When Did Education and Intellect Become Political Negatives?

This post is not intended to criticize Sarah Palin and John McCain, nor is it meant to praise Barack Obama. Rather, it aims to raise one key question: since when did the American people forget the importance of pragmatic intellectualism and education?

The forefathers of the United States were children of religious bigotry and persecution, and, as a result, fled Britain to create a new approach to life and government. They valued intellect and education. In fact, they outlined the principles of the United States' democracy to establish intellectual freedom from the Church.

The Constitution separated the ideologies and values of the Church from the State, and leaders of the State were thus educated in matters pertaining to the State. These leaders proved themselves time after time with their pragmatic intellectual capacities. The public trusted them as well, seeing intellectuals as the authorities of their studied subject matters.

Unfortunately, we are now living in a different world. No longer does the public want a leader with an education or experience. The public wants the beer-drinking buddy from Texas or the beauty queen from Alaska. Cover photos on US Weekly and People Magazine are now the new authoritative credentials -- so much so that they carry more clout than Harvard Law degrees and Constitutional Law professorships.

But right now, more than ever, we need a dynamic leader with the intellectual capacity to tackle the issues at hand. We need a leader who can solve economic problems, as well as deal with nuclear threats. We need a leader who can approach problems with reason and logic. Not so long ago, we had such leaders. And better yet, the public actually admired them for being masters of their craft. Nowadays it seems that many Americans equate education and intellectual capacity with snobbery and arrogance.

Education and experience in leadership, though, determine capacity for leadership. Somebody lacking the necessary education and experience simply will not have the capacity to successfully lead. We wouldn't want someone without cooking experience to cook for us, so why would we want someone without political or foreign policy experience to govern us?

Calling oneself a hero after making mistakes shouldn't earn public trust. And certainly, selecting a person as a running mate solely because she's a woman -- and therefore appeals to a segment of potential voters -- doesn't make you right. Palin is unqualified on her record to be the president of the United States, plain and simple

Either we're a country that believes race and gender are the key issues in 2008, or we're going to elect the most suitable people we can find. Pragmatism doesn't mean we elect an unqualified candidate who claims that two years as governor of Alaska qualifies her to be president. Palin has no foreign policy experience whatsoever. Alaska's proximity to Russia doesn't count. How about her views on unprotected sex? If we're going to deal with morality and values, then we need to be honest. There's something hypocritical about Palin telling our children to abstain altogether, or to at the very least have protected sex, when she apparently forgets to teach her own children to do the same. We can't allow our leaders to play the old "do as I say, not as I do" game.

Why have we resorted to nominating pretty faces on People Magazine as suitable candidates to run our nation? Is it going to take the National Enquirer covering stories about Palin's child, childhood, six colleges, etc. to really wake us up from this bad dream?

Comments

[BillCarson]

Part of the problem may be anti-intel­lectualism­, but there is another element that should be considered.

Back in 2004, after the election, I did an informal internet poll asking people why they voted for Bush.

After filtering out the "God chooses our leaders", "I despise trial lawyers", "Bush will appoint Godly judges to the supreme court", etc. etc. there was one comment that seemed pretty close to the truth...

"For devout Christians, they would rather be poor and unemployed rather than allow unrestricted abortion and gay marriage. And they turned out in large numbers this time, to give Bush a victory even though they're hurting economically. That's a bitter pill for liberal Dems to swallow."

The problem for Obama is that the dynamic hasn't changed much since 2004, (except that people are hurting even more economically) and may explain in part why the race is so close.

[katrina1234512345]

Dear Mike--As I enter this "getting into college year" on behalf of
my 17 year old--smart, curious, engaged-- daughter, your words are so
important to read.
Thank you for them.
It crystallizes so much of what I've been thinking--often despairing--
about our country's direction. What kinds of messages are we sending
our kids,a younger generation--and others (including a world which
wants to reengage with a US not defined by Abu Ghraib/Gitmo/ anti-
thought/ anti-enlig­htenment!)­
all very best,
Katrina vanden Heuvel

[RachelineB]

As a dual citizen of the UK and the US, I feel this insightful piece raises a number of pertinent issues outlining the need for the US to reaffirm its status upon the global stage. While the Europeans are rushing forward at CERN to discover the origins of our universe, the next American VP speaks in tongues and is convinced that dinosaurs were munching in your back yard five thousand years ago.

In short, America needs to reclaim a leadership role in math, science and general scholarship. Otherwise, the alternative is to leave the future to others who understand the consequences of allowing religious convictions to dominate matters of state.

[BillCarson]

>the next American VP speaks in tongues and is convinced that dinosaurs were munching in your back yard five thousand years ago.

LOL

[kravitz]

It became a negative when you have a dumb as a post scrub of an arizona senator who has gotten by on other people's sweat with nothing to say because he has not an original thought of his own.

McCain actually wants to ditch the department of education. I mean really, it obviously didn't do a thing for either him or his vp candidate.

