The American distaste for elitism is strange.
It is strange because, in a society that has a market economy as a fundamental pillar, one would expect elites to rise to the top, to hold power and wealth, and to be respected for their ability and efforts. The same should be true for any sort of democratic society; the combination seems to imply elitism should be inevitable.
There will be an elite. The only question is, what ideals will they have? Will the next elite rise and be respected for their capability but feared for the power they now wield? Or will they be the virtuous elite, the great men of a new golden age?
Reactionary conservatism has created a remarkably long list of negative effects on the country. The basic principle that drives conservatives to look back 40 years and claim it as a golden age would be good if, in the years between each ideological reset, the progressive agenda would not advance silently into the very policies and ideas that they claim as pillars of conservative thought.
Education is a wonderful example of this. Somewhere between 1880 and now, conservative America adopted egalitarian education as an ideal form. Of course, it sounds like something right out of the American Dream. Every American citizen should be educated the same way so that every American may have an equal opportunity to succeed.
It may be profoundly American to think this way. If so, American thinking must change.
To be egalitarian, education must be reduced to an increasingly lower common denominator. Those students who could otherwise excel may be promoted to a higher class, but their education is then on the same equitable line as that of peers in their class. Over time, the reduction of exceptional students means a reduction in exceptional adults, which, among other professions, affects the teachers who themselves may not be as capable of propelling students to their greatest potential. Over generations, an entire society can be eviscerated by two assumptions: that proficiency and competency are sufficient replacements for mastery, and that the maximum success of each student is less important than the roughly equal outcome of the rest of the group.
Intentional or not, mastery and individual excellence are often a part of two growing education movements: homeschooling and classical education. Although I will not make a detailed case for either here, it is instructive to note that their academic achievement regularly outpaces their peers in other educational settings. Yes, they often take that talent to a farm or other technical career. But why shouldn’t conservative farmers be able to out-argue progressivist professors?
Fortunately, the conservative movement is noticing. In the last half-decade conservative thinkers and donors have poured resources into education: Hillsdale College, Young Americans For Freedom (YAF), and the recent growth of K-12 classical schools are evidence.
This growth has to reopen the question, though: who is forming the elite?
Groups like YAF, Hillsdale, and even K-12 programs are forced into the uncomfortable reality that even they are rescue missions. Rescue missions must by nature bring everyone to the same starting point. The sad nature of modern life is that the vast majority of people neither knew enough to care nor had the opportunity to learn about the existence of truth, much less the moral foundations and struggles in our society. An egalitarian system brought them to the brink of destruction, and now an egalitarian rescue mission must bring them back.
Some places manage excellence anyway. For example, Hillsdale students have a growing reputation for incredible intellectual capability even among their conservative peers (and often the disdain for elitism that accompanies that reputation). Conservative educators encounter two classes of students: those whose parents or own interests guided them to seek this wonderful world, and those whose early education prepared them to operate and seek opportunities beyond the foundation needed by those leaving hostile progressive environments.
An egalitarian system of education cannot adequately accelerate this new conservative academic elite.
There are 16- and 18-year-olds whose skill with communication or strategy could, with targeted mentorship, be developed into an asset to any campaign team or research operation. There are 22- and 24-year-olds whose fitness for local office could far outweigh that of their progressive competitor. There are amateur coders who, with a targeted apprenticeship or accelerated college program in their mid to late teens, could master software development for a company in the parallel economy. There are even future philosophers and educators who, if propelled from where they are rather than the base point that a college must expect, could finish college in two years and be a Ph.D. before their progressive colleagues were accepted to a master’s degree program.
Yes, I know, this sounds unrealistic. I know some of these young leaders personally, however. They do exist and already have begun to enter the egalitarian systems which could crush their achievement over time. No, they are not much more than a set of statistical outliers.
Yet.
But already, places like Hillsdale are adjusting, allowing rising seniors in high school to apply and be accepted. Organizations like the Forge Leadership Network are connecting the brightest of all conservatives and accelerating their steps toward service and leadership in the new conservative culture. Leading the higher education charge are schools like St. John’s College which have begun to provide solutions for young future leaders who are dissatisfied with their current rigor: summer programs, dual credit, and even admission before a completed high school diploma.
Most of the focus is on rescue missions like YAF, which enter the hostile battlegrounds of America and begin rescuing one hurting student at a time. Rightfully so; it is there that the need is greatest.
But as in all things, if we are to survive as a movement, a culture, a political entity with any sort of power, we must look to the future and what we will need to return America to that which is right. Rescue is only a reaction to tragedy. There must be a good world parallel to that which is falling, a buoyant ship to which the lifeboats can return. Our education does not need to trap everyone in an egalitarian lifeboat. It must not.
Not all, but a growing few of the 16-year-olds of today are the 18-year-olds of yesterday, who were themselves the 21-year-olds of three years ago. Those few must be accelerated to the fullness of their potential, and so in the end must every citizen of our nation. If we do not build the structure now for those who are ready, they will either swim on their own beyond the lifeboats we have or, in the process, become victims of the same failed system that caused this crisis in the first place.
And, in a world designed to hold everyone else back, these students will seem like elites.
Let them.
Encourage them.
It is better they lead than the Progressive wave that will rule otherwise.
