What is elitism?

With reference to www.dictionary.com,

elitism
[ih-lee-tiz-uhm,ey-lee-]

consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group. The interpretation of Elitism can be as follows: feeling that oneself is superior than others in terms of academic, physical capability etc than other people. People who are elitist often have a narrow and warped mindset that they themselves are better than others just because they may be superior in one aspect of life. This is apparent in Singapore, especially in the academics, which can be seen in the evidences substantiated.

Elitism in Singapore
Elitism is the advocacy or existence of an elite dominating element in a system or society. Elitism is prevalent in Singapore and it causes a divide in the minds of the students in Singapore. These students coming from different streams preformed notions about each other and they hesitate to befriend one another. This situation is aggravted when students share with each other misleading negative comments about students from other streams.

Evidences of Elitism

1. Newspaper article by Sandra Leong, an ex-Raffles student

In this newspaper article, it exemplifies how Raffles Junior College students, who never get a chance to mix with others may start to develop cynical views on those who may not be well-off in studies or have a good job. This article highlights that those from elite schools may start to develop an 'exclusionary attitude' and may feel that those who attain less than what is viewed to be good may be ostracized.

2. Wee Shu Min incident From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Wee Shu Min elitism controversy occurred in October 2006. Wee Shu Min, daughter of parliament member Wee Siew Kim and a then-eighteen year-old student on Raffles Junior College's scholarship programme, found herself in controversy after posting on her blog what were viewed by some Singaporeans to be elitist, nave, and insensitive statements against heartlanders. Dismissing the views of Derek Wee who voiced concerns on job security and age discrimination on his blog, she shot back with a take-no-prisoners diatribe, calling Derek a "stupid crackpot", belonging to "the sadder class" and overreliant on the government. Her post also called for Derek to "get out of my elite uncaring face". Her response triggered an avalanche of criticism, as it came on the heels of the sensational suicide of an individual (said to be facing financial difficulties) at Chinese Garden MRT Station. As a result, her name toppedTechnorati's search terms for a week. She has since appeared to have apologised on another blog and shut down her own. Response In response to the scandal, Wee Siew Kim stated that he supported Shu Min's point in principle and that "people cannot take the brutal truth," but he and Shu Min's college principal also expressed disappointment and counselled her to be more sensitive towards others. Wee also claimed that his daughter's privacy had been violated. Critics pointed out however, that he appeared to have endorsed her elitist remarks and failed to address values such as empathy and humility, and that he was apologising for the tone, but not the content of his daughter's response. Furthermore, the government had previously made it clear that there was no such thing as Internet privacy with the imprisonment of bloggers under the Sedition Act just over than a year earlier, and that Wee Shu Min should be old enough to take responsibility for the consequences of her statements.

3. Newspaper article by Muhammad Farouq Osman

" I READ with interest Mr Zakir Hussain's article last Friday, 'Meritocracy's hidden danger' which gives a revealing insight into Singapore's brand of meritocracy. The article states that about 53 per cent of Public Service Commission scholarships go to those who live in private property. While there is general acquiescence that these scholarships are indeed awarded on the basis of academic performance and individual achievement alone, the preponderance of the socially privileged among them merits scrutiny. These students largely hail from the crme de la crme of schools and have benefited from the various schemes that cater to the academically talented, such as the Education Ministry's Gifted Education Programme. Their dominant social status arising from higher household incomes suggests that they possess the cultural capital required to 'make it' in life, as nurtured by their parents who are likely to have attained qualifications at the tertiary level. In their scholastic journey, this group of students are likely to be enrolled in the Integrated Programme where, since 2004, they have been allowed to bypass the O-level examinations, in favour of taking the A Levels at the end of a six-year course.

This is a manifestation of greater elitism being built into the education system, where the same elite minority continue to receive value-added education throughout their schooling years at the expense of vast amounts of public funds. As a result, Singapore's education system, which has always been held up as a model of social mobility for all, is attenuated because one group benefits from a distinct advantage over the others. The public perception that there is an inherent link between students from wealthier households and high academic achievement is pervasive. Over the years, there have also been concerns about the attitudes of these students who are among the best and brightest and who are likely to secure positions of pre-eminence in society in the future. The raison d'etre for this stems from the fact that there have been several scholars who are known to have broken their government bonds in favour of more lucrative job offers, which smacks of individualistic competition and selfishness, among other factors. There is the danger of a dichotomy developing in an increasingly stratified Singapore society, exacerbated by widening income gaps where the mentality of 'us versus them' prevails. By then, the people's faith in our so-called meritocratic system would have shattered." Muhammad Farouq Osman

Rethinking Elitism Part 1

Posted by theonlinecitizen on November 3, 200813 Comments

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 dont 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 laymans 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! Im 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), Im 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, Im not suggesting that individuals who speak Singlish are less capable. My point is that the manner of presentation of ones 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 ones 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, Im 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 cant. 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.