Anti-intellectualism in America

[All Along The Watchtower]

Why is there so much anti-intellectualism in America?

Discuss.

[King]

TV ratings.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Because the Ivy League professors have a blatant bias towards the left, and anybody who lives between New York and San Fransisco. Its only natural that Bluecollar conservatives oppose them.

[HAnnA MArin County]

The Tea Party.

Being stupid wasn't really cool until Sarah Palin showed up.

[dead0man]

To be fair, intellectuals (or at least people that label themselves as such) tend to be giant douchebags a good chunk of the time.

[UpcomingYouthvoter]

The Tea Party.

Being stupid wasn't really cool until Sarah Palin showed up.

George "Dubya" Bush says hello. Stupid is as stupid does.

[Free Palestine]

TV ratings.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Populism.

[HAnnA MArin County]

The Tea Party.

Being stupid wasn't really cool until Sarah Palin showed up.

George "Dubya" Bush says hello. Stupid is as stupid does.

Ha. Sarah Palin/Michele Bachmann make George W. Bush look like he at best completed 8th grade.

[UpcomingYouthvoter]

The Tea Party.

Being stupid wasn't really cool until Sarah Palin showed up.

George "Dubya" Bush says hello. Stupid is as stupid does.

Ha. Sarah Palin/Michele Bachmann make George W. Bush look like he at best completed 8th grade.

Who knows about all three nuts. They are polling a act or something with their anti-intellectualism talk to market blue collar voters. I've heard someone on this forum knowing a Bachmann advisor and he told him that Bachmann is different if you meet her.

[TheGlobalizer]

I don't think America is anti-intellectual.  I think Americans have simply kidded themselves into thinking that all (native-born) Americans are inherently intelligent.

[Del Tachi]

I find it kind of funny that anti-intellectualism is regarded today as something that manifests itself mostly on the conservative side of the political spectrum, seeing how anti-intellectualism has always been a hallmark of American politics (see: 1844 presidential election).  However, it wasn’t until the left-of-center, populism movement of the late 19th Century that anti-intellectualism became almost essential to winning national elections.

The main reason I think that anti-intellectualism is so engrained in the American political system has a lot to do with religion.  America is, historically, the most religious of all the MDC’s and we have a strong Puritan tradition.  Anti-intellectualism, populism, and religion kind of all seem to blend together on the American political scene.  To many Americans, you can’t be both a scholar and a saint.  Americans are a simple people and thus prefer simple politicians.

When you think about it, when was the last time America elected an “intellectual”?  And don’t say Obama, cause despite being an intellectual he was able to run an anti-intellectual campaign.  I’d have to say Woodrow Wilson, as he is the only president to ever have a PhD. 

[HAnnA MArin County]

Well, if you're a journalism major and you can't answer a simple question like, "What newspapers do you read," then you might as well throw in the towel. Just saying.

[tpfkaw]

The root of anti-"intellectualism" in America is the people who start threads entitled "Anti-intellectualism in America."  The matter with Kansas is the people who write books entitled What's the Matter With Kansas?.

[courts]

When you think about it, when was the last time America elected an “intellectual”?  And don’t say Obama, cause despite being an intellectual he was able to run an anti-intellectual campaign.  I’d have to say Woodrow Wilson, as he is the only president to ever have a PhD. 

Well what qualifications are you using here? Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, for example.

[angus]

Why is there so much anti-intellectualism in America?

Discuss.

Because it's fun.  Intellectuals are verbose, exotic, wimpy, and often lack social skills.  Easy targets, especially in a nation founded upon a violent and illegal insurrection.

FWIW, anti-intellectualism seems to be on the decline.  I remember when I was in grade school the climate was fiercely anti-intellectual, and there were no pro-social messages to counter that.  The kids I talk to today have a very different outlook. 

[Del Tachi]

When you think about it, when was the last time America elected an “intellectual”?  And don’t say Obama, cause despite being an intellectual he was able to run an anti-intellectual campaign.  I’d have to say Woodrow Wilson, as he is the only president to ever have a PhD. 

Well what qualifications are you using here? Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar, for example.

Clinton, despite perhaps being an "intellectual" (as most presidents are), did not try to court the "educational elite" during his presidency instead focusing on the plight of working class, White people.  This makes him an "non-intellectual".

[specific_name]

A certain populist spirit has long been apart of American politics, anti-intellectual sentiment goes back before the founding of the nation. The various religious groups that settled here first were distrustful of centralized authority/the big city/distant government/the Catholic Church and witches of course; we can't forget America's long antipathy toward witches real or imagined. Joking aside, paranoia and fear of foreign elements has long been a feature of our politics as well.

The intellectual, by the nature of his work, is detached from the rhythms of working class life and so it's no surprise that the populist spirit finds in an outlet in distrust of authorities who are perceived as not having a stake in the "real world."

[All Along The Watchtower]

A certain populist spirit has long been apart of American politics, anti-intellectual sentiment goes back before the founding of the nation. The various religious groups that settled here first were distrustful of centralized authority/the big city/distant government/the Catholic Church and witches of course; we can't forget America's long antipathy toward witches real or imagined. Joking aside, paranoia and fear of foreign elements has long been a feature of our politics as well.

The intellectual, by the nature of his work, is detached from the rhythms of working class life and so it's no surprise that the populist spirit finds in an outlet in distrust of authorities who are perceived as not having a stake in the "real world."

That makes sense.

Of course, if more intellectuals supported the working class, and if there wasn't a segment of intellectual life that was devoted to smearing intellectuals in general (to win the favor of the working class), well, perhaps things would be different.

[John Dibble]

Why is there so much anti-intellectualism in America?

Discuss.

Because it's fun.  Intellectuals are verbose, exotic, wimpy, and often lack social skills.  Easy targets, especially in a nation founded upon a violent and illegal insurrection.

And oddly the violent and illegal insurrection was headed by many who could have been considered the intellectuals of their day. Such bitter irony.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That might be because only the verbose, exotic, and wimpy who often lack social skills are the only ones willing to talk to an old man who rambles on and on.

[Хahar 🤔]

The root of anti-"intellectualism" in America is the people who start threads entitled "Anti-intellectualism in America."  The matter with Kansas is the people who write books entitled What's the Matter With Kansas?.

Clever.

[Foucaulf]

Two quick thoughts:

-American intellectuals are foremost pragmatic. Despite the claims that they are all "far-left", they do so because the left has provided them a method with which they can investigate their nation. There's an aversion to ideological bantering like the Europeans. It is odd that American think tanks have been dominated by the ideological conservative bunch, but it is also an example of leftist intellectuals more content to ponder their own path.

-Average Americans are pragmatists. Personal experience is enough for many to prove a point and to demonstrate a lesson for the future. Intellectuals needlessly obfuscate these experiences through critical evaluation. The American is displeased by this, especially when they end up agreeing with experience anyways.