What is it to be a member of the “elite”?  How does one become an “elite”?  And why are people against the “elite”?

The word comes from the Latin, eligere, “to elect.”  In general usage, the elite is a relatively small and dominant group within a large society, having a privileged status perceived as being envied by those not elite.

But just exactly what does it mean to be a member of the elite, and why do people like Sarah Palin rail against them?

Apparently, the elite run Washington.  President Barack Obama is the most egregious of the elite in Washington.  Only Democrats are allowed to be elite, too.  All of this is bad, and needs to be changed.

Speaking strictly Latin for a moment, and if the derivation of the term is eligere, “to elect,” then by definition, isn’t Sarah Palin elite?  She was, after all, elected mayor of Wasilla, and governor of Alaska, even though she quit two years into that latter gig.  Does that mean she resigned from the elite, too? Or once in, always in?

Is a person “elite” because of what he or she says or has, or do actions define “elite”? Is there an income threshold that defines one’s status?  If you criticize the “elite” does that make you an un-elite, someone the elite supposedly look down upon?

If upon encountering a person who has painted the face of the first African-American United States President white and marked the face with a swastika you call that person a racist, does that make you elite?

If you call a person who refuses to believe the United States President is a naturally born citizen a “birther” and label that person’s politics “fringe,” or a person who brings a loaded gun to a political gathering to protest the first African-American United States President a “crazy,” does that make you elite?

Doesn’t each major political party consider its beliefs, ideology and platform better and more correct and knowing than the other’s?  Isn’t another way of saying the same thing that you consider your opponent’s views inferior to your own?  Would that make one an elitist? Looking down upon those who disagree with you, apparently makes one an elite.

Just exactly what is an elitist such that the Sarah Palins and the teabaggers hold elitists in such disdain?  And does holding an elitist in disdain make one, himself or herself, an elitist of another sort?  A distinction without a difference?

If a person expects one who would be our President to know that Africa is a continent and not a country, would that person be an elitist?  If a person expects one who would be our President to be able to name the reading sources he or she relies upon to keep abreast of current events, would that person be an elitist?

Then again, the expediency of the moment more often than not trumps virtue in politics.  And so does calling one’s opponent some awful name.  Sticks and stones are, in fact, able to break political bones when used often enough in front of the right audiences.  Keep them in nice, tight ten word increments so they fit well in the evening news, and you have yourself a winner.

On several occasions, these pages have offered advice to Palin – - brush up on history, geography, economics; study the issues, learn them; and when someone asks a substantive question, give a substantive answer.  “I’m against the elite”  as an answer no matter the question just doesn’t cut it.

I suppose, then, the offering of that advice makes me an elitist.  As I said, sticks and stones, former Governor Palin.