Privileged and Elitist

Should Seeking the Best Be a Problem?

There is an attitude in New Zealand which may explain the difficulty that many have in wanting to achieve their full potential. It has been referred to in a couple of ways – the “tall poppy” syndrome, the “politics of envy” – and is characterized by the use of formulaic language or characteristic words that are used to sum up an argument or stereotype an individual or diminish and that person’s standing based, not on the quality of what that person says or the actions that person has done or accomplished but as a result of some vague quality that is found to be unacceptable in the eyes of the critic.

This attitude of envy – created by the political class, mainstream media, social media, and advertisers - has created a culture of covetousness by relentlessly provoking us to envy others and to be envied. The result is not surprising: a deeply indignant and rapacious generation that believes no one is more deserving of advantages and rewards than they.

Envy leads to resentment, which eventually erupts into violence and rage, malicious mobs, cancel culture, and the elevation of dysfunctional political systems such as socialism and Marxism.

Rather than encouraging individuals to rise, the politics of envy promotes the idea that the successful have unfairly taken from others. Politicians and ideologues use this sentiment to stoke division, advocating for punitive taxes, wealth redistribution, and regulatory overreach, not to promote fairness but to punish achievement.

The underlying assumption is that wealth is a zero-sum game—one person’s gain must be another’s loss.

However, history has shown that wealth creation is not finite. Innovation, entrepreneurship, and hard work expand the economy, creating prosperity for all.

Capitalist economies thrive when individuals are incentivized to create, invest, and take risks. The politics of envy disrupts this system by penalizing success, leading to capital flight, reduced economic growth, and fewer opportunities for the very people it claims to help. It is no coincidence that societies most influenced by envy-driven policies—such as those with extreme socialism—tend to stagnate economically and politically.

Beyond economics, the politics of envy breeds resentment and hostility, eroding social cohesion. Instead of celebrating those who achieve success through merit, it conditions people to see them as enemies. This divisiveness weakens the bonds that hold societies together, replacing aspiration with grievance.

Closely related to the politics of envy, the tall poppy syndrome describes the tendency to cut down individuals who rise above the rest. This mindset is particularly strong in collectivist cultures, where standing out is seen as arrogance rather than inspiration. In such societies, achievers face social ostracism, professional sabotage, and institutional barriers designed to suppress individual excellence.

The effects of this are profound. When individuals fear backlash for their success, they may choose to suppress their potential. This discourages ambition, innovation, and leadership. The tall poppy syndrome creates an atmosphere where mediocrity is celebrated while exceptionalism is punished. Over time, this leads to stagnation—both economic and intellectual—because the brightest minds and most talented individuals are either driven underground or leave for environments that reward merit rather than suppress it.

Nations that thrive are those that embrace and encourage excellence. The United States, for much of its history, has been a beacon of meritocracy, attracting the world’s best minds. Conversely, societies that have discouraged individual success in favor of forced equality have often seen their brightest citizens flee or disengage, leading to long-term decline.

The politics of envy and the tall poppy syndrome are often enhanced by the media. In New Zealand this would arise from desire to maintain the image in New Zealand of an egalitarian society and maintaining that myth.

And this is done by the use of words.

The words I want to discuss are “privilege” and “elitism”.

Privilege.

The issue of privilege loomed large recently in a case that went before the High Court on appeal from the Family Court. The issue was that a mother wanted her daughter to attend a private school. The father wanted the daughter to attend a State School.

The report of the case in the NZ Herald for 25 February 2025 outlines the argument and the outcome. I have read the judgment of the Court and the Herald article is a fair summary of what the decision said.

The father argued that a private education is inherently better than that of a public school and that state education offers more to help produce a rounded person. He viewed the private school as an elitist school, which is attended mainly by children from privileged backgrounds. He was concerned the school is separated from and is not representative of the general make-up of New Zealand society and has values that do not accord with his own.

There was another child of the relationship. That child attended a state school. The father argued that it would be unfair for one to attend a state school, and the other one of the “wealthiest, most exclusive, private and privileged religious schools in the country”.

