In Defense of Being Educated
Much attention was made of Hillary Clinton's interview last week with USA Today, when she noted that support for Barack Obama "among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."
Many found her comments about race divisive and problematic. Overlooked was what she said at the end -- that voters "who had not completed college were supporting me."
Let's look at this a moment.
It's fair to say that people who haven't completed college have less education than those who have completed college. And saying that that someone has less education is the same as saying they're less smart. And calling someone less smart is saying that they're -- well, dumber.
And Hillary Clinton thinks this is a badge of honor?? It's one thing, after all, to call your supporters dumber than your opponent's. It's another to proudly trumpet the fact.
Most politicians tend to present why they are the best, what they can offer to the public to make their constituency a better place. Even Ronald Reagan, who didn't set very high standards of excellence, wanted Americans to seek a "shining city upon a hill." Barack Obama's hope is "Yes, we can," to inspire Americans to reach for their best. Hillary Clinton is proudly saluting that her appeal is to the dumber voters.
Way to pander.
To be very clear, before people leap (which they will) -- calling someone "dumber" is not the same as calling them "dumb." Put two Nobel Prize-winning physicists in a room, and one will be dumber than the other. But they're both really smart people.
And also to be clear, there are college-educated people who snake through four years and leave the ivy-covered walls dumb as a rock. And people who never went past high school who you'd be happy to have them lead you anywhere.
But while we're being clear, let's also be honest.
When picking a surgeon to operate on you -- would you prefer one with a college education, or one of those unlicensed doctors? Why? If you need someone to defend you in court, are you more likely going to want to have an attorney who went to law school, and actually graduated? Yes? Why?
We tend to require college education for the most valued aspects of life. Teachers, for instance. Air traffic controllers. Registered nurses. FBI agents. Nuclear physicists. CPAs. Commercial airline pilot. Veterinarians. On and on...
George Bush says he listens to the generals on the ground. Do you? Good. But you do understand that all those generals went to college. West Point tends to make that a requirement.
By the way, though we disparage them, it's a safe bet (since we elect them) that we want our politicians to have gone to college.
Right now, there are those ready to boil up a faux-cry of "Elitist!" And a faux-cry it is, particularly because it tends to come from the party of actual elitism. But mainly, education has nothing to do with elitism. It has everything to do with human beings wanting the best. Wanting the best for themselves when needing medical care, legal defense, flying on an airplane, safe bridges, military leadership, on and on. Wanting the best, period.
People have different goals, temperaments, life situations, needs. So, some go to college, and others don't. But most people in life want more for their children than themselves, to reach loftier heights. Isn't having a good education generally the goal? Honestly? Don't we all wish for the best for our children? For us?
Honestly?
When denigrating education, understand that it has an effect. Dismissing science, math, history does not exist in a vacuum. Medical research will grow overseas. Other countries will invent computer technology once invented in America. Electronics development will take place internationally, as will the jobs. Creative automobile leadership will occur elsewhere.
Education matters. It has nothing to do with elitism. Being elitist doesn't mean striving for the best, trying to be as talented, smart and accomplished, as qualified as you can be and want others to be. That's the point of life.
Being elitist is dismissing other people's worth as people because they haven't reached your self-imposed standards. That's completely different from wanting everyone to reach that same high standard, and striving to bring that about.
Striving to reach a high standard. Hoping to become the best we can be. Working for our children to do even better than us. It's what we want.
Unless, apparently, you're Hillary Clinton. Then you proclaim that you should be president of the United States specifically because voters who support you are not as educated as your opponent's.
Senator Clinton's claim reminded me of an email I received a few days before. One of her supporters was furious at a prayer I'd written for Ms. Clinton, and said it was the last straw, that he wasn't going to vote for Barack Obama should he become the Democratic nominee. I thanked the fellow for writing, and mentioned that I said Hillary Clinton had much good in her, and might one day be president, suggesting he seemed to have missed that part.
What I didn't write was that anyone who wouldn't vote for a candidate because of what someone other than the candidate believed -- well, that person probably shouldn't vote. But then, I guess when you're going for the "My voters are dumber than yours" base, it's not surprising when occasionally that's what you get.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I have to do this. When the media goes over demographics to predict who will win, where, and they say something about certain blocks of voters, such as voters in Georgia, are they speaking about people with certain *additoods*? For example, if blacks in Georgia vote for Obama, did that mean these black people are all racist? Not on your life! They liked something about Obama, and there is much to like about Barack, no question about it. If another demographic group, say white Virginia voters vote for Hillary, is that a matter of race, being racist, or even being smarter or dumber? Wrong again. What about all *them white people* voting for Barack Obama? Are they racist? All smarter than those who did not vote for Obama, and better educated? All this makes no sense, now does it? It also does not make any sense if this blogger states that, or a supporter of one candidate or another states that. What about African Americans who did NOT VOTE for Obama? What the **** is wrong with them? I bet this blogger is very well educated. Smart, however, he is not. There are so many *smart and educated* Obama (or even Hillary) supporters writing all sorts of nasty things, throwing labels, stating opinions which are not really acceptable in polite society from anyone about anyone, and it serves absolutely no purpose. They may have gone to school, even earned degrees. Educated, however, they are not.
There are so many *smart and educated* Obama (or even Hillary) supporters
Thanks for the "or even...".
I honestly think the "education" in question here isn't what the kids learn in books at college... It's the fact that when a kid goes to college, even if its a local state university, he or she is introduced to a large number of other people with very different experiences. They are not longer sequestered in their comfort zone, surrounded only by like-minded (and equally insulated) individuals. Certainly some people graduate without growing much as a person, but many more do among college goers than those who don't attend. The very act of being immersed in a different situation with diverse ideas has an effect....
