
Anti-Intellectualism and the “Dumbing Down” of America - amazedsaint
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201407/anti-intellectualism-and-the-dumbing-down-america
======
xorgar831
> Isaac Asimov once said: "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States,
> and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a
> constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life,
> nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just
> as good as your knowledge."

I've often wondered what would cause the United States' empire to collapse,
but see now how we've always been on a precipice. Ironically one that even
financial greed can't hold together. Even Hitler was democratically elected,
so given enough time the right conditions will inevitably come together for
someone similar to come into power, likely states will be forced to succeed
from the union when that happens etc.

~~~
tpeo
Hitler wasn't democratically elected. The Reich Chancellor was appointed by
the President. It just so happened that then president Paul von Hindenburg was
convinced by people on his staff to form a coalition government with the
NSDAP, which had around 40% of the popular vote.

Point is that, although people often point to the Nazis as some failure of
democracy, they didn't sweep into power by a landslide election (Hitler ran
for president against Hindenburg and lost). They were strong, but nowhere that
strong. It took a lot of political maneuvering and dirty tactics until they
finally seized power by exploiting the Reichstag Fire [0] in order to pass two
decrees [1][2] which essentially made Hitler a dictator.

Furthermore, although Nazis were anti-intellectuals, I don't think that was
the key to this whole process.

[0] :
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire)

[1] :
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree)

[2] :
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933)

~~~
xorgar831
Thanks for the correction! That's somewhat encouraging.

------
joseph8th
> The American Association of State Colleges and Universities report on
> education shows that the U.S. ranks second among all nations in the
> proportion of the population aged 35-64 with a college degree, but 19th in
> the percentage of those aged 25-34 with an associate or high school diploma,
> which means that for the first time, the educational attainment of young
> people will be lower than their parents;

Maybe because since 1995 [1]: "The average tuition and fees at private
National Universities jumped 179 percent. Out-of-state tuition and fees at
public universities rose 226 percent since 1995.In-state tuition and fees at
public National Universities grew the most, increasing a staggering 296
percent"

[1] [http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-
col...](http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-
college/articles/2015/07/29/chart-see-20-years-of-tuition-growth-at-national-
universities)

------
AdeptusAquinas
Trump might be good for America, in the same way Brexit might prove to be good
for Britain. These events pull the mist away, and show that something is
fundamentally broken.

Democracy is not supposed to be the rule of the mob. There are supposed to be
safeguards, constitutions and general education that mean the mess of voting
still leads the country in a forward, progressive direction. Each generation
better than the last etc.

Both Trump and Brexit show that somewhere along the line that process has
failed. And its their opponents that are to blame - they made too many
assumptions, capitalised on the wrong emotions for their personal gain etc.

Bringing it all crashing to the ground in a mix of bad hair and racism gives
an opportunity, after the dust settles, to rebuild better than before.

Assuming we survive the global recession to follow shortly of course.

~~~
vixen99
I understand your evident discomfort. How galling to find that seventeen
million people (dumbos?) constituting the 'mob' (five million more than ever
voted at any period in any UK general election) gave a thumbs down to the EU
as a governing body that imposes rules and regulations on people irrespective
of their wishes. If only those intellectuals who <did> support Brexit had had
a better education!

------
paulddraper
> The very mission of universities has changed, argues Liu. “We don’t educate
> people anymore. We train them to get jobs.”

And yet I hear about an unemployable student debt crisis. IMO it sounds like
we should be doing more training, not less.

~~~
randcraw
I can't agree. I think the problems lie with: 0) universities that teach an
excess of oft irrelevant minutia via regurgitation -- and not the mastery of
essentials followed by forays into lessons of experimentation and invention,
1) corporate HR departments that have no idea if they are failing and don't
care, 2) employers that believe matching on an alphabet soup of low level S/W
skills are the only way to attract and select the best people.

As long as a keen inventive mind is _not_ the principal measure of a job
candidate, corporate America will continue to minimize risk rather than
maximize potential, eventually populating itself only with robots, be they
wetware or software. And universities will continue blithely down their
current path to foster ever more sterile minds.

------
forgottenpass
Interesting idea, but any possibility of making a point is hindered by shying
away from root causes. The article focuses on contributing causes that are
themselves symptoms in a self-reinforcing system.

There is nothing new in saying the American schooling system is falling. Or in
blaming it on social mores of popularity in school jocks v. geeks. Or a wider
society that doesn't encourage learning. “We don’t educate people anymore. We
train them to get jobs.”

These are all age old whipping boys. -- Stop talking about them in and of
themselves and start asking WHY?

It beats a slightly fresher dead horse with the "angry social media posters"
but doesn't even mention the clickbait trash bloggers teaching them to have
those thoughts.

(Spoilers: Why not? This article is a Psychology Today blogpost, let's click
over to the homepage. The cover page of their latest issue touts an article
called "The Narcissist: It's not always who you think." Oh.)

(Bonus irony tangent: This point is raised by quoting a NY Times blogger to
argue that rational thought and critical thinking are on the decline, and
blames it on shouty everyday people. But what about the NY Times itself? Their
reporting is still among the best, but how often do they (or other prestigious
news outlets) themselves promote rationality and critical thinking? If they
spent a fraction of the time asking their audience to think critically about
"What is good governance?" instead of focusing on "Watch this trainwreck;" how
long do you think Donald Trump would have lasted? He'd be evaporated by the
first debate, if he made it that far.)

Of course this article is part of the problem too. Read the last paragraph,
then the short bio of the author that follows. He's not trying to solve
anything but instead pitching a business management book.

------
timehastoldme
Remember, we just elected a black man who was the head of the Harvard Law
Review. Whatever you think about him, he did not succeed because of know-
nothingism. We have bifurcated in some ways, but there's still a lot to be
excited about!

~~~
LyndsySimon
> Remember, we just elected a black man who was the head of the Harvard Law
> Review. Whatever you think about him, he did not succeed because of know-
> nothingism.

I can count on one hand the number of political positions Barack Obama has
held with which I agree, but you're right on this count. Obama was successful
because he's probably the greatest campaigner in my lifetime. That skill
includes the ability to build, manage, and inspire a large organization. His
campaign "machine" will have an impact on American politics for decades to
come.

> We have bifurcated in some ways, but there's still a lot to be excited
> about!

I agree, but I would also like to point out that the bifurcation is not along
party lines. It's obvious to me that there are not-insubstantial factions of
both major parties who simply do not care about the policies of their party's
candidates. They identify with the tribe, see them as the "good guys", and
therefore the opposing party are the "bad guys".

~~~
timehastoldme
Yeah, the tribalism isn't really based on party lines so much. Identity
politics has gained primary importance, perhaps in part because of social
media.

Also, on that note, I thought this was interesting:
[http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-
trump-...](http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-
trump-2016-authoritarian-213533)

Basically, the "Trump tribe" is identified by their embrace of
authoritarianism.

~~~
LyndsySimon
Yeah, I've read that article and largely agree with it.

Personally, I'm as anti-authoritarian as can be, to the point of considering
myself an anarchist. My childhood was spent around conservatives though, so I
guess you could say that I'm "culturally Republican". I noticed early on that
Trump's support within the GOP was predominately among those who had no
problems with using the power of government to shape society to their own
notions.

------
madengr
Reminds me of Jay Walking:

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vmI6YpGew1w](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vmI6YpGew1w)

