It seems you are making an incorrect assumption here. Bush is not generally looked up to because he’s rich. Most people realize he got wealthy mainly thru family connections.
Kerry got hurt somewhat by comments his wife made that sounded VERY snobbish. She said anyone who didn’t agree with Kerry’s health care plan was stupid (or something very close to that) and her comments about Laura Bush were very condescending-- saying that her own experiences were “bigger” (read better) than the First Lady’s.
That’s not what I meant to imply. It’s a bit of a tangent, but the point is that I don’t think the examples you cited are themselves causes of anti-intellectualism.
Who are you talking about? Who is saying these awful things? I don’t remember Kerry saying “We’re better than you” or calling anyone stupid or a shlub. I don’t know of anyone who labels themself as an “elite”.
What is being said is, “The world is very complex and there are no simple black-and-white answers”. Is that something that should be backlashed against or taken to heart?
I think this is a case of “methinks thou doth protest too much”. “Deep down most people realize” that smarter is better and they immediately resent it, regardless of the lack of overt put-downs coming from intellectuals.
One last thing, gun nuts enjoy pointing out that totalitarian regimes tend to outlaw guns, but they also tend to persecute intellectuals because they’re less gullible and less likely to swallow the party line.
I don’t even think they are good examples… Homer Simpson and Al Bundy are laughed at, not identified with. A better example would be The Odd Couple… the slobby guy… I’m too young to know the name of that character.
Right! So, watch it! when you’re dissing the Simpsons of the non-OJ variety. Us red state folk enjoy The Simpsons — I like the unpretentious red state humor — even Homer’s unintentionally red state wit – and even Moe’s intentional red state selfishness is funny in a red state sort of way –
Their unpretentious use of streotypes when depicting mobsters, pizza makers, drunks, and convenience store clerks – all funny.
I always thought the Simpsons had a lot of smart sarcasm and irony in it. Homer might be an anti-intelectual symbol… but the program is quite smart IMO.
There is anti-intellectualism in the US, but its usually along the lines of ‘they have not lived my life and they think they know whats best for me’. There was a campaign commerical against Howard Dean complaining about him being a ‘new england liberal’ or something.
Intelligence itself is not discriminated against. Its usually encouraged outside of grade school. Or in college when it fucks up curves.
Which part of “I wasn’t talking about Kerry” didn’t you understand?
As to the rest of your rant, I’m unsure how it relates to what I said in my own posts.
The difference is talking TOO people or talking AT them. Kerry talked AT people, and while eloquent he really didn’t have much of substance to say. Bush talked TOO people, and while he also didn’t have much to say of substance either people felt a connection to him…he kept it simple and gave the impression that he was plain spoken and was actually saying something of substance.
As to Kerry explaining too much I would tend to disagree with you. Certainly he was verbose…no doubts there. Take his stance on Iraq. I never DID figure out exactly how it differed from Bush’s as far as what he would do once he was president…it sounded to me (and still does) like he would do everything Bush was doing…just better. Thats not a stance. It was the same on other issues. I got the feeling he actually DID know what he would do, but that he didn’t want to say it as it would somehow hurt him (which I think it WOULD have…as I think his programs would have caused taxes to be raised, never a good political position even if its reality). However, to make this short, talking a LOT isn’t equal to SAYING a lot.
I had a friend tell me she thought it was in very poor taste for someone to display a Phi Beta Kappa key on their person. That it was boastful and bragging, and therefore obnoxious. This same person thought nothing of taking her Coach purse with her wherever she went, driving her luxury car.
Now, she’s entitled to her opinion on displaying academic honors–indeed, doesn’t it get some snickers when somone insists on signing personal correspondence with an MD or JD or PhD? But it was interesting to me that she didn’t think there was anything wrong with being showy about material successes.
Ok, so I say I know what’s best because I’m smart, and you[sup]1[/sup] say you know what’s best because the Bible told you so. I really don’t get why the former is more elitist than the latter.
[sup]1: Not you specifically, but rather Joe Redstate[/sup]
[sup]Also, why can’t I get nested quoting to work?[/sup]
I’m not talking about academic credentials. Often times when someone is significantly more intelligent, they can find their peers boring or simple regardless of their education level.
It is possible for someone to be “intellectual” without formal education, however, I would suggest that often such intellectualism can take the form of “knowing just enough to be dangerous”.
Of course, we haven’t really defined what we mean by intellectual. I know very few people, outside of the world of morons, who do not view going to college or pursuing advanced education to be a positive thing. On the other hand, no one likes having fancy schooling or degrees thrown in their face. In the end, it’s a matter of packaging the message.
It’s quite common to have an attitude that “street” knowledge or “gut instinct” is somehow superior to scientific analysis.
Exactly. Now take a tour of the majority of the Straightdope posts leading up to the election. The hubris on this board is such that the majority of Bush supporters are labeled as ‘dumb’ or, maybe, have struck some sort of Faustian bargain during the election process – No way Bush gets elected otherwise -
This nails it, and it also explains why so many people screwed by the Bush tax cut support it. (Screwed in the sense that a reasonable cut would have given them a lot more money back and helped the economy more.)
Forget about politics, think of your average high school. Is there a high school in the country (exept maybe University highs and Bronx High School of Science) where a valedictorian or someone who gets 800s on SATs gets as much recognition as a football player? Do honors student get letter sweaters? Who gets looked down on more - the dumb jock or the elitist smart geek?
I was on a committee coming up with selection criteria for a new principal at my kids high school. I suggested improving academics - and most of the others looked at me like I was crazy. And we’re a pretty good school too.
I wonder how many people actually think of Bush as rich? He only allows himself to be seen cutting brush. I bet that a poll would grossly underestimate his net worth.
[QUOTE=John Mace]
It’s not so much a matter of being an intellectual, it’s more a matter of thinking you know better how people should live their lives.
[quote]
So, be smart, just don’t try to achieve anything with it.
Or, for instance, how aerosol hairspray creates holes in the protective ozone layer that keeps the giant nuclear reaction in the sky from killing us all. Oh wait, no, that makes you an elitist again.
So, be smarter than other people, but only tell them what they want to hear.
