"Liberal," "entitlement," "elite": three words among many that politicians have severely distorted for strategic reasons. "Liberal" at one time referred to a person with a preference for freedoms, including the free market. "Liberal" has been so effectively worked over by "conservatives" that political liberals now prefer to call themselves "progressives" or "moderates." "Conservative" is a safe call for anyone not ready to hide behind another rubric.
"Please, Sir," said Oliver to Mr. Bumble, "I want some more." Oliver Twist must have believed he had an entitlement. In the 19th century context set out by Dickens, Oliver was way out of line, as maybe a few conservatives think now. Oliver should have gotten out of that free children's home, including its free school breakfast and lunch program, and gone to work in a coal mine.
"Entitlement" has gone through remarkable changes in usage. Entitlements were, in olden days, the rightful property of the "titled." And did the titled believe in their entitlement? Most assuredly, these princes, dukes, earls and lords did, as likely endorsed by God.
The entitled of a slightly later era also believed in the purity of the mercantile or capitalist system that gave them their entitlements. Greed? Nonsense; aggressive search for wealth is the key factor in the system. Any interference in capitalism's natural mechanisms damages the system's utility. One can distribute a portion as noblesse oblige, but that is entirely voluntary.
"Entitlement" has taken quite a different spin from those days, hasn't it? Established wealth and its rewards are not saddled with any word of derogatory implication. Now, "entitlements" are the unjustified claims of the lower classes. Oliver has a new plea.
"Please sir, can we have a guarantee of medical care? Can we have a system of education for our children from pre-K through college? Can we have a leave allowance to take care of them when first born? Can we have a minimum wage that will allow us to meet the minimums of housing and nourishment for us and our families? Can we be paid a reasonable fraction of our previous pay when forced into unemployment?" Mr. Bumble's cohort of indignation continues today, with "entitlement" now a term suggesting the lack of it.
"Elite" is a good term as applied to military units or those admitted to the space program, but generally, it is an adjective or noun of scorn. "Elite" is now a term covering those disposed to help the Olivers. "Oliver," says today's Mr. Bumble, "elites are out to do you political harm. How arrogant to think that years of education, study and experience in government-sponsored operations give a better understanding of how to address an issue or solve a governmental problem. We have given you a president, who has shown by his ability to turn millions into billions that he is "entitled" to run a government, appointing other billionaires to assist him. Who needs any other kind of elites?"
The Bumbles may, for the moment, speak for close to half the public, many believing that life and fortune are lottery prizes they might win. The balance, not of a Bumble mindset, including a few of the very wealthy, supported by almost all economists, think uncontrolled liberal capitalism will wreck the economy if essential government rules and controls, including entitlements for the underclasses, are not in place. Pay no attention to them. Maybe you will win the lottery. Then you too will be among the legitimately entitled.
"Liberal," "entitlement" and "elite" are legitimate terms of social intercourse with historic and dictionary meanings of ready utility that require no scorn. Clean them off and bring them back into the vocabulary.
John Havelock, in roles as a former government official, educator and lawyer, believes he ranks in the upper middle of maybe three or four elites but doesn't come close on thousands of others. He has long enjoyed shared entitlements like Medicare and hopes the Congress will polish and not destroy them this week. He is liberal, moderate or conservative, depending on the subject matter.