<p>Yeah, I seriously doubt that happens.</p>
<p>Straight from the horse's mouth. Try Bangor. :)</p>
<p>So that's a different argument. You resent that some extracurricular activities tend to be dominated by wealthy people who have the wherewithal to hire the personal trainer for the athlete, pay for private lessons on an expensive instrument, etc. Is that correct? </p>
<p>How do you propose that people's ability to choose how to spend their own money be limited? For example, there's a different thread about a young lady in Chicago who was homeschooled; her parents were upper middle class but nothing really over the top. They took their resources and instead of buying fancy cars and vacations and jewelry and what-not, they used them to buy some educational experiences for her, including a harp, a French tutor, classes at various cultural institutions in Chicago, etc. The girl was clearly incredibly gifted academically and took full advantage of these resources. Would it be preferable if they had spent their money on cars and jewelry, just because not everyone can afford a harp, a French tutor, and classes at cultural institutions? </p>
<p>Life is unfair. Get used to it.</p>
<p>Ha! well all I can say is that my high school has the best debate team in California (well maybe not now, but last year we did), and I know some of the kids, especially the best on the team. They arent as you describe. They arent rich. Their parents are not lawyers. The kids are just insanely skilled in debate. Last year I remember our school announcing who won 1st in state in various forms of debate, and I think like 7 or 8 of our kids placed top 3 in at least one type of debate, with 4 or 5 taking home titles for 1st in state in as many as 3-5 different types of debate.</p>
<p>The best kid in our school last year placed in nationals all 4 years he did debate I think, and he was valedictorian last year and is currently attending Stanford. The best kid on the team this year is going to Stanford,too.</p>
<p>I'm a left libertarian. I'm not opposing the ability of people to make spending choices and that's the last thing I'm suggesting.</p>
<p>I'm only encouraging new means to <em>break</em> (into) the existing entrenched culture, and this is the hegemony I'm talking about in the thread title.</p>
<p>I don't have some long-running vendetta against the wealthy, only against particular attitudes borne by some. I've always noticed there was a cultural divide, but it wasn't till I came into CC (in a sort of baptism by fire) that I realised the full extent and the real source of that divide. </p>
<p>Besides solutions requiring a drastic change of societal norms, I initially only asked for how other people dealt with that divide, since it seems much of CC is on the other side of that divide. I'm not jealous, anymore than a freshwater fish is jealous of the shark :) -- but the cultural divide exists, and at times even discourages other individuals from joining.</p>
<p>Break into the entrenched culture you resent? If you resent it so much why would you want people to break into it?</p>
<p>Anyway, people have a choice over how they choose their money and over what educational opportunities they take advantage of. I am not rich, single mother, income under $100K, under $50K for most of my life, but I have been VERY LUCKY as I've had private piano lessons + classes at a local music school plus college classes etc., some of which I pay for, some of which my mom pays for, some of which I get financial aid for, some of which my mom is in debt for, some of which my mom has borrowed money from family members for, etc.. She has always really valued education for my sister and me as well as for herself; she went to graduate school and got an MBA, even though it meant having $0 income for one year and going crazy trying to find money for things. Now, she is able to make more than before, and basically, improve our family's situation in life. Yes, it is possible to take advantage of traditionally expensive educational opportunities with low/medium income - it just means searching like heck for financial aid, and working like heck to improve your situation.</p>
<p>Is it easy? No, it's required A LOT of work, especially on my mom's part. But it's totally possible. But I think the "Cultural divide" you speak of is more connected to how willing people are to work. If you want to get educated, find a way to educate yourself. No "cultural divide" is going to stop you if you're willing to do the work, no matter how poor you are. If you don't want to work hard, you're never going to improve your life standings - whether you're rich or poor. So the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. But don't say there's no way to improve your lot in life, because there IS - and it's called working like heck to meet your goals. </p>
<p>And yes, the hard work can even beat the teams who hire lawyers to look at their debates - there are books on logic that people can always use for consultation and I'm sure there is some lawyer out there who would do it for free in exchange for being able to say he/she "Sponsored" a high school debate team. It just takes a lot of effort and searching.</p>
<p>Pizza girl: If Bill Gates is to the right of median as are many others - how can it be skewed to the left???????? Median isn't mean, there are exactly half of the people lower and half higher. It doesn't matter if there are 1million people making 49999 and 1 million each making a billion. The point is half the people are living on <$50000.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Break into the entrenched culture you resent? If you resent it so much why would you want people to break into it?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Because I love debate but don't like the dominance of private and affluent schools? (At least for my state...) </p>
<p>When I say, "break into," I necessarily meant to reduce its hegemony. I see a lot of people there who are basically there because they were told to do it -- not so much that they don't have the passion (they do), but had those same people life not been born under conditions so fortunate, would they still seek that same pursuit? Our team sought the opportunity for ourselves, and we outcompeted past many schools' traditional positions even though this is our first year, attaining third place in the state. We went against the gradient, despite all our disadvantages -- many who were more affluent simply went with it. </p>
