Intellectual Elitism, or are people just really stupid?

[anti_shrub]

I keep seeing posts on how Dems will never win again because we're so snobby, but can the people who beat the drum of elitism really make the claim that there isn't a brain gap between Dems and Pubbies?

I know when I see someone who's got a flag in every crevace of their vehicle and the rear bumper/trunk area is covered in right wing catch phrase bumper stickers, my first thought isn't "That's obviously a very intellegent person who has been swayed by the media". My first thought is "This guy's a f'ing idiot". Does that make me a snob? Perhaps. But in the age of the Internet, anyone who refuses to search out answers for themselves and allows the media to spoon feed them the Rove approved message without question deserves to get looked down on just a bit.

I can't agree with calling people elitist because they don't stop to consider the feelings of such a brainwashed (and brain dead) Pubbie who would no sooner go off on a tirade about educated liberals in their ivory towers not knowing how the "real world" operates.

[LoneStarLiberal]

1. Good Question

The answer is, unfortunately, relative to who you are asking.

Contemporary Republicans and a sadly growing number of contemporary conservatives in general are anti-intellectual. This is a historical trend in America that runs somewhat on the following script: Intellect is admired as long as you are smart enough but not too smart for your own good. Being too smart for your own good is a broad script that, in contemporary times, includes anyone who has an intelligent criticism of the Bush administration's domestic or foreign policies. I would highly recommend Richard Hofstadter's "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life" to you. It's dated but still very relevant.

I'm a researcher and a PhD student who works at my university's computing center. I consider my field to be an intellectual one and I consider myself to be an intellectual. I feel this administration and the people who support it have declared war on me and all other intellectuals. And I have no qualms whatsoever about fighting back.

So if you are asking me, there are just a whole lot of selfish, narrow-minded, drooling morons in this world. If that makes me elitist, so be it. I'm elitist. But at least I'm not a mewling sheep seeking the safety of the herd and the strong hand of authority to live my life.

[anti_shrub]

3. I don't even consider myself that much of an intellect

I'm one class away from an Assoc degree, so I don't have the doctoral alphabet soup after my name that people who are anti-intellectual point to.

The whole elitism thing plays into Pubbie hands. We all know they dislike education. The more people learn, the more liberal they become. The easy way to fix that is to demonize intellectuals and anyone who shows a greater intellect is a snob.

[Brian Sweat]

7. "I'm a researcher and a PhD student...

...who works at my university's computing. I consider my field to be an intellectual one and I consider myself to be an intellectual."

There was a time when this would have gone without question. Have we reached a point were a PhD candidate would not automatically be considered an intellectual? If so, that is a very sad comment on the state of education in this country.

[ma4t]

39. sad commentary but true

"Have we reached a point were a PhD candidate would not automatically be considered an intellectual?"

Sadly, if one looks at the catalog from pretty much any university one will find that a Ph.D. can be had in many fields that require absolutely no intellectual rigor whatsoever.

[LoneStarLiberal]

41. Yes Indeed

It's a sad fact but a true one....one not isolated to my particular school.

[leftofthedial]

2. the problem is widespread ignorance

and a complete lack of curiosity about the truth.

many people would rather be spoon-fed lies than to have to do the slightest work to find the truth.

It's an intellectual fast-food culture. We wait for 10 minutes in a drive-through to get three days' worth of calories and no nutrition instead of spending fifteen minutes to prepare something nutritious. Same thing with information. Tune in Rush, no thinking necessary, just soak up a couple of soundbites.

[StopTheMorans]

6. "Tune in Rush, no thinking necessary, just soak up a couple of soundbites"

I agree with you 100% there, it completely absolves the individual of any responsibility to truly get educated when all they have to do is memorize the day's "talking points" and then blindly repeat them in conversation without really stopping to consider the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind them. This goes along with the whole conservative demonization of "over-educated liberals" and the way that they constantly bash universities and professors for tolerating/encouraging "free-thinking". Free thought is the antidote for conservatism. Granted, it is a much longer and harder road (the fact that 99.99% of all issues are always gray, never black and white tends to scare many people away, many cannot handle cognitive dissonance)while conservatism relies upon memorization of the party's ideology, and once this is accomplished, a fierce defense of any member of the party/party platform regardless of whether they are actually "right" or not (or whether the platform is outdated/not applicable to the current situation). People just want to be right and will take the easiest route to further this perception in their own mind; it is much easier to claim "moral clarity" than to actually engage in intelligent discourse and weigh all sides of a situation. To conservatives, there is only one side, their side, and everything else is evil simply b/c they refuse to wrap their minds around the fact that almost nothing in this world is cut and dry. my rant...

on edit: edited to correct subject/verb agreement

[Brian Sweat]

4. If you are stupid,

I am going to think that you are stupid. If that makes me an elitist snob, so be it. Half the people out there have below average intelligence.

[anti_shrub]

5. Wasn't that a Quayle-ism?

"Half the people out there have below average intelligence."

[Sinistrous]

13. Appropriate to Quayle

The correct statement would have been: "Half the people out there are below MEDIAN intelligence."

Damn, I hate nit-pickers.

[wuushew]

16. mean is also correct

since intelligence distribution is a normal bell shaped curve

[Sinistrous]

22. True, for a normal distribution.

but I believe the distribution of intelligence is positively skewed.

Also, I have just exhausted the little I remember from statistics.

