Today, elites hold unprecedented control over American political life.
Billionaires like Tesla CEO Elon Musk now wield the political power necessary to shape popular discourse, fiscal policy, and even bureaucratic structures. This growing elitism has sparked widespread public distrust and disillusionment, undermining the political identities at the heart of both major parties.
In the wake of the 2024 presidential election, the Democratic Party found itself face-to-face with a profound identity crisis. Party leaders were forced to confront a difficult truth: Democrats were increasingly seen as out of touch with the everyday concerns of the average voter. To many Americans, the Democratic Party had become the “party of the elite.”
This perception didn’t emerge overnight. Over the past decade, the Democratic coalition has steadily shifted its focus toward white-collar, highly educated, and often affluent Americans — particularly those from metropolitan areas. The party has prioritized the interests of middle-class suburban voters while placing far less emphasis on rural and exurban working-class communities. Internally, professional-class meritocrats have come to dominate Democratic leadership, priorities, and messaging. As a result, the party now relies on a coalition of urban professionals and the multiracial working class — a base that has proven volatile in recent years.
Now with Trump in his second term, the Republican Party faces accusations of their own elite entrenchment. Musk and the newly created Department of Government Efficiency, along with sweeping federal layoffs and multimillion-dollar campaign contributions, have dominated national headlines. Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos — the CEOs of Meta and Amazon, respectively — were also notably in attendance at Trump’s inauguration.
Although Republicans present themselves as champions of working-class grievances, their political alliances tell a different story. The party increasingly aligns with ultra-wealthy donors, corporate leaders, and tech billionaires. Such elite connections have influenced both the party’s economic agenda — characterized by deregulation, privatization, and consolidated executive authority — and its approach to governance. Populism remains a central theme in Trump-era Republican rhetoric, yet contradictions emerge as shifts in the party’s infrastructure increasingly prioritize elite interests in policymaking.
The 50th Harvard Youth Poll
Elite consolidation is thus becoming more pronounced on both sides of the aisle, and young Americans are paying attention. Released today, the 50th edition of the biannual Harvard Youth Poll found that 52% of young Americans believe that elites serve themselves over the public interest. As elite power increases across the political spectrum, young Americans — especially those closest to elites themselves — are emerging as some of its fiercest critics.
The latest Harvard Youth Poll offers a revealing snapshot of how young Americans view the elite class today. By party, 72% of young Democrats believe elites primarily serve themselves, compared to 51% of Independents and just 44% of young Republicans. Such a partisan split likely reflects underlying socioeconomic differences: young Democrats tend to be more highly educated, reside in urban areas, and come from higher-income backgrounds — demographics that are also the most critical of elite power. It may also signal lingering frustration over the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, as some Democrats attribute systemic failure to outsized elite influence.
By income level, young Americans from the wealthiest households are the most likely to express anti-elite sentiment: 61% of respondents from households earning over $150,000 — the poll’s highest income bracket — believe elites primarily serve themselves rather than the public good. By contrast, just 21% of those from households earning less than $10,000 share that view, while a majority in that group (57%) responded “Don’t Know.” Anti-elite sentiment generally rises with income across all seven income brackets. Despite their closer proximity to elite structures and resources, wealthier young Americans are more likely to question whether those in power serve the interests of society.
Such disillusionment extends to regional divides. Young Americans living in urban (60%) and suburban (60%) areas — often the centers of economic and political influence — are significantly more likely to view elites as self-serving compared to their rural (42%) and small-town (42%) counterparts.
Education follows a similar trend: 70% of college graduates expressed anti-elite sentiment, compared to just 47% of their non-college peers. While a college degree has traditionally been understood as a stepping stone to success, higher education is increasingly perceived as detached from the real-life concerns of most Americans — a symbol of elitism in itself. A 2024 Pew Research Center survey demonstrates this shift: nearly half (49%) of American adults now believe a four-year degree is less important for securing a well-paying job than twenty years ago. A paradox therefore emerges: those pursuing the very credentials that open doors to elite circles are often the most vocal critics of the elite.
Disillusioned at the Top, Uncertain at the Bottom
The results of the latest Harvard Youth Poll raise a critical question: Why are young Americans who are closest to elite status often the most disillusioned with elites, while their less affluent peers appear more uncertain or indifferent?
One explanation could lie in proximity, not immunity. As household income declines, the share of “Don’t Know” responses steadily increases. This trend suggests that lower-income individuals may be less exposed to elite behavior, leaving them less inclined to form a clear opinion. Such an informational gap may reflect deeper structural inequalities; media access, civic education, and political outreach are often concentrated in wealthier or urban communities. Over time, this exclusion could create a positive feedback loop through which elite-dominated governance reinforces policies that alienate non-elites and dampen their political engagement.
On the other hand, those who move through elite institutions — including universities, high-paying industries, and major metropolitan hubs — often witness firsthand the inner workings of power and its influence: influence traded behind closed doors, systems bent to serve the well-connected, and a meritocracy that rarely lives up to its name. Their critique may thus stem from participation in elitism, not exclusion.
In contrast, young Americans from low-income or rural backgrounds may not express the same levels of frustration — not out of trust, but uncertainty. High rates of “Don’t Know” responses in this group point less to apathy than to disconnection: limited insight into elite structures or a lingering hope that the system might still work in their favor. The lower or ambivalent sentiment toward elites could stem from an aspirational belief in one day joining their ranks, rather than genuine approval. Yet today’s economic landscape paints a starker picture. As opportunities for social mobility shrink, the gap between aspiration and reality grows wider — deepening disillusionment among a generation raised on the promise of the American Dream.
What, then, does that mean for the next generation of leaders who are disillusioned with power, but on track to inherit it? What American politics needs now is an honest, unflinching look in the mirror — not just at elites themselves, but at the very values and structures that define who gets to become one.
Senior Local Editor
