the belief or attitude that those individuals who are considered members of the elite — a select group of people with outstanding personal abilities, intellect, wealth, specialized training or experience, or other distinctive attributes — are those whose views on a matter are to be taken the most seriously or carry the most weight; whose views and/or actions are most likely to be constructive to society as a whole; or whose extraordinary skills, abilities or wisdom render them especially fit to govern
When applied to the political arena, it suggests that the elites are best able to comments on or lead politically. I find this particularly amusing because most elites are either degreed intellectuals or the trust-fund rich. The problem with these people being in charge of politics is that they are usually out of touch with the goals of politics. Too often these elites are in it because they think they know better, or because of some misconception of Noblesse Oblige. In other words, they enter politics (either as a politician or as an expert on politics. This is not the goal of politics in a democracy such as the US.
The goal of politics in the US is to serve the average citizens. It is the average citizens that make this country great. They do so by working and toiling to provide for their family. The product of their toils is the productivity of the engines of our economy and national wealth. The even more precious product of their toils are young men and women willing to fight and die to protect this country, willing to continue their parents productivity to maintain this country, and generate entrepreneurship and innovation to advance this country. Thus it is the average citizens who makes up and continue the weave that make this country great.
Being richer than the average citizen does not give the elites a mandate for leadership in politics. Being smarter than the average citizen does not give the elites a mantle of leadership in politics. I am in no way suggesting that being rich or being smart disqualify a person for political leadership. Certainly being smart is of great value for any political leaders but it is even more important to know whether that intelligence has been employed to the benefit of the average citizen directly. "What have you done to improve the lives of those around you?"
I believe in political merits, that service has been rendered to help others should be the requisite for political leadership or positions. I want political leaders to be judged based not on what they want to do along. Anyone can promise the moon. I want political to know how the average citizens have benefited from what actions of the politicians. I am particularly tired of politicians and pundits who feel their intelligence and wit allow them to judge others based on elitist concepts without significance for the average citizen, even worse when they belittle and insult the average voters.