I humbly leave the field.

[Brian Sweat]

24. Yeah,

but if you say that half the people out there have below mean or median intelligence, half the people out there won't know what you mean.

[rogerashton]

8. The Kingfish.

I've been reading T. Harry Williams' biography of Huey Long, a genuine (if flawed) progressive who had a reputation as a vulgar clown.

Cut to the conclusion.

What people want is someone who really is one of themselves, except moreso. It's cool enough to be smart if you are smart in ways they can conceive they are, only you are moreso. That's an advantage Hollywood Stars and self-made billionaires have -- Joe Everyman really believes that, with a few breaks and a little more effort, he could have been a star and a CEO. But not a college professor. He never wanted to be one of those, and more than that, never understood why anybody wanted to. Still doesn't.

Everybody knew that Huey could be as intelligent and as intellectual as he needed to be, but his clowning and damnfoolery and boozing and brawling gave people the feeling that he was one of them, in the ways that mattered. We need progressives who have that touch.

[Sick of Bullshit]

76. The problem is, Huey's style got him gunned down

in the lobby of the Louisiana capitol building.

[hatrack]

78. Huey also finished Tulane Law School with honors in nine months

That says a lot about his intellectual gifts, at least imho.

[QC]

9. PhD candidate here as well

Spending my entire adult life in academe has shown me that not all intellectuals are smart. I've known some utter fools with prestigious doctorates. The one thing they all have in common is their unshakable conviction that they are smarter than everyone else.

And, frankly, the word "sheeple" sets my teeth on edge. It's very hard for me to imagine Mother Jones or Eugene Debs denouncing the Great Unwashed the way so many of us do here. When was the last time the Left really tried to reach the masses? While the Right was setting up a media machine to propagandize the working class, we were taking over the English Department and writing Lacanian analyses of Madonna videos. We're way behind them, and sitting around preening ourselves on how oh-so-intelligent and aware we are will not catch us up.

[Iverson]

11. right on, baby

You touched on a pet peeve of mine: the phony radicalism of postmodernist literary theory.

"I've known some utter fools with prestigious doctorates."

Let me second that.

[thehonesttruth]

55. cheers for QC and iverson

and i hate it when some pos(T)ers, call people "sheeple", also. i have nothing but respect for middle-class, working class and the working poor in this country. that's where the groove of the planet happens. peace

[juajen]

81. Generalizing is always dangerous

My father was a hard-working, uneducated steelworker. He, however, did not ever fit the norm. He was, indeed, a smart man, though some of his choices were certainly dumb.

Actually, I like the word "sheeple". It's a state of mind and does not take into account education or IQ, working class or "other". To my mind, it simply means people who follow blindly. I know a few college professors who certainly fit into this category, and plenty of so-called "working class" people who fit into the progressive liberal thinking category. I certainly don't mind being called a progressive liberal, or "a bleeding heart liberal". I call a sheep a sheeple if it fits.

[sendero]

62. people generally....

.... confuse education with intelligence. There is only a mild correllation between the two.

[rasputin1952]

71. I believe you have struck a chord, deseo...

There are highly educated people that could never learn the finer aspects of a socket wrench, but they would be more than happy to analyze said wrench, take it apart, see what makes it work. But those with true intellect are the ones that can use the tools around them, whether they be hand tools, or mental tools.

I have known a great number of people in my time, and I came to a conclusion years ago in the Army; "I don't care how smart you are, can you shoot"?

There are always times to discuss the finer intellectual matters of life and the universe during chow, or sitting in the latrine for that matter....but if we get into a fire-fight, you damn sure better know how to shoot; elsewise, we may not be having any intellectual conversations in the future.

Education is fine, I have known many an educated idiot, they just have paper to prove it. I have an IQ of 142, who cares? My brother has a higher IQ than I, who cares? bush has an MBA, I don't care about the degree, but I do care that he is an idiot. Idiots, or worse, educated idiots are the bane of mankind. For the neo-cons, their worst nightmare is an intelligent woman, this is why they hate Hillary. Not because of her Law degree, but because of her intelligence, and her ability to use it. She scares these people to death.

BTW, I have a GED I earned in the Army....all of the rest of my formal training, was in disciplines I found interesting. I never went for a degree, and probably never will. I respect educated intellectuals, but I despise educated fools or hypocrites.

Live life the best you can, and learn how to grow your own food. The greatest library in the world, will feed your mind, but you'll die of starvation while getting the synapses of your brain to function correctly. A combination of both is perfect.

:bounce:

[noiretextatique]

third on that

i know a few utter fools with doctorates.

[anti_shrub]

12. Interesting

Since the only people I ever see "preening" around here are those who constantly pat themselves on the back for not being elitist like the rest of the snobs, and take pride in announcing their fellow liberal's elitism where ever they deem it appropriate.

As a great man once said, a pat on the back is only six inches away from a kick in the ass.

[QC]

30. "I know you are, but what am I?"

That's really the substance of your reply, you know.

"We're not doing it--*you're* doing it"

The assumption in your original post that everyone has internet access and the time to track down foreign news sites is, if not elitist, then close. Most poor folks can't afford computers or even dial-up, and few have the time that many of us have here to spend online anyway.

It's clear that the masses have not gotten our message, so there are two things we can do. We can examine our presentation of that message, or we can call the masses stupid. I happen not to think that the latter approach is very useful.