[FearlessFreep]

It goes back to the '50s, and probably even earlier. (See Richard Hofstadter's ANTI-INTEL­LECTUALISM IN AMERICAN LIFE.)

[xenofile]

It probably goes all the way back to the founding, but it seems to be escalating a faster rate and rising to higher level than ever before. Earlier there was at least lip service paid to the value of intellect and education (in the press and public sphere). Now it seems almost universally mocked.

[MamaBird62]

What I'd like to see is each candidate locked in a room with a pen and some paper and asked to write up policy positions on four or five key issues. Full page answer (at least) on each question. They'd be required to back up their statements with facts and sources. Then the copies of their actual writing could be published, and we could decide who knows what the heck they're talking about, and who is simply reading and repeating other people's talking points with no knowledge behind it.
I want a President or VP who can think for him/herself.

[BlueWave]

Why? -- Bigotry and religion. -- It's that simple. Near total reliance on those two ideologies as life guideposts have ruined the ability of a great segment of our country to critically think. Rationale and logic is out the window, and stubbornly so.

The $1,000,000 question is how do you counter this reality... In the long run, massive overhaul of the education system and strong protections for the availability of information. In the 50-whatever days until the election, God help us.

[Heavenhelpusall]

Bush 43 put intellect in the garbage and anybody who goes searching for it comes up filthy.

[ToonMoene]

It's far worse than that.

I can understand the Pennsylvanian Dutch (who are German, not Dutch) - they want to live with technology they understand and can repair themselves.

The big, big problem is with all those bible thumpers who think they can teach a 2500 year old description of the creation of the world and *still* use all the useful (technology) and necessary (medicine) products based on two centuries of science.

Of course, in the long run this won't work - in the long run the Chinese will drill for oil in the US and the "natives" will ride around on horses hunting whatever is left.

[Morcat]

This is what happens when you systematically de-fund the programs that will help people develop critical thinking skills. It's what happens when you have corporate mainstream media that presents a bunch of fluff that glorifies superficiality, athletics and violence. It routinely occurs when you have a ruling party that requires a lowly paid class to do the work for them. It occupies itself with "getting and spending" rather than thinking, caring and giving. It thrives on bigotry. It's called "conservatism," and it appeals to the worst aspects of our human character. That's how it happens -- or how it has happened.

[baci7107]

This campaign breaks down to two things RACE and RELIGION forget about policy. Let's hope this country has enough intelligence to get beyond the Jerry Springer mentality that has plauged it.

[sabbyma]

This article should be sent to all major newspapers. Every American citizen should exercise their vote holding in mind that we are the only super power in the world. At this crucial juncture where the whole world is at loggerheads with each other, WE SHOULD NOT elect a president with TEMPER ISSUES, OLD AGE, HEALTH PROBLEMS and who does not want to talk about the issues ( by their own admission) which will shape our country.

[Rudderman]

Michael, I've been thinking the same thing for some time. As we watch the men who put Bush in charge for the last 8 wonderful years now trying/lying to put a religious zealot/moose hunter who barely graduated from college a breath away from leading the free world, one has to wonder: Why is it Americans keep electing people to lead our country because they can relate to them? I live in New Hampshire and know people who hunt, drive snowmobiles, drink beer and have families (without pregnant teens). Do I want them running the country?
I want people light years ahead of me in education, intelligence and vision. It seems that lately, like polar bears, people who expect the same are an endangered species.

[katmeyster]

I teach government at a community college in a poor area of the country. While these students are interested in getting an education -- or at least a vocation -- they are extremely under-educated. They show up at "college" with almost no historical knowledge, no knowledge of current events, no reading comprehension skills, and no analytical skills. I wonder if they learned anything in K-12. I would love to have intellectual discussions, any kind of discussion really, but it is impossible without basic knowledge. You can't be analytical when there is no knowledge to analyze. If this is how it is across the country, then we are in real trouble. Of course they are going to feel insecure about their lack of knowledge -- they aren't stupid. But also, because of their lack of intellectual and analytical skills they just repeat talking points, and believe what their family and friends say without wondering if it is truthful and rational. It is scary when a 19 year old, who is almost clueless about anything, repeats a rumor like Barack is a muslim and declares it as fact. There is an entire underclass out here who is not getting a decent education, and if this continues we will lose our democracy. This is serious.

[kellysmalltowngirl]

Antifascist-08 "intelligent people like to sit around or blog and show their issues credentials, but the rest of the country doesn't. Wake up. What percentage of voters check the blogs each day? Anyone?"

You are 100% correct and this is the reason why they don't vote for intellectuals:

"I remember reading about Adlai Stevenson who, during one of his presidential runs, encountered an enthusiastic woman who shouted out "Governor, every thinking American will vote for you!" Without missing a beat, Adlai shouted back "Madam, that won't be enough. We need a majority!" And there you have it." - Resisco

Would you vote for a candidate who insulted you by implying you don't think?

Show some respect for people who are not like you, for crying out loud!

Obama Biden '08