I suspect the image of Anti Intellectual has less to do with real volume and more to do with easy access to mass communication by anyone in our society. It’s easy to become enamored with odd ideas when the basic struggle to exist (for most) isn’t that hard here.
With ready access to mass media (how many cable stations are there?) any identified niche of ideology occupied by people who have money will be catered to by people wishing to sell them something. In the act of attracting those folks to the products the advertisers wish to sell, an illusion of normality is often created to ease the passage of the semi believers and curious to give an idea a try (and perhaps purchase ancillary products).
Nazi Germany was hugely anti-intellectual. This was augmented by their hatred of the Jews-they even invented a myth (“Jewish” science) to justify their own irrational, anti-science views. Hitler’s anthropologists also invented a whole “race” (the “aryans”) out of nothing. Despite having a highly educated citizenry, and some of the world’s best universities, Nazi Germany was very anti-intellectual.
In my experience, you put the letters Phd behind someone’s name they start to think the only reason that any person disagrees with them is because they’re too dumb to understand them or are “anti-intellectual”.
Doesn’t really seem to matter if the subject has absolutely nothing to do with what they got the Phd in.
I have met a couple people who are not like that, but I think they would be in the top 10% of ability in their field; not really the type of people you meet on a regular basis.
Let’s change FEMA camps to “Jade Helm is Obama taking over the country”. We have state governors and 10s of thousands of wackos drinking the Kool Aid (Flavor Aid).:eek:
Actually true liberals would understand the concept. Liberals by definition will look at a situation, evaluate positions, and form opinions based on available information. They will also change opinions when new information comes to light. That’s a major difference from conservatives (see supply side / trickle down economics).
Canada’s prime minister is a climate change denier despite our northern neighbors having a reputation as relatively calm, sober thinkers. So no, the USA hasn’t cornered the market on anti-intellectualism, not by a long shot.
Change may be coming. I’ve been a high school teacher for 21 years and “nerdy” is kind of cool now in a way it never was before. I mean, horn-rimmed glasses and bow ties are kind of a thing. My particular school is in a fairly blue-collar area and there is a marked decline in ridiculing classmates who are into science/technology or who take their GPA seriously, to the point where someone who did that would be pretty obviously admitting their own stupidity. Someone mentioned materialism and millennials aren’t into that as much as preceding generations.
Assuming for a second your definition of true liberal is correct; that true liberals evaluate positions based upon evidence. It’s difficult for non-liberals to tell who these true liberals are because those in the big liberal tent are by-and-large just as politically partisan as those outside it. Those in the liberal camp are just as unwilling to give ground to their opponents as conservatives. I have no measurable way of showing this, but my knowledge of human nature tells me it is so. People are petty, political, and self interested in roughly equal persuasion no matter which side of the political spectrum they come from.
It’s also the job of “anti-intellectuals” to keep these “true liberals” doing potential harm during the time it takes for new information to come to light. Both Communism and racial theory were mainstream intellectual positions of much of the 19th and 20th centruries. Both appear to have been proven woefully wrong. Thank goodness we had a degree of anti-intellectualism for much of that time.