[anti_shrub]

32. More people have PCs than you think

I worked at a electronics chain for years, I saw a lot of folks who I would never guess would have interest in a computer end up buying one.

Besides, libraries are still free and (for now) still offer internet access.

There's no excuse for being uninformed.

[QC]

36. OK, what about time?

Not to get personal here, but have you ever had two work two jobs to scrape by? People who do live that way do not have a lot of time. I've done it, and I've come home exhausted every evening, only to start on yardwork, cleaning house, grading papers, etc.

I agree with you, though, that people who are sufficiently motivated will find out stuff on their own. But it is much harder for someone who is poor than for those of us who have money and some leisure time.

And there's another important factor in voter apathy that we haven't talked about here: a lot of people have come to feel, understandably, that politics has nothing to do with their lives. I've seen that attitude a lot in my students the past few years, who are often far more cynical than a 20yo should be. They don't believe that politics has any impact on their lives. In many cases, they are right.

I also get frustrated with educated, reasonably affluent people who cannot be troubled to inform themselves, but not everyone who has tuned out politics, or who believes whatever the talking heads say, is equally blameworthy.

[BiggJawn]

20. But I'm NOT Mother jones or E.V. Debbs, am I?

Just a common garden-variety AAS here, not even considered by most to be "washed" much less intellectual.

After a few experiences with "I don't care what you read in 'The New York Times' or that commie paper, 'The Guardian'. THIS is what I heard on Rush's show...", you give up. You abandon your fellow traveler to their idiotic fate.

My OWN GIRLFRIEND, who is as Liberal as they come on campus w/o a PhD (OK, on THIS campus, we have a LOT of Conservative Profs) still refers to some of my sources for News as "one of those Weirdo Internet sites"...

it's too late. The "media machine" has done its job, and the sheeple are distrustful of anything that doesn't come from Rush or the Glass Tit.

I'm sorely disappointed with how gullible the Murkan Sheeple have become, and it pisses me off, and NO, it's NOT *MY* job to educate them.

I'm just the Video Tech Guy.

[QC]

25. So whose job is it to get our message out?

I guess the answer to that question depends on whether you want to change things or just complain.

If you want to change things, you have to frame your message so that people can understand it. If you only want to complain, then, well, you don't need anyone's advice on how to do that.

[ewagner]

48. Most important point

Communication of ideas cannot occur if the audience is incapable of understanding the communication itself.

It's certainly okay to be intellectual but consideration of those not capable or unwilling to become educated must be taken. Otherwise, you might as well address the masses in Swahilli (spelling)

[QC]

51. Very true.

Something I had to learn right away, as a new teacher, is that college freshmen and sophomores do not have the background or interest in literature that I have, or nor should I expect them too. So I can only be effective if I explain terminology and concepts in ways that relate to their experiences and understanding and make a strong effort to show how those concepts have something to do with their own lives.

If I do that, I can get some lively discussions going and even get some people interested in books, as happens now and then. If I don't do that, then I'm wasting their time and mine, too.

Am I saying that my students are stupid? No. But I am saying that since I know more about the subject than they do, having spent years studying it, I have an obligation to try to make it accessible to them.

I think the same applies to politics.

[sandnsea]

21. Yes and equally, education really isn't a panacea

I don't know if it's genetic or not, but some people truly are at their peak with an 8th grade education. It doesn't mean they aren't valuable and if they can't understand the Democratic message it's our fault for not respecting people right where they're at.

I used to think education would solve anybody's personal position in life, until I met two people in particular. One was a kitchen worker who was going to school to become a receptionist, which looked like a huge step upward to her. They make the same amount of money and one isn't any harder than the other. She didn't know that, took out a student loan for a distance education program, and ended up working in a kitchen anyway. Sad.

The other was a friend who I encouraged to go to college after her divorce. Her first semester, anthropology, and she just couldn't get past the section on brain development; the reptilian layer and all of that. Nope, she wasn't a reptile and that's that. She flunked out. Just could not figure out how to take in information whether she agreed with it or not; and moreover couldn't accept the consistencies in nature as applied to humans.

Could better education in the lower grades help this or are some people just limited by their own intellectual capacity. The Republicans don't care and honed their message so these people could understand it, so they accept it. Democrats didn't and still aren't. That's one thing Edwards seems to know and why I might be inclined to go with him as our candidate, he can talk to the people we haven't been able to reach.

[QC]

28. True.

I've been a college instructor for fourteen years and seen many, many students who were not suited to higher ed. And there's nothing wrong with that. The world needs receptionists and mechanics, and I do not think that blue-collar labor is demeaning.

[Brian Sweat]

29. I wasn't aware that the term "Sheeple" refers to the "Great Unwashed.

My understanding was that it refered specifically to people who blindly believe everything they are told.

[anti_shrub]

31. It doesn't

Some people want to make the term "sheeple" out to be the n-word for the common folk, when it's the term used to describe people who think Rush is the only conservative voice in the librul media.


on edit: subject typo

[QC]

43. As commonly used here, "sheeple" often implies the blue-collar types.

I mean, how many times have you heard Limbaugh listeners and religious fundamentalists characterized here as rednecks who live in trailers, drive pickup trucks, and have disturbingly few branches in their family trees?

In truth, most of the people I've known who religiously listened to Limbaugh have been professionals--lawyers and such. And many fundamentalists I've known are tech people and quite affluent.