<p>
[quote]
No "cultural divide" is going to stop you if you're willing to do the work, no matter how poor you are.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not stop your will perhaps, but you can't succeed in many endeavours alone.</p>
<p>i specifically remember as a kid driving past the local catholic parochial school and saying, "St. Mary's kids are snots". i ended up there a few years later, where the kids were not snotty, and where my peers at my nice public elementary school had larger salaries than that of some of my classmates. now i travel an hour to school everyday to go to an all-girls catholic school (i only have to drive down a few more times though; calc exam & graduation!!!) Not everyone is super wealthy, some kids picked where they went to college based on the best scholarship packages, others drive bmws to school. as far as i have seen, how intellectual someone is, and their wealth, have no correlation. Are you really going to say that woodrow wilson wasn't intellectual? how many famous authors, poets, greats, etc, have come from wealthy families? even ghandi wasn't born in poverty. the heaviness of someone's pockets doesn't determine the depth of thoughts in their mind. i might fit into the $100,000 income bracket, frankly i don't know for sure b/c my parents just don't tell me that stuff. however neither came from super wealthy families (though both g'pas have phds, but they did military service=education $) one thing going to highschool has taught me is that you can never judge a book by its cover. my mom teaches at the local middle school(i.e.-much lower average income bracket). a lot of kids have psychological problems and messed up home lives. however just as many kids in my high school have issues of some sort. one rich girl's parents are practically verbally abusive to her. at least four girls in a class of 80 have had eating disorders, and i think there is enough prozac and lexapro going around the school to indicate that money doesn't=happiness. some rich parents are still ignorant of psychological problems. i was lucky and have amazing parents. it just seems that you are just as prejudice against those who have money, as you think the world is against people like you.<br>
high school has been hell for me. i'd gladly trade-in my mom's volvo for a beat up ford if i could have been happier. maybe you've been with a rotten bunch of rich kids, but before you knock all rich kids down, take a chance to get to know them...........</p>
<p>p.s.- i don't have my own car, i've never been to disney(although i have been to france twice and am going to spain this summer, but my mom's a foriegn language teacher (french and spanish)), i don't own any tiffany's, and i don't brag about going to key west every year to visit with my grandparents. there are probably two pictures on facebook from the six yrs i've gone. every trip i take is with or about family.........
oh and my dad went to ohio state, it was that or live at home and go to college in cinnci...</p>
<p>I still fail to see the point of this thread. Besides the esoteric ramblings of some and the downright bitter rants of others, the point is that it's sad to demean an entire "class" as you would put it, to your idea of their "culture" (and some may not even follow that culture)
My father grew up dirt poor, and was the first one to go to college. He still struggles with the fact that he hated this "culture" as you termed it when he was young, but then discovered that was merit in this "culture". Because there is merit. All you've done is stereotypically belittled it materialistic.<br>
My mother went through the Culture Revolution and suffered greatly. She came here, and guess what? She's made it. Both of my parents are what you patronize as "privileged" in their fiscal situation. Probably extremely privileged. Because my mom likes her car. And she doesn't feel any obligation to make other people's kids "appreciate" her idea of culture nor does she feel that she should enforce the idea of education and social mobility to people who don't want to hear it. But I bet their grasp of what their own culture is a lot better than your stereotype of it. </p>
<p>You are idealistic for all the wrong reasons. You want to change the culture, because of your narrow minded picture of what the culture and its demographic is. Perhaps the first thing you should do before your Crusade is realize that most people don't feel they need to be "saved" from their culture, and they aren't big fans of a Messiah who has learned much, but understands little internally.<br>
Don't based everything you believe on your anecdotes. Because the world does not necessarily reflect your opinion of the world.</p>
<p>I do know that culture internally; I was raised in that culture when I was much younger ... I used to go to school in a rich little yuppie town where the median income was around $100,000 or higher (of course I didn't know this till later).</p>
<p>This was of course, before my family's divorce. </p>
<p>I have been on both sides of the fence.</p>
<p>DocT - I explained precisely how the median can be skewed. Where exactly did you learn that the median is the infallible average? It's very strong assuming a normal distribution, and NYC's income levels are bimodal.</p>
<p>Galoisien - My high school had one of the best debate teams in the country, and I know personally how hard each of them worked to achieve that. None of them hired lawyers. I've never heard of any other team hiring a lawyer to proofread evidence or anything of the like, and I live in a fairly wealthy neighborhood. Imho, this is a suspicion that you're applying to a broad swath of debaters that don't warrant it. Maybe you were beaten simply because they were better. Did that ever come to mind?</p>
<p>As for the wealthy being more intellectual, a relatively stable lifestyle allows for the pursuit of knowledge. It's a fact of life - why do you think nobles and monks were the two primary scholarly classes for centuries? You can't hate rich people for being corpulent, materialistic twits while turning around and bemoaning their strength in the intellectual fields. So they should live frugally, but they shouldn't use that hard-earned money to buy books, take extra classes and learn more either? So what do you propose they do? Donate all of it to their alma mater so angry resentful young men like you can attend college on scholarships?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maybe you were beaten simply because they were better. Did that ever come to mind?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Huh? It was our first year, and we actually defeated that team (or at least I did). I was beaten by people who were better than me -- I don't get where you think I contest otherwise -- but not by that team. But those were by people who went with the grain, not against.</p>
