Fleck wrote:
It's also a term often foisted on the educated, in that they know too much. I get confused by this - don't we want the smart people, who really know what they are doing on certain things to be guiding use. The former Conservative government of Stephen Harper when it was getting "Tough on Crime", was HEAVILY criticized by academics in Sociology and Criminology (people that actually study this professionally for a living) - we don't need to get Tough of Crime. If you want to do something about crime do this . . . But those academics, where written off by the Harper Government, as elites who did not know what they were talking about! When I queried my Conservative MP at the time - she told me that when she was talking to people in the riding ( a very affluent one), at their front doors, she was told that the government needed to do something about crime. That it was "out of control", and people were really worried. Of course, all those front-door analysis's are wrong! Crime rates are at their lowest in 30 years and dropping faster than they ever have!
Who do we want making these decisions? The guy at his front door, who really has no idea what he's talking about, or academics, who really do know what's going on?
It's concerning to me when the guy-at-the front door, is making decisions on large social policy issues that will cost $billions!
I don't know about you, but when I think of the qualities I want in the leader of my country, "smarter than me" is rater higher than "can have a beer with"