But to hear many people here talk, Limbaughites and fundies are ignorant, poor country people.

[Brian Sweat]

46. It is all a matter of where you live and who you know

I live in a city of 1 million plus people and work in the it sector. Most of the people that I know live in the same city and work in the same sector. As a result, most of the people I know who are fundamentalist or Rash Slimeball fans are also in the IT sector.

But the truth is that most fundamentalist, most Slimeball fans, and most Republicans live in rural areas, have low incomes and are not well educated.

[QC]

47. Perhaps, but "most" does not equal "all."

It's just not a very good idea for us to assume that all of our enemies are poor, ignorant, and alienated. As Shrub says, that causes us to misunderestimate them. He has benefited greatly from that.

Still, I think you're right to point out that our observations have a lot to do with where we are and who we know. It's a very dangerous thing to think that the whole world is one's neighborhood on a bigger scale.

I would be interested in seeing Limbaugh's demographics info. Do you know if that sort of thing is publicly available? My guess, though I have no evidence for it, is that Limbaugh's appeal is less a matter of class or region and more a matter of a particular mindset--one that likes easy answers and scapegoats.

[Brian Sweat]

52. I am sure Slimeballs demographics are available somewhere,

but I have no idea where.


Here is the basis for my assertion. Most Slimeball listeners vote Republican. Most Republicans live in rural areas. Most people in rural areas have low incomes and are less educated than average. There are some logical falacies in this assumption, but I am convinced that the facts will bear me out.

There was a map of the 2000 presidential election that showed all of the counties that voted for Bush in red and all of the counties that voted for Gore in blue. Almost all of the red counties were poor, rural areas. Most of the blue counties were urban and suburban.

[QC]

54. Yeah, the Goopers have a strange coalition going.

Poor country people + the captains of industry and finance. Religious fanatics + the country club set.

It's weird and I can't help but think fragile as well.

FWIW, I think the reason poor country people now vote Republican is that the "cultural issues" that appeal to them are the only ones in play, since the Democrats long ago abandoned old-fashioned class politics. Since neither side represents their economic interests, they go with the one that at least pretends to respect their values. After letting the GOP set up the game that we, we lost.

[Brian Sweat]

58. I think that is a very astute observation

Rural people tend to be socially conservative. It is that way all over the world. The Taliban received their support from the rural areas of Afghanistand and today from the rural areas of Pakistan. In Iran the Mulahs receive their support from rural areas, while the people in the cities support the moderate government.


Until the recently, the Democratic party was not scene as being extremely liberal socially. It also supported economic policies that appealed to rural voters.

In 1960 Alaska was a Democratic state and Hawaii was a Republican states. Today Hawaii is solidly Democratic and Alaska is equally Republican. Many of the western states like Montana and Wyoming were Democratic too.

[sendero]

64. anyone...

.... who thinks that economic class is indicative of intelligence is also barking up the wrong tree. I've met house painters who are smarter than plenty of people who think they are smart :)

[Yupster]

65. I handle retirement accounts for our local Jr college teachers

They are not as a group overly smart, other than in their specialty. In some matters, like money, they are far below average.

If you want to know about taxes, you would have far better luck asking the janitor in the hall, than the english professor in the office.

That's just my experiences from meeting with scores of them over 13 years. Never good to generalize though.

[quilp]

10. The "Pubbies own the megaphones.

There aren't really more of them. They are just a lot noisier. And they can afford bigger flags. Always bear in mind nearly four million voters voted against Bush than for him. Even after all the whoreish positive press Bush received, and the disgusting negative press heaped on Gore. Something that is always pushed in the backgound.

[jiacinto]

14. What's wrong with putting the flag on the car?

I have several liberal friends who have flags on their car. Why must those on the far left always have problems with the American flag?

[Iverson]

17. missed half

I believe the original poster did not refer to the flag in isolation, but instead in combination with right-wing bumper stickers.

Your question, then, should be "why must those on the far left always have problems with the flag being displayed with far-right bumper stickers?" That would also fix the inaccurate sterotype.

[StopTheMorans]

18. here we go again...

I have no problem with the flag UNLESS it is used as a shield to deflect the bearer of the flag from rational discourse/free thought. which it very often is. is this going to turn into the "why do liberals always blame america first" fest? have you ever thought about the politicization of the flag right now, and what people take it to mean? how the flag is equated with patriotism, and how people assume that waving a flag/having one on their car automatically makes them patriotic, even though they have no idea what it stands for or no awareness of the current issues? sorry, but a lot of people put flags on their cars for the same reason people put blindfolds over their eyes, it allows them to sleep easy at night, but at least the people with blindfolds aren't putting them on to veil their ignorance in the garb of the patriot.

[quilp]

19. There is nothing wrong with putting A flag on A car.

But some of these civilians deliberately make their cars look military. While the drivers, of course, are safely over here. Many very patriotic people look on excessive flag waving as a cheap expression of patriotism. That is what they find so objectionable. When you look at most of the flag wavers in the Bush Administration, you have to admit they have a point. It is not the flag. It is who is waving it.

[ewagner]

49. Flags on cars

My problem with flags on cars is that the Flag has become a "brand" for the Republican Party and the conservative agenda. Much in the same way flag lapel pins became a psuedo-republican fraternity pin.

