The sans-culottes were poor working-class people in 18th century France who became radical militants during the French Revolution. Their identity during this period stemmed from their opposition to the aristocracy. They formed their ideology in means of what they think is best for them in the immediate, such as fixed wages and direct democracy. They formed a near-majority of the revolutionary army at some point and executed those who opposed them.
This surely is a simplistic summary and I could have chosen a lot of other examples to introduce what I would want to explain.
The “aristocracy” at the time, comprised of the monarchy, clergy, nobility and the bourgeoisie represented the current status quo. It was an exclusive group. The sans-culottes wanted to punish this group of people for their own misery and implement their views of how France must be governed.
In our current affairs of our world, we witness the popularity of extremists both of the left and the right. With a particular focus on France, I’ve come to notice something.
Many people do not necessarily want their representatives or leaders to be competent or good, they would like their leaders to resemble them in their ignorance. One would be frustrated when having to hear a leader speak gracefully and eloquently with proper mannerisms because that’s not how he looks or sounds like on a daily basis. I would fall short from calling this “envy.” He does however see an “us’ and a”them“, if he is unable to understand the issue being presented by the current leader at hand, he resorts to mockery and disdain. He would want someone ignorant to lead the country. Someone ignorant just as he is. In no means do I use the word”ignorant" as an insult in this article, but as a state of being.
Extremists on both ends of the spectrum are not stupid; which is why they accentuate their populist discourse to appease the “ignorant class.” The reason why the far-right is doing better than the far left is (1) the National Rally has been ostracised for so long that they get to claim they have had nothing to do with whatever ills are being reproached to the current leadership and (2) it focuses on ideology particularly concerning social issues.
For at least two generations before our own, ignorance was looked down upon. It was seen with contempt. People wanted to learn given the peculiar opportunities each person had. Young people knew that higher education was the primary tool for social stratification — but that’s because they were told so by their parents and teachers. I agree with this method. Higher education must remain a tool for social and economic success. However, the advent of the internet, (unfiltered) political and educational content, coupled with lobbying efforts and misinformation give young people today the notion that “higher education is a waste of time.”
This is a faulty statement. It is indeed true that a university degree will not get you a well-paying job overnight in this economy, but what other options do we have?
After the results of the US presidential elections came out, I came across a poll on the education level of those who voted. Those with an undergraduate degree or higher overwhelmingly voted for Harris. This reminded me of a similar poll that came out after the European and French legislative elections, where an overwhelming majority of those without higher-education voted for the National Rally. This cannot be a coincidence.
It is particularly appalling to read comments on social media on accounts belonging to well-respected newspapers. Critics don’t come with their own opinion or counter-arguments to share, but simply smear the paper. These people are certainly ignorant because no self respecting person would use obscene language regarding a respected newspaper while avoiding to offer anything of substance.
We’ve never had this much information at the tip of our fingers this quickly about anything and everything. We therefore think we are all-knowing geniuses.
“Higher education” is not simply spending 3 to 5 years studying one subject matter. It is about meeting people of all walks of life, it is about learning how to use a library, it is about networking, it is about taking elective courses and participating in student elections. It is about looking up to (most of) one’s professors whom one should aspire to be as one day. It very likely also means moving away from one’s family cocoon and live independently.
As the sans-culottes rose up against everything they are not, so have a large chunk of our population steadily rising against what they deem to be the “elites.”
We’re not in the 18th century though, anyone can be part of the “elite” — a bourgeois today. While taking note of current economic hurdles young people face, what are three pillars of being a successful person? : (1) financial capital, (2) social capital, and (3) cultural capital. I would argue the 3rd one is the most important, but that’s just my opinion. A 17 year old from an average working-class rural family has neither of those. Obtaining a higher education degree, which remains relatively accessible and free for all in France, already gets one numbers 2 and 3, if they take their time at university seriously. Which means said person would have the ability to think critically and vote wisely even if a party is promising them to hang the billionaires or deport immigrants to solve the economic crisis which said student feels the weight of every day.
Our capitalist societies’ hyper-fixation on wealth also gives the masses the impression that if one is financially wealthy enough, it means they were sufficiently smart to accumulate said wealth — and in that case, are capable of leading. Elon Musk, for example, has financial and social capital but lacks cultural capital. He does not have any experience in politics and yet many regard him with high esteem when he shares his political views. Financial capital is important because it makes your life easier. It simplifies the process. One can’t buy intellect though and surely can’t buy culture. Important individual experiences necessary for one’s social and intellectual development can not be bought either.
I quoted a writer once in an argument and the cynical comeback was “oh you are so cultured.”
Well, yes. Yes I am. I am quite cultured but I will never be cultured enough. None of us can be cultured enough.
I have met countless intelligent and cultured people who tone down their knowledge and experiences in public settings and I find that horrendous. A person who, to give some examples, speaks a handful of languages, has extensive general knowledge of current affairs, is a specialist (be it in medicine, architecture, art, finance or the law), plays musical instruments, knows how to point their country on a map and has traveled beyond the 10km they grew up in is indeed a person we must look up to and aspire to be as.
The tides are indeed turning, from a time when being educated and cultured were respected goals to being perceived as pretentious and a source of ridicule. This tide must be stopped.
Follow the comments:
|
