Hmmm... it may be useful to do a little vocabulary research here.
There is a difference between elitism and snobbery. Snobbery (
definition) is simply a matter of whether you decide to avoid associating with folks you consider inferior. So, for example, if we prohibited non-DVC members from posting on this board, that would be a form of snobbery. If DVC members preferred to stay at DVC resorts since we're shielded from non-DVC members that way, then that would be snobbery. The term "cliquish" is very similar in meaning to the term "snobby".
Elitism (
definition) is the belief that you're entitled to special treatment because you're better than others. Folks who feel that because they're DVC members they deserve benefits not guaranteed by the papers they signed can often be considered elitists.
So snobbery pertains to who you associate with and elitism pertains to what you think you're entitled to.
Anyway, my point in bringing up this difference is that people are normally a little of both, at all times. Look around at your friends -- typically they're all from the same socio-economic class as you, or within a narrow range across classes. It is a very rare person who has both close friends who are homeless and close friends who live in 20 room mansions. The type of snobbery that causes negative judgement (which is another negative appellation, by the way) is where that exclusionary tendency extends beyond the more intimate associations. Still, I don't think many people think badly of folks who won't move into 20 room mansions that are in the shadow of run-down 20 story "project" housing. So it is all a matter of degree.
By the same token, elitism, to some extent, is very-much a staple of a non-socialist society. People pay for what they want. The more money they have, the more they can afford, and therefore the more they are entitled to. The negative judgements of elitism, at least in our society, come into play when that entitlement is thought to be derived from something other than the expenditure of financial resources: i.e., intellectual or social status. People who think that they have the right to govern simply because they're smarter rather than because they were elected are often considered overly elitist.
So bringing this back to DVC. I think most DVC members would love to, at least occasionally, stay at other resorts on points if it was a decent value. They're staying at the DVC resorts exclusively (to the extent they are) only because it is the best value for their points. and provides them the ability to save money due to the kitchen facilities. It is (typically) not a way to stay insulated from "others". Moreover, we all know that DVC reservations are often available for cash to non-DVC members. The only objections I have ever seen to that involve when there is a pattern of abuse (although, without firm evidence, that could be considered a bit snobbish, eh?)
There have been some discussions recently that exposed some elitism. I've always maintained that all we're entitled to is what we paid for: the rooms and whatever discounts Disney
wants to give us at any one time. Believing we deserve more than that just because we're DVC members, even though we've made some sort of commitment to Disney, is presumptuous. It's like expecting grandma to buy you an expensive gift for Christmas.
But who cares. I can't get enough of WDW.