[wuushew]

23. especially when the flag is so small and modest </sarcasm>

[anti_shrub]

27. I have problems with people who put a flag on their car

and allow it to get ripped to shreds from the wind, which happens when a flag is placed on a car which usually travels at about 30-40 MPH.

[sangha]

34. Carlos, it's disrespectful

Putting a flag on a car violates several of the rules for displaying a US flag. The most disrespectful aspect of this is how it exposes the flag to all sorts of dirt and filth.

[dawg]

35. I think we need to reclaim the flag ...

I'm quite fond of the flag. To me, it's a symbol of freedom - not conservatism. Conservatism would be better symbolized by the stars and bars.

[Brian Sweat]

38. Nothing wrong with putting a flag on your car.

I think that the problem is that many of us have seen people use the flag as a way of saying, "I'm more patriotic than you." As a result, many of us tend to have a knee jerk reaction when we see someone displaying the flag. We automatically think that they are at it again instead of assuming that they are just being real patriots.

To me, this is just another example of how the right has beaten us down. It is not our fault if we are gun shy. They're the ones who have been using the flag as a weapon against us.


OK
Tastefully displaying the flag on your vehicle, at your place of business or on your home.


Not OK
"These colors never run" bumper stickers.

Multiple flags displayed all over your car.

Flags left on your car until they have become tattered and dirty.

Gigantic flags in front of your place of business, so big they blot out the sun.

Gigantic flags in front of your place of business that quickly become tattered because the material cannot handle the forces.

[maxsolomon]

45. your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore

the byrds i think.

[Old and In the Way]

61. John Prine

I think.

[greekspeak]

53. There is nothing wrong about proudly displaying a flag

The problem is the distortion of what the flag means. First of all, there is a flag code, that explains how to treat the flag respectably. For instance, there are appropriate ways to display the flag. Putting one on each antenna of your car and letting it blow in the wind to tatters is not one of them.

The other problem with many flag displays is that they do not embody what the flag stands for. Who has more respect for the flag? Is it the person who doesn't even own a flag, but looks at the flag, marvels at the pain and pleasure, the joy and sorrow the galliantry and solidarity for which is stands? Or is it the person who has a knee-jerk reaction to a bad situation and uses the flag as a mental and emotional weapon? Somehow, I doubt that most posters on DU would fault person number one. But a great many of us have a problem with person number two. So its not that we have problems with the American flag, but rather how it has become co-opted and misused, and against displays that go totally against for what the flag stands.

[nolabels]

57. What's wrong with practicing Voodoo

Simply place the straw man (Voodoo Doll or Wicca Man) flat on your palm and slowly it raises to stand upright. Under your complete control at all times. This is a sell out whenever demonstrated. Members of the Shadow Digest already know that there are some wonderful effects possible with this item and we supply you with The Wicker Man, a superb story and routine by kind permission of Joe Lantiere.
PRICE (U.K.) £9 inclusive.
OVERSEAS add air-mail and credit card fee.

To Order directly from The House Of Secrets, click on the email icon below and when your addressed blank page appears, write 'Voodoo Doll' in the subject box. Then write your order/enquiry and send.

http://www.dragonskull.co.uk/voodoo_doll_picture.htm

[Pobeka]

74. I have no problem with the decals

But I wonder how many barrels of oil a day are burned dragging those
flags down the road at highway speeds. Any aeronautical engineers care to speculate the energy requirements for 1 of those flags?

[Droopy]

15. This liberal knows all about the "real world"

And it makes me swing even further to the left.

I've been working since I was sixteen. I managed to sqeeze in two years of college, but every job I've ever had has been blue collar. I've been a truck driver for the last 6.5 years. If somebody does go off on a tirade about liberals not knowing what the world is like, tell them to come down here. We'll set that straight.

[BiggJawn]

26. Same here, Droopy...

I know Gubbmint Cheez. I know getting the gas shut off. I know ALL that shit that happened during the "Reagan-Bush Miracle Years". I've gotten my hands dirty and gotten hurt on the job with nothing but grit and pain pills to get through it.
I have a 2-year degree and I STILL get dirty and rip my clothes to make a buck.

The closest I have ever been to having an "Ivory Tower" is that stack of soap on my bathroom shelf.

[dawg]

37. That government cheese is darn good!

Or at least, it used to be. Why doesn't the cheese in the grocery stores tastes that good?

[Chovexani]

68. Gubmint cheese

I don't know what it is about gubmint cheese, but it always makes the best macaroni and cheese. It was my great aunt's secret weapon. :)

[sangha]

33. False dichotomy

"elitism" and "stupidity" are not mutually exclusive

[alaine]

44. How true, how true.

It's bad enough to let your elitism show, but it's stupid to let it show when you've got something to lose because of it.

One could argue that the problem is not the elitism, but the display of it and the subsequent political alienation of people from the party because of it. Come on people, we could at least fake it like the republicans do.

[tkmorris]

50. You fake it

I used to fake any number of things, and I didn't like myself much. I make a lot more messes these days, but I fake nothing. My skin seems to fit better this way.

[alaine]

59. That was a joke.

Just trying to point out that the right wing is a whole lot better at pretending to be the ally of the working class, yet screwing them over royally at the same time.