The outcome of the case was that the Judge had to focus not on the father’s views about schooling which would be putting his issues above his daughter’s interests and effectively giving him a “veto” that he didn’t have the right to but on the overriding interests of the child.

The decision accurately records the language that was used by the father and it will be immediately apparent that the derogatory use of “privilege” and “elitist” come to the fore. Clearly the father wanted to use his values as a yardstick to measure the type of education that his daughter might have.

Often comments invoking privilege are based on a raft of assumptions or perceptions and result in stereotyping.

In the case of the school the attack is derogatory, suggesting that there is something wrong with the particular institution because it values high standards and achievement (I will talk about “elitism” in a little while).

So let us have a look at “privilege” and “privileged” in a slightly more objective manner.

Originally, privilege referred to special rights or advantages that a person or group might have in society. In legal and historical contexts, it described exemptions or rights granted to certain classes, often tied to wealth, nobility, or legal immunities.

Over time, especially in discussions about social justice, the term expanded to describe unearned advantages based on race, gender, or socioeconomic status.

While this usage has analytical value, the problem arises when privileged is used as a pejorative rather than a descriptive term.

Instead of simply acknowledging that some people have certain advantages, the word is often used to dismiss their perspectives, undermine their experiences, or imply moral deficiency.

A person who is labeled privileged is frequently treated as though their opinions are less valid, their achievements are unearned, or their concerns are trivial compared to those of less advantaged individuals.

Using privilege as a derogatory term is flawed.

One of the most troubling aspects of the pejorative use of privileged is the assumption that individuals who have any form of advantage do not experience hardship.

Privilege exists on a spectrum, and having certain advantages does not mean a person has lived a life free of struggle.

A wealthy individual may suffer from personal tragedy, a person with racial privilege may experience economic hardship, and someone with educational advantages may still battle mental health issues.

The derogatory use of privileged unfairly dismisses these struggles, reducing individuals to a single aspect of their identity.

Using “privileged” as an insult or accusation often shuts down conversations rather than fostering constructive discussions. Instead of encouraging empathy and understanding, it can provoke defensiveness and resentment.

When people feel attacked or dismissed, they are less likely to engage in meaningful dialogue about systemic inequalities.

If the goal is to raise awareness and encourage positive change, labeling people in a way that alienates them is counterproductive.

Every person’s life is shaped by a unique combination of advantages and disadvantages. While someone may be privileged in one area, they may face significant challenges in another.

The pejorative use of privileged tends to overlook these nuances, treating people as monolithic representatives of their perceived advantages rather than as complex individuals. This reductive thinking prevents a deeper understanding of the factors that shape people’s lives.

Perhaps one of the most problematic effects of the derogatory use of privileged is its ability to silence people based on their background rather than their ideas.

Instead of evaluating arguments on their merit, some dismiss perspectives solely because they come from someone who is deemed privileged.

This is an ad hominem approach that undermines constructive debate and intellectual diversity. People from all backgrounds can contribute valuable insights to discussions about fairness, justice, and opportunity, and their voices should not be invalidated simply because of their circumstances.

Acknowledging one’s advantages does not mean feeling guilty or being shamed—it simply means recognizing factors that may have contributed to one’s position and considering how to use them for good. Similarly, discussions about privilege should be framed in ways that encourage mutual understanding rather than resentment.

A more balanced conversation about privilege recognizes that advantages exist but does not weaponize them against individuals. It acknowledges that while some people may have easier access to opportunities, this does not mean they have not worked hard or deserve what they have.

By shifting the discourse from blame to awareness and understanding, we can foster a more thoughtful and inclusive dialogue about social issues.

Elitism

Elitism is another word that is used as a pejorative. It suggests that one has grown too big for his or her boots and is a manifestation of the tall poppy syndrome.

Ayn Rand considered that the true elite was made up of individuals who excel through their own ability and effort. She saw the true elite as those who think independently, create, and drive human progress.

What could possibly be wrong with that?

A person should try and maximise his or her potential and abilities to the fullest – to be the best they can possibly be.

The derogatory sense of elitism is the belief that a select group of individuals with superior abilities, intellect, or influence should lead or hold power and is often viewed with skepticism in modern democratic societies or used as a term of loathing, especially by the Left.

