Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Intellectualism
Several times recently I’ve heard reference made to the growing anti-intellectual movement in the right side of the political spectrum. Usually this is countered with allegations of elitism. I’ve gotten to the point where I’m rolling my eyes at the entire exchange.
First, let’s examine “intellectualism”. It seems to me that intellectualism is a state in which one is open-minded to new ideas, is able to critically analyze those new ideas based on facts and experience grounded in a good knowledge of history, and is willing to make judgments on those ideas with extreme prejudice. In addition, one should have a moral grounding upon which those analyses can be based, because making value judgments about public policy, for example, is impossible without a moral code. In sum total, what is required of an intellectual person is character, knowledge, and wisdom, as well as a willingness to out go out into the world and apply these traits to all aspects of life.
It seems to me that the common definition of intellectualism, one that liberals tend to support and conservatives tend to oppose, is merely the state of having a degree from an Ivy League school. The state of intellectualism is reached by getting the right diploma, usually conferred in an insular, wealthy, largely liberal environment reminiscent of an echo chamber. The ideas associated with such intellectualism are rarely tested by merit or by morality, they are simply the most popular ideas put forward by that crowd. As such, those ideas generally reflect the values and culture of the urban and suburban rich, as well as the ideas of an academic culture largely isolated in its ivory tower for decades on end.
Is it any wonder that Joe Sixpack is going to react against this sort of intellectualism? It is simultaneously arrogant, dismissive, and frequently amoral, and it leads to conclusions that clash head-on with the common sense morality instinctively embraced by many Americans.
On the flip-side, the charges that Joe Sixpack is uninformed, incurious, uncultured, ignorant, and apathetic, are frequently true.
The charges of elitism and anti-intellectualism are not simply a contest between those who believe in education and those who don’t. It is a proxy for a clash of cultures – rich, urban, and “educated” versus poor, rural, and not.
Really it is not about intellectualism at all, it is about belonging to the right exclusive club, keeping the riff-raff out, while the riff-raff stand outside telling each other “we don’t need them”. Elitism versus anti-intellectualism is just a cover that latches on to one of the differences between the cultures, while making one side seem inherently superior to the other.
In the end, both sides miss the point entirely, much to their detriment. True intellectualism is grounded in real education, something that neither side seems much interested in these days.
Comments
-
And Glib = Intelligent. A soothing cascade of meaningless drivel delivered with style. They must be smart, to use such big words!
Old country saying, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.”raven | 10/28/2008 02:36 PM CDT -
A former girlfriend used to watch the British TV show Blackadder, one scene I recall goes along with this topic:
Blackadder meets a group of men in a tavern who seem to spend all their time striking heroic or tragic poses. He asked them what they do, one replied “Do? We don’t do anything, we’re intellectuals” to which Blackadder replied “Huh! There’s more to being an intellectual than running around in a big shirt trying to get laid.”
Seems a good description of modern intellectualism.
Mark D | 10/29/2008 08:57 AM CDT -
It’s amazing, too, how often you offend the elitist fellows or the Joe-Sixpacks if you approach a problem or topic as described in your second paragraph. Everyone suspects you then.
Weetabix | 10/30/2008 10:24 AM CDT -
No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people. Nor has anyone ever lost public office thereby.
H. L. MenckenGW | 10/31/2008 11:01 AM CDT -
You hit upon the problem. We don’t know what “intellectual” means when we hear it. And others don’t know what it means when we use it.
The same problem is destroying communication in law and politics and other social activities and sciences.
What means “social justice” or “economic justice” or “fairness” when politicians campaign?
What are “obscene profits”? Are they large profits or profits from high markups or any profit at all from selling to the poor.
What are the human rights? I think I have heard of at least 500. The current favorite of intellectuals* seems to be a right to not be offended.
Said right seems to be the right to be offended by any remark.
*well, there I go again.
K | 11/2/2008 03:09 PM CDT -
There is so much irony here it’s not even funny.
First: The modern education system is constructed with a built-in anti-intellectualism.
Trust me, hard work is NOT respected, and the meritocracy that many of the old school liberals (used to proclaim) love and support is a dead 1960’s pipe dream.
They’ve discovered the joys of networking and have a lovely “good-old-comrade’s” network to keep the good times rolling.
Oh, sure, there might be be a few who are still thinking, but they are safely stored where they can do no harm to the status quo, and are looking more and more like conservatives every day.
How ironic that we have a massive school system devoted to destroying all meaning.
So what do you do when the Decemberists are the architects of the majority of schools?
Still racking my brain over that one.
Further irony: my family is mostly constructed of teachers. They live in the middle of no-where (the supposed home of Joe six-pack) and are better educated than those urbane types.
They are, of course, very unhappy about the way things are going right now, but just because they are teachers doesn’t mean they can do anything to change things for most people. In fact, a number of them make changes for the way disabled children are taught, which is more open to individual input and creativity than the “unwashed masses”.
Not to mention, in boondocks territory, there’s less supervision from the state, therefore more learning can actually happen. Did I mention that country-bred kids tend to be (even today) more disciplined? Remember,this is on a current comparative basis.Oh, and Indiana has more Universities per-capita than any other state in the union. I knew more “joe-sixpacks” in a major university town out-of-state (known as a liberal hot-bed, and honorary-ivy-league) than I do here… in “konservative korn kountry”. (Which is NOTHING like the stereotype) Yeah.... Irony abounds.
I’d love to teach. This is why I’m not a teacher. I’d be able to make more money baby-sitting… and since that’s NOT what I want to do, there’s no point in being a teacher (for pay).
The joys of a modern education…
V | 11/22/2008 02:51 PM CDT