I mean if we thought about it, we must be REALLY, REALLY unappealing to someone the thread author regards as stupid, because for them to STILL vote republican in the face of all this anti-working poor legislation shows what a low opinion they have of us. We need to do a better job reaching out to people instead of looking down our noses at them

[Loonman]

40. Intellectual Elitism

Is a phrase stupid Republicans use to define anyone who has read more books than they have. So if you've read at least two books in your life, with one being sans pictures, you're an Intellectual Elite!

[QC]

42. Agreed--the charge is a way to dismiss

an idea by attacking the source. And it rests on an equally silly notion that the universities are filled with "tenured radicals." As Camille Paglia pointed out, right for at least once in her life, real radicals didn't get tenure. They were not willing to suck up and jump through hoops. And the aging hippy profs I've had generally were conformists and game players underneath the beards and Birkenstocks.

Besides all that, anyone in academic life knows that administration tends to be quite conservative, as do the power departments that bring in the money--business, law, engineering, pharmacy, etc. So yeah, we tend to be pretty liberal in the English department, but how much influence do we have?

Still, though, I think there is something to the charge that liberals are often distant from--and dismissive of--the concerns of the working class. That's one reason--old-fashioned anti-intellectualism being the other--that the charge of "liberal elitism" has so much resonance for so many people.

[pnb]

56. Its more than just being anti-intellectual...

...and it stems from some legitimate complaints.

A person who has gone on about their life with a small amount of formal education but is still doing what he/she wants and knows what he/she wants is going to have a problem when a 22 year old college grad tells him/her what their goals and beliefs should be or calls them stupid for believing differently. Quite a few (certainly not all) well-educated people tend to do this.

There is also the fact that quite a few well-educated people believe that education automatically makes you more intelligent and savvy. Not true at all. It just means you are better trained in a specific area. But if you try to come off that way to someone less educated, it is going to create this type of anti-intellectual thinking as well. After a while, some people stop differentiating and assume this of ALL educated people.

Believe me, if someone used their PhD as a rationale to tell me that my beliefs and desires are wrong and that they know better what was good for me, I'd be pissed off too.

[AntiBushRepub]

60. To the original poster...

I've stated before on here, my views are mostly conservative, except on a few issues.

I'm certainly not a liberal.

I managed to make it into Mensa, with my inferior conservative brain.
(I know, I know. I'm just making a point, bear with me)

There are alot more conservatives out there than the shotgun rack/Budweiser crowd. You'd be surprised.

Is this how you plan to win elections? By dismissing over half of the American population as dim witted whenever a poll comes out you don't like? One that doesn't scream from the rooftops that Bush is going down in flames, and soon Howard Dean will dance on his grave and you will all tag team Ann Coulter in the sack like you're all hoping will happen?

You know, I could possibly be persuaded to vote Dem depending on the circumstances. But lately, I'd sooner vote Forrest Gump into office than one of the current crop of Dems.

How come you guys have such a hard time accepting people who think different from you? Why must they be stupid if they disagree with you? Why can't they just be people who have a different point of view? For a supposedly tolerant bunch, there isn't much tolerance on the pages of DU.

Which will probably be evident when this becomes my 'ban' post.

Apparently you don't much care for open debate, either.

Seems like if you were so sure in your ideas, you'd want people to come debate you so you could shoot them down and show everybody who's the man.

But I don't see that. I see a big circle jerk.

I can understand banning the people who are really disrespectful and post nothing but flame bait. But a little debate might legitimize this board a little

Just a suggection.

Just a little honesty here, no disrespect intended.

-An

[sendero]

66. I'm not sure...

... the board needs the kind of 'legitmacy' you have to offer. Good day.

[AntiBushRepub]

67. For what it's worth....

I suppose by that kind of legitimacy I spoke of, I mean having stood up to the test of intelligent debate, opposing viewpoints included, and passed muster. I see alot of pretty wild stuff thrown around over here, no offense.

You're preaching to a choir here. I am aware of the fact that this is a liberl minded place for Dems to discuss ideas, but maybe instead of banning anyone remotely conservative immediatly, make a judgement call and let a few stay on who are not disrespectful and rude.

I can't help wondering what all those "deleted post" used to be.

I see profanity in other posts so I don't think it's that.

Anyone care to say what makes up the majority of those?

-An

[tom_paine]

70. I appreciate what you say, AntiBushRepub

Let me try to reply to your very valid points:

1) For many of us (but clearly not all), this is not an issue of Left vs. Right anymore, but Tyranny vs Liberty, Republic vs. Empire, Police State vs. Security State (which with all it's faults and flaws I'll take ANY DAY over where the Busheviks are leading us). I have plenty of conservative leaning views, from guns to affirmative action to immigration (and a couple in between) to go along with my liberal and moderate views on environment, unions, wealth disparity, etal., but I cannot support what the current Republican Party has become (the Busheviks). If you are truly an anti-Bush Repub, then perhaps you have a knowledge of what I mean.