<p>(We didn't have enough debaters to win sweeps -- but the teams with the lawyers did.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
As for the wealthy being more intellectual, a relatively stable lifestyle allows for the pursuit of knowledge. It's a fact of life - why do you think nobles and monks were the two primary scholarly classes for centuries? You can't hate rich people for being corpulent, materialistic twits while turning around and bemoaning their strength in the intellectual fields. So they should live frugally, but they shouldn't use that hard-earned money to buy books, take extra classes and learn more either? So what do you propose they do? Donate all of it to their alma mater so angry resentful young men like you can attend college on scholarships?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>They aren't supposed to do anything.</p>
<p>We're supposed to come up with ways to break down their closed culture. It is our imperative, not theirs. ;)</p>
<p>galoisien:
"They aren't supposed to do anything.</p>
<p>We're supposed to come up with ways to break down their closed culture. It is our imperative, not theirs."</p>
<p>do i nose some marxism?</p>
<p>p.s.-by saying that they shouldn't do anything, you imply that they are too selfish, preoccupied, or oblivious to start any change. or at least that's what i inferred. i hope that it doesn't come to storming the Bastille...</p>
<p>pps-i have a rather wealthy friend at school who realizes that she is materialistic (that's how she has been raised) and wants to change, and is therefore looking forward to college. she's also one of the most kind and conscientious people i know. introspection and epiphanies do occur. (saul to paul?)</p>
<p>
[quote]
pps-i have a rather wealthy friend at school who realizes that she is materialistic (that's how she has been raised) and wants to change, and is therefore looking forward to college. she's also one of the most kind and conscientious people i know. introspection and epiphanies do occur. (saul to paul?)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not disputing that occurs, and I very much appreciate people like that.</p>
<p>These however, tend only to be in the minority ....</p>
<p>
[quote]
do i nose some marxism?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, (left) libertarianism. When your group ain't doing well, you're suppose to rouse them to compete and dethrone the reigning champions in the same way they originally got their power.</p>
<p>I simply want to end the pattern of having rich school after rich school win tournament after tournament. I'm not suggesting a revolution, just more attention towards the lower-income schools.</p>
<p>I work for one of the big law firms in NYC and I can tell you that many, if not most, of those firms sponsor either debate or mock trial teams. The teams come to the firm weekly during the year and are coached and prepped. Lots and lots of fun.</p>
<p>galoisien, that's never going to happen. People who have wealthier parents generally have higher-educated parents, who in turn place more emphasis on education for their children and use their substantial resources to prepare their children for that education. People whose parents were absent working 3 jobs (which is admirable) would not have had that type of preparation. Innate brilliance is not unheard-of in lower-income schools, but one would be hard-pressed to find as many brilliant students in a lower-income school who have the financial security to pursue ECs that require such intense thought and preparation--like debate.</p>
<p>"I do know that culture internally; I was raised in that culture when I was much younger ... I used to go to school in a rich little yuppie town where the median income was around $100,000 or higher (of course I didn't know this till later).</p>
<p>This was of course, before my family's divorce."</p>
<p>Did you hate the culture of privilege when you were still in it? Or is this just sour grapes because of your own family's personal circumstances?</p>
<p>OP you need to take a step back from all this intellectual and theroetical discussion and face the reality of the world.</p>
<p>I'd just like to point out that in my 10 months on CC, this has been the most stimulating thread I have ever read. I particularly liked ee33ee's description of middle-class disillusionment as well as Zamzam's rebuttal regarding the difference between median income and the middle class state-of-mind and worldview.</p>
<p>To the OP: Much of the flaming that has taken place in this thread has been a result of misinterpretations of your posts or careless derogatory, inappropriate statements that you made that really had no relation to your overall theme of contempt for certain aspects of the "entrenched culture" of many "privileged" families. While your argument in itself is highly worthy of discussion, your main message is convoluted by your inability to express yourself without spitting out insulting, unrelated comments in which you deride many aspects of the middle class. The middle class is the staple of American society and the foundation of the American Dream (whether you care for it or not, it is fundamental to our culture and the ideologies of the Founding Fathers), and to mock the "privileged" of society (whom you claim to be making as little as $100k annually, which where I live, is purely middle class) demonstrates your lack of understanding of the social structure of America -- without the "hegemony" of the "privileged," there wouldn't be any elite colleges, since everything would be run by the government and all people would be on "equal" grounds. Where do you think private universities get their money? Why do you think elite universities attract the best students? It's because students seek to eventually attain these "privileged" lifestyles that you so harshly denounce.</p>
<p>Because of this contradiction, your argument really makes no sense logically.</p>