However, when properly applied, elitism can offer numerous advantages that contribute to social progress, efficiency, and excellence. From governance to education and innovation, elitism ensures that decision-making, leadership, and critical roles in society are entrusted to the most capable individuals. This essay explores the positive aspects of elitism and its role in fostering progress and stability.

One of the strongest arguments in favor of elitism is that it promotes leadership based on merit rather than popularity or mediocrity. In a system where the most knowledgeable, skilled, and competent individuals rise to positions of power, decisions are more likely to be well-informed and effective.

Unlike populism, which can lead to the election of leaders based on charisma or appeal rather than expertise, elitism ensures that those making crucial decisions have the necessary experience and wisdom to guide societies toward long-term stability and prosperity.

Historical examples highlight the benefits of elite leadership. Many of the most successful civilizations, from ancient Greece to the Renaissance city-states, were governed by highly educated elites who prioritized philosophical inquiry, strategic governance, and economic expansion.

In modern times, technocratic governments and expert-led institutions ensure that critical policies, such as economic regulation, healthcare, and national security, are handled by specialists rather than by those swayed by transient public opinion.

Elitism plays an important role in scientific and technological advancement. The world’s most groundbreaking discoveries and innovations have often come from highly specialized individuals who dedicate their lives to the pursuit of knowledge.

Fields such as medicine, engineering, and artificial intelligence demand exceptional talent, years of rigorous training, and intellectual discipline—qualities cultivated in elite academic and research institutions.

Universities and research centers, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Oxford, or the Max Planck Institute, thrive on elitism by selecting and nurturing the best minds.

This selective process ensures that innovation is driven by those with the highest levels of expertise, resulting in advancements that benefit society as a whole.

For instance, the development of vaccines, space exploration, and quantum computing would not be possible without the contributions of intellectual elites.

Elitism also plays a crucial role in the preservation and advancement of culture, literature, and the arts. Throughout history, artistic and literary movements have been shaped by elite intellectual circles that pushed the boundaries of creativity and expression.

From the Renaissance masters to the literary elite of the Enlightenment, the pursuit of excellence has produced some of humanity’s greatest cultural achievements.

In modern times, elite institutions such as Juilliard, the Royal Academy of Arts, and elite publishing houses continue to uphold high standards in their respective fields. Without such institutions fostering excellence, cultural production might be diluted by mediocrity, reducing the depth and complexity of artistic expression.

A well-managed economy depends on the expertise of financial elites who understand global markets, economic policies, and fiscal responsibility.

Countries with strong economic institutions, often led by elite policymakers, experience greater stability and growth.

Central banks, financial regulators, and economic think tanks ensure that fiscal policies are formulated based on data, research, and long-term planning rather than political expediency.

Entrepreneurial elites also play a key role in job creation and technological progress. Visionary leaders such as Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Warren Buffett have reshaped industries, driving innovation and economic expansion.

By fostering elite talent in business and finance, societies benefit from wealth generation, investment opportunities, and the creation of new industries.

Elitism also safeguards the integrity of institutions by ensuring that positions of responsibility are filled by individuals who have demonstrated exceptional competence and ethical responsibility.

This is particularly important in fields such as law, medicine, and education, where decisions have profound consequences for individuals and society.

Legal systems, for instance, rely on highly trained legal professionals, judges, and scholars to interpret and apply the law effectively. Without an elite class of legal experts, the rule of law could be undermined by arbitrary or uninformed decisions.

Similarly, medical elitism ensures that only the most qualified professionals practice medicine, maintaining high standards of patient care and safety.

So when the father in the case mentioned above considers the private school as an elitist school, given the examination that I have undertaken that term should be a badge of honour and a place dedicated to the highest standards. What more could a parent wish for a child than that she attend a school that fosters elitist values.

To conclude – the media will continue to use these terms in a derogatory sense. What is important is to avoid the trap that they are setting.

Rejoice in the things that you have that are an advantage – they don’t necessarily mean you are “privileged”.

Strive to be an elitist – be the best you can be.