2) You have to understand that what you are dealing with is the mirror image in many way of the Clinton haters, except we have legitimate fears whereas much of the anti-Clinton was very purposefully whipped up. I know you will want me to back THAT statement up so here goes...

a) The Clinton-hating Industry, shall we say, was blared from every outlet...CNN had on Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham and that bunch repeatedly, posing as moderates. The Washington Post printed every Whitewater lie wrapped around the grains of truth in this pathetic excuse for a scandal of which Clinton was ultimately exonerated. But as I search my memory now, I don't ever remember reading about that exoneration. Why? The Clinton-hating Industry was fully endorsed from nearly every level in the Republican Party and agreed with. Trent Lott, Dan Burton, Orrin Hatch, Strom Thurmond, et al. were as madly shrill in many ways as Ann Coulter (didn't Burton or some other Repub congresscritter call him a "scumbag") and used their position to reinforce the Clinton-hating industry with hearings, investigations, and in my opinion usurpations of power more grave than anything Clinton did.

b) Contrast that...really think about this...with the Bush-hating industry as it were. A few internet sites. Newspapers/TV, in contrast, in spite of the tremendous grist of scandals fraud and lies which have lead to people dying, can't stay focused on any Bush scandal for more than a week, if that, from Bush ties to Enron to Bush's repeated multiple lies (that he STILL keeps telling, such as his odious blaming of the press for the drumbeat to war. Consdier that far from being a vast echo-chamber of political power for the Bush-hating industry here at DU, many Democratic Congresscritters STILL take time out to praise the Emperor (you won't hear the Emperor being called "scumbag" and if anyone dared they would be excoriated for MONTHS across the dial...the Orwellian Double-Standard I ahve grown so used to). Last but not least, the DLC and Lieberman actually mimic Right-Wing attacks on 'liberals'. So let's just say there is a slight support-system difference in the two similar, yet quite constrasting, movements.

2) back to the point...so we have some angry, Thomas-Jefferson-in-1775-angry people here. many of us kept our cool for YEARS as we listened to what your side said about us (have you LISTENED to what the Repubs have said about Democrats, let alone their President, for the last decade). That we were lazy welfare cheats unpatriotic no-values-havin communist traitors, to name a few. Myself, I'm a veteran and a homeowner and billpayer/taxpayer who quite firmly believes in capitalism. You can only listen to so much of that before you begin to return the favor. Being hated breeds hatred in return. I held out for rationality as long as I could, but now that Ann Coulresque assumptions like that are now the unerlying driving force of what passes for a "National Dialogue" how can I or anyone who loves the original ideal of a Moderate Two-Party nation remain passive? Keep turning the other cheeck when your face is caved in?

And you're damned right I agree with DU's policy of banning screechy Repubs while leaving the screechy Dems and Greens alone. Jesus Christ, one can't swing a dead cat or watch what you consider the most "liberal" of sources like CBS or CNN, without getting a healthy dose of right-wing screeching or sancitmonious patronizing (Jonah Goldberg, anyone? Jack McCafferty or Lou Dobbs?) down to centrist journalists who fear to be slapped with the "liberal bias" rather than argue vehemently for the largely unrepresented other side.

If you want to be convinced of anything, convince yourself to turn off the idiot box, and consider what is said here at DU, anger and all. Some of it is bullshit and you must discard it that offends your intellect. What of it? We all do that every day.

In the end, only you can decide the truth. In the end, only you can decide on whether or not having an Attorney General (of EITHER Party) aggressively rewriting the Constitution without passing amednments, or a pResident utlizing and manipulating goverment agencies in unprecedented ways to churn out desired answer regardless of facts or aggregating the powers of the other branches to himself.

You see, what it all boils down to is this: If there is an alternate universe somewhere where it is the Democrats abusing the system in this way, breaking down Constitutional barriers, dangerosuly stirring up hatred (and it is hatred now...on both sides...perhaps as great as at any time since the Civil War but expressed differently, since our lives are so nonviolent and nonconfrontational) for personal and political gain, packing the courts with Hard-Left Ideologues and padding the bank accounts of their Commie Pals with phony collusional no-bid contracts, etc etc.

I hope in that alternate universe, I am standing side-by-side with Republicans fighting for but Liberty vs. Tyranny, Republic vs. Empire, Security State vs. Police State,.

Get it? Think about what I've said please, and I would love to hear a reply...

[Yupster]

63. Considering that

high school drop-outs and the poorest people in the country are two loyal voting blocs of the Democratic Party, I don't think you're so safe saying that in general Democrats are smarter than Republicans.

Of course it's never right to generalize, but I don't think as a group, very poor high school drop-outs would be the smartest group in town.

[iangb]

69. Not "Stupid"......just..

.....ill-informed, and misled.

It doesn't require a PHD or even a great intellect to be informed.....it just requires effort.

"Effort? Why should I have to work at being informed when I can see what's going down with a click on this remote?"

And it isn't even laziness.....the networks will assure you that their coverage contains all you need to know. Why disbelieve them?

"Living a life is hard enough these days without making it harder on yourself by looking for 'problems'."

[rasputin1952]

72. An honest observation...

while this has nothing to do with winning elections, by reading many of the posts above, I would say we have our fair share of snobs in the house tonight.

Please don't get me wrong, there is nothing actually wrong with this, but take a look at the posts, mine included. Yes, we can be snobbish, and apparently, we have no qualms about it.

[Pobeka]

73. Most people are intelligent

Just in different ways. For example: I was helping out at my daughter's school, they throw a schoolwide BBQ twice a year, and a district employee drives around this panel truck with all the stuff needed. When he asked what I did, and I said "scientist", he started the "oh, you're much smarter than me" line.

I asked him, "You think I'm smart, but I haven't got the first clue how to properly load and unload all the equipment on this truck." And he saw it. We both use information and our brains, just in different ways.

This is of course a extrapolation from one person to a larger group, but I think it's got a lot of merit.

