academics that do manage to escape academia and influence outside of the tower generally do so by doing something else. Nevertheless, they contain within themselves the ability to change minds. This common thread is something they share with the wealthy person that may choose to use their money to influence. So, the elite must be some kind of person of influence regardless of field. This point makes the concept more inclusive. If we are to include artists an activists as possible elites we’d be hard pressed to say that activism is a field of occupation and not a lifestyle, calling, pastime, side hustle, etc. The same for art.
My concerns are that the systems by which elites develop are themselves the confounders. Capitalism and democracy are themselves largely the drivers of our society. If capitalism is the engine of our civilization then democracy is the attitude we drive it with. For this writing these parameters will set the boundaries. It is safe to say that most things invented in capitalism are to drive the creation of capital and there are few things a person can engage with that are incapable of generating capital (for now). One such thing might be the generation of an idea or engagement with ideas. It’s free. Engaging with art requires capital but the pursuit of which mostly generates none. Ideas themselves become commodities, things that can be bought and sold, with narratives attached that can be used to influence people. Certain conspiracy theories for instance possess vast amounts of influence. They change the way people view reality (or the other way around?). They can influence behavior and interactions in the real world. They can change the way people vote. Belief against all evidence that an election is illegitimate is one way that these ideas take effect. And these ideas are generally created by an individual or group of individuals with an agenda and a desired effect of their thought. So, an idea with a desired effect might make up a significant portion of elite behavior.
Establishing what elite behavior is could be difficult. The idea implies that elites are in some way similar enough to be identified through their actions. If they are similar then it stands to reason they have an origin of some point. If they have an origin, a reasonable question is whether or not they can be created. Are the elite organic and is there a way to replicate them? If we were in an original position, or a Hobbesian state of nature, could we somehow manufacture our own elite? And if we could, why would we?
At this point I’d state that the elite is someone with the ability to commodify influence for a desired effect. This person can be flat broke and have no formal actionable field of expertise. They simply need to harness the ability to generate an idea, get people to buy into it, and utilize that idea to achieve a desired effect. Elites can be big or small, positive or negative. But they still exist within a larger contextual system (or set of systems) that dictate the parameters of their behavior. Regardless, they possess some kind of outsize privilege compared to their peers. The next task for this project is to identify exactly how it is these people wield power.
Way Past Policy 