The People's Politicians Usually Support Elitist Policies

My friend who lived over in Germany told me once that an interesting feature of a political system that preaches equality is the marked inequality that exists. The countries that push the most for their citizens to be equal have leaders who live unequal lifestyles, whether it was in East Germany or the Soviet Union in the past, or Venezuela or Cuba today. Similarly, the politicians today that push the most for equality appear to be living it up on the people's dime (Obama throwing lavish parties and remodeling limo's), or using the people's dime to implement policies that support the elite in our country. As surprising as it is to some, conservatives and Republicans and the policies they promote lead to more equality than liberals and Democrats. As an example of this, I found a really good post over at Jack McHugh's Blog:

My colleague noticed an announcement on the website of the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor and Economic growth about a state government “Vibrant Small Cities Initiative” program to hand out some $6 million in federal money to subsidize “façade improvements” on downtown buildings.

She was pondering the distinction between “vibrant cities” and the “cool cities” that Gov. Granholm has touted as another government central-planners’ vision of how to revitalize Michigan. I suspect there’s no difference, that both are buzz-words describing an particular elite class’s vision of an ideal setting that in many cases they themselves do not choose.

Here’s my attempt to define the contents of that vision. (Granholm wants to give taxpayer money to support places) with high-density population that are inhabited by: older, upper-middle class singles or empty-nesters, college students who are the offspring of upper-middle class families, or unmarried or childless college grads in their 20s or early 30s from the same upper-middle class background.

(Granholm does not want to support) suburban or urban neighborhoods inhabited by: families with children (or any income level), individuals or families who prefer the privacy and space of single family homes, or working people with limited incomes and leisure time, or the poor who can't afford to live in the cities.

For all the blather about “diversity,” the inhabitants of this ideal world of Democrats and liberals is a narrow class-driven vision of elites.