What we need to overcome, I think, is the illusion that we "just can't get through" to those who claim loyalty to the republican party. True enough, for a small minority. But there's a huge fraction of folks who are moderates, and we keep alienating them by telling them they're stupid.

Well, DUH. That's no way to engage in a conversation and hope to convey valid thoughts to the other party. And, I am working hard at this every day. I find many are wanting out of the ridiculous mess this country is headed in, but they need a way to bow out graciously. They are in a form a denial.

We gotta take this conversation to the streets, to the office, to our friends and families, in many small, civil discussions. Let's not piss them off and force them into further denial.

[Ladyhawk]

75. I haven't read this entire thread,

but let me throw my opinion into the ring.

Having grown up in a religious right-wing community, I can tell you that many people are willfully ignorant. If they started to actually think for themselves, their entire world view would fall apart, so they actually avoid knowledge like the plague.

I've tried to point out the lies of Bush to my mother and she actually covers her ears and says, "I don't want to hear it."

I'm one of the few people in my family who dared to think for herself. When examined even cursorily, the world view I had been fed by my family shattered. God, it hurt. It still hurts. I lost my friends, my family, everyone.

Sometimes it's just easier to refuse to think. After having stood up for what is true (and lost most of what I had as a result), I have very little sympathy for those who continually stick their heads in the sand. Sometimes I have to take a breather from the "examined life," but I'll be damned if I'm going to believe everything I'm told.

[rasputin1952]

77. You are correct...

it IS easier to avoid thinking. I have neighbors that don't have TV, and qvaid the Newspapers as if the were printed in Arabic.

One of the reasons some religious sects have so much power over others, is because thinking takes effort. Pleasantries and hellfire/brimstone go down easier if the mind is left to waste away.

I too have lost much in my pressing for the truth. I miss none of it, as long as I still have my son, and my capacity to good, little else matters. Funny thing about the truth...everyone cries for it continuously, but when it is there for all to see or presented to the masses, they flee, as if the Black Death were upon them. The truth is often brutal, and can lay waste to false hopes and dreams built on sand. But it can also be the strongest foundation that anything can be built upon. Sand, as lies, is cheap; you must expend energy and time to build on a foundation of truth, but what you build, will last for ages.

[9215]

79. Without fools for comparison

we would never know wisdom. }(

[ulysses]

80. welcome to the conundrum

A lot of people are, in fact, either stupid or too lazy to separate themselves. At the same time, they're our only hope.

[depakid]

82. Not always intellectual elitism- but often laziness and stupidity

I know a number of people with advanced degrees who are just plain lazy, and don't bother to keep themselves informed- even of developments in their chosen fields, which is disturbing, because these are people in the legal and healthcare professions. I have also met people who have sterling curricula vitae who can only be considered stupid. This is also disturbing, because I have vetted these folks as potential expert witnesses and I have cross-examined more than a few whose utter lack of knowledge threw my rhythm off.

On the other hand, my best friend never graduated high school, and yet is one of the most intelligent, broad minded and well read people I know. In addition, the guy can build you a Victorian house complete with elaborate trim and paint, from the foundation up.

The defining characteristics, I think, are empathy and avarice.

My friend cares about people and is interested in and amazed at the world around him. He's also the most selfless person I've ever met, often to his own detriment. Accordlingly, he's a lifelong progressive.

Rightwingers in my experience DO NOT share these characteristics. They typically have little empathy, are often greedy and have no broad intellectual curiosity. They don't give a shit about anything other than "them and theirs," and so don't have much interest in anything outside of their narrow fields or hobbies. Hence they are easily duped (especially if they are intolerant) into supporting candidates and movements that are not in their best interests.

Moreover, they tend to be closeminded and resistant to re-examining their own attitudes, beliefs and values.

I'd say that pretty well sums up the average Freeper.

[GoneOffShore]

83. I'm a snob

and an elitist. I field phone calls every day from people who should have a minder just to cross the road.
There seems to be a large portion of our society that just doesn't get it. They are willing to buy the Walcrap goods, eat the mcPuke food, and grab onto the lying pig boy sound bites for their arguements.
So, what's the answer here?
Push them kicking and screaming into awareness? Or give up?
I don't have the answers, but I think that a bit more 'liberal arts' education could make a difference. We're too concerned with making a buck, being a success, getting the bling-bling than we are with really appreciating the world around us.
It's just a question of getting people to see over the edge of their tubs, as someone said.
Oh hell, I'm ranting drunkenly.
And I'm still a snob.

[tom_paine]

84. Ignorance is not a problem until it gains unchecked POWER

The Constitution and Bill of Rights were written with human fallibility in mind.

The Founding Fathers never could imagine the technological advances, but I have no doubts that behind the closed doors in Philadelphia 1789, there was much discussion of the coming of the Busheviks, the coming of Empire, the seizing of the prize of a Great Republic.

Even Ignorance in Power was foreseen, counterbalanced by checks and balances, it could be recovered from.

But now it is clear the Busheviks or the Confederate Broederbund or the VRWC or whatever the hell you want to call it have been gnawing at these edifices for DECADES with stealth and tons of $$$ fueled by growing wealth disparity.

Now it is quite clear.

[AntiBushRepub]

85. to: tom paine

I still plan on replying to your post.

Been so busy with work, and I know it'll be a long reply

I will when I have time though, just wanted to let you know I haven't abandoned the thread

-An