I also agree that conventional academic pursuits can and does often encourage the exercise of creativity. Without it people are often more likely to use the language and methods of attempting to establish power that are similar or even exactly identical to those of their oppressors although power isn’t necessarily their goal… it sometimes just looks that way to people who have power (societal influential power rather than individually perceived power) because they don’t understand the pursuit of anything else.

However, unless there is a recognition that our reward systems are completely disproportionate and that those who are disadvantaged by this system that encourages failure actually make up the majority of people….and that this majority is an untapped resource that includes the greatest creativity, ingenuity, and ability that the world has never known, then our royalty will remain on their thrones until they run out of ideas to maintain the overinflated view of their worth.

At that point, the internet and all resources that can be used by the elite will be used in order to suppress the empowerment and education of their subjects.

As their (the elite….using my rigid definition of the word) creativity diminishes, their methods of oppression will become harsher and may ultimately be used to extinguish those whom they see as their threat. All education and empowerment would be a threat to their security.

There is an academic view that makes all points relative.

Once all things are described as equal in the respect of none being a necessarily better with regard to ideas, then the academic elite make the decisions and that becomes more important than truth and the academically inclined are sheided from the understanding that comes from truth.

Relativism has it’s place in judging ideas and people so that we can be less critical and accepting of cultures different than our own. However, when relativism is just a word being used to devalue a view because it seems unimportant or inconvenient to attempt to understand, it becomes a tool that suppresses the voices of the masses.

For the internet to be a real tool of empowerment and education, it needs to be accessible to people who (in all our ignorance and glory) are given an opportunity to have our voices heard *before* we overcome all of our academic challenges.

I was not saying there is an elite understanding of sociology though of course the US academic hegemony has attempted such in the 50′ and 60′s with the predominance of certain schools of thinking.

Elite is a word with a variety of understandings and contexts, and to be rigid in it’s definition is to self lable yourself into the “elite” that believes that only it’s definitions and explanations are ever valid.

Marketing does require logic, heck it is an extension of the empirical rationalism that came in with Adam Smith and the “enlightenment” there are mathematical formulae which can be adduced to describe it all. Oh well must go or I will miss my bus.

There has never been an elite understanding of sociology that was widely recognized…. or any true picture what lots of societies even look like. Most people aren’t factored into the equation so the information isn’t reliable. The truth just isn’t marketable.

Intellectual capability has never been measured as it relates to the masses because most people aren’t given the opportunity to exercise their ability in that area and even when they do it isn’t recognised as being valid… not because it doesn’t show ability but because we like our ability neatly packaged by already recognised sources.