American Elite Do Not Like Luxury Consumption And Vulgar Culture.

American elite do not like luxury consumption and vulgar culture.

Without Trump, no one will draw attention from everyone. The elite will face the ultimate torture of "whether the existing social system is really fair".

About 20 years ago, columnist David Brooks captured David's spirit of the times.

In his book Bobos inParadise, he announced the combination of Bohemia militants in 1960s and bourgeois who pursued money in 1980s.

This combination is represented by theClintons and Clinton.

The Episcopal elites in the United States have been replaced by the genuine and practical schools of thought.

Any talented person can join.

"Each according to his ability, according to his ability."

Brooks wrote.

These elite do not like luxury consumption and vulgar culture.

At that time, just like now, Donald Trump ranked the top of the list of DonaldTrump list.

His victory consolidated and shattered their world outlook.

Behind the assertion that Trump is wrong, there is a kind of anxiety which can not be directly expressed.

Trump distracted people's attention and let people forget about the ultimate torture. But this matter can not be postponed indefinitely.

When the elite of the United States look at their hearts, what will they see? First, the impact of self cognition.

The bourgeois (Bohemia) people think they can take into account both accumulation of capital and moral superiority without sacrificing anything.

If you study hard and get real talent, there will be a lot of top social positions.

But there is a flaw in this idea.

American elites have accumulated endless wealth.

This brings three problems to others.

First, the elite invest their extra wealth in copying their advantages.

Children who grow up in the ordinary non wealthy areas have little chance of becoming elite.

Their parents do not have strong social capital like the rich.

The suspension bridge is being retracted.

The gap between elitism and open self image and reality is enormous.

Psychologists call it "self discrepancy".

Economists call it barriers to entry.

The second response to such immense wealth is to create other kinds of scarcity.

Because most people now own basic goods - automobiles, smart phones and university education - material things are not signs of success.

Conspicuous consumption is convergent.

People are fighting for scarce commodities, such as a IvyLeague degree or living in a community where you don't need a car.

Cultural superiority is also one.

The creed advocated by the American elite is the so-called science, technology, engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education.

But that's for others.

Social capital is embodied in knowing when and who to say something - this is a complex skill.

Skill learning is left to others.

The children of the elite are learning how to raise money for charity.

Economists define this as positionalgood.

Sociologists call it virtue signalling.

Trump calls it political correctness.

The third challenge is the most difficult to solve.

With too much capital to chase too few investment opportunities, Laurence, former US Treasury Secretary, called LawrenceSummers secularstagnation, now the "arms race" in education has become a curse that the United States can hardly shake off.

The current position does not match the diploma obtained by the millennial generation.

Nowadays, it is not easy to be a child of a successful class.

Children must spend more time and harder studying than their parents before they can find jobs, which are often very sorry for their efforts.

The children of the wealthiest group do not need student loans, but live on their parents' capital.

Others are hard to prove that this high investment is worth it.

It's as if they were led to the promised land at sunset.

The proportion of input and output is rising.

The more people who study, the lower the return on education.

You always need more diplomas, which most people can't afford.

Losers get frustration instead of capital.

This brings us back to Trump.

During the presidential election in 2016, he said, "I love people who have little education."

This seems to be a rude sentiment.

But it attracts a lot of people, because this is exactly the opposite of what other politicians say.

Trump's tweets revealed that he was a semi illiterate.

What he wants to say is "there (there)", which is written as "their (he / she / their)".

What he wants to say is "unprecedented (unprecedented)", which is written as "unpresidented."

He quotes the place where he should not have quotes.

Trump's funny behavior is a comfortblanket for the intellectual elite.

He confirmed our sense of moral superiority.

But he also erodes this sense of moral superiority.

Somewhere in our bourgeois unconscious, we realized that Trump was not an accident.

He lifted up a broken mirror and illuminated our illusion.

When we laugh at him, he draws strength.

When he provoked, we made mistakes.

However, we can not help ourselves.

He is too intolerable.

The deepest secret we hide is here.

We need Trump as he needs us.

This is a terrible symbiotic relationship.

Without Trump, no one would divert everyone's attention.

We may be forced to see if we have adhered to our values.

Do we like highly educated people? Do they deserve praise for holding a diploma? Or should we reexamine what we call a fair society? Please tell me your answer by e-mail or twitter, but it is better to use the right English.