Do the folks here ever get tired of writing and reading negative rhetoric about Senator Clinton?
And, more importantly, do you want your guy to win in November?
An 'educated' guess is that you're going to need her supporters, and you're not doing a good job of winning them over.
It's difficult to get tired when she keeps giving them so much material to work with. If I were you, I'd be upset that her campaign has turned off so many people, it's the whole reason she's lost a race she orignially had in the bag.
6 months ago she was in the lead by 20 points then because Obama beat her in Iowa she had to go off the rails and down the Republican-lite road. It's not anyone's fault but Hillary's. Why aren't you angry she's pissed off so many Democrats, even many that used to support her? This was her race to win.....an
I don't think a college education MAKES you smart, but people haven't pointed out that going to college often exposes one to diversity--of opinion, of culture, of race, of ideas. That type of exposure is playing a part in this election.
Par. 4. Your conclusions about education and intelligence are a little off the mark, Mr. Blogger. Being more educated does NOT NECESSARILY mean more intelligent, or smarter. I know many, many people who are busing tables, and doing similar work , or who are in sales. They are not making much money. Those I know all have a college degree or better. The problem is there are no jobs for them out there, and they are *temporarily* doing what needs to be done to make ends meet. Others I know opted not to go to College and beyond, for any number of reasons, and acquired practical skills, such as cutting diamonds, silversmithing, currency trading, being a plumber, and they are doing all quite well. They are all, also, their own bosses. Now who is more intelligent, and who is the dummy? Inquiring minds want to know.
It is my belief that the right wing does not support education, and refuses to adequately subsidize college for all of our citizens, so that they have an electorate less likely to utilize critical thinking skills, and therefore they are more likely to vote for a candidate based not on issues, but on slurs and innuendo.
I do not believe that a degree makes me smarter than the next person, (since my husband doesn't have a degree, and he is a very smart man) but I do believe it makes me, at times, more aware of fallacious arguments.
HuffPost's Pick
There is much evidence of the "dumbing down" of America. Keep the base ignorant and they are more likely to blindly follow, less likely to question, argue, become passionate about real causes. They will take speeches and news reports at face value. Keep the news focused on gossip and fluff, fed constantly to the general public and the real issues of the day and agendas being played will be overlooked, even ignored as all the masses will care about is the latest silly movie/rock star gossip, or the pushed popular TV shows that are covered by the MSM on their news reports as if these shows really mattered to us in the big picture instead of the economy, the war, energy, climate, policies at home and abroad.
It will be a monumental effort to change that, getting people involved, questioning things:
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president.
"I am the president, see? And I do not have to explain myself to anyone." — George Bush
“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Both George W. Bush and Hillary ride on the support of the less educated, "dumber," if you will, voters--that's political expediency. Both graduated from elite colleges (though George's is questionable) and both operate within circles of highly educated people. They have figured out a way to corner a "niche" market. Oh well.
What is really disturbing is a far more prevailing anti-intellectual culture that may even influence those with college degrees. It is one thing to be "educated" in the sense that one has acquired enough skills to work in a specialized field, and it is quite a different matter when, degreed or not, one has learned to think on a higher level, to think in broader terms beyond "me," "here," and "now," to think in abstract terms, and to project beyond immediate gratification to see the impact of one's actions in years to come. "Critical thinking" is not a necessary outcome of schooling.
So while it is laughable to see Clinton touting her supporters as "dumber," one ought not to get too smug being an Obama supporter (of which I am one) --blind following is dangerous regardless of who we vote for.
And if you are really up for this type of discussion (you elitist!), and if you haven't done so, you may want to check out the following books:
*The True Believe" by Eric Hoffer
*One Dimensional Man" by Herbert Marcuse
While it's refreshing to see an alleged Obama supporter caution against "blind following", it's revealing that you distort Hillary Clinton's statement into "Clinton touting her supporters as 'dumber'".
You may not be blindly following, but you're nipping at the Kool-Aid a bit.
On one hand I would say that the rising cost of education prevents a lot from getting educated, so it's not their fault. However...
Whatevs...
Your second point is only valid for those who have the education to be aware of this. If they're deprived decent education, food, human contact, safety, etc. througout their young lives, with what know-how or ability are they supposed to seek further education when they don't possess the knowledge basis to pass even the most basic of more advanced schooling?
What an arrogant ASS! I love this philosophy. Sing it a little louder. I want EVERYONE to hear you!
Because they are dumb? Is that what she is say?
The real problem here is that this nation lets way too many kids who absolutely should go to college fall through the cracks. It's a shame. Four year college needs to be the norm, not the exception. And four year college needs to be absolutely free, including room and board, if the parents can't pay for it. Every discussion beyond that is just a distraction which will lead to a truly dumb nation. And we have seen where that leads.
I agree with the basic thrust of your argument. HRC's pandering to the less well-educated and sneering at the elitists (while pretending not to be one herself), was deplorable.
But, let's remember that in a democracy one voter may want tax dollars to build more public universities and another to build more roads. Each individual votes for the candidate he believes will best serve his interests. So, a college professor's vote has no more weight than a truck driver's.
Then, when it comes to grave national interests, like the decision to go to war, everyone needs to be able to trust in the judgment of those who must make those decisions. And it does not take a college education to tell when a man (or, woman) can be trusted.
But if you do not have the tools, can you do the job. Math can be complicated. Geo-political issues take more than a GED to understand.
Um, you seem to be skirting the point: the voters being called uneducated aren't merely lacking in a formal education but usually also are deficient in self-education such as political understanding and fact-finding. A person who hasn't gone to college can be an excellent chooser when it comes to voting, but not if they meekly accept what the MSM tells them without even considering asking questions or verifying the information, and make decisions based on faulty understanding or utterly irrelevant issues. The issue isn't with people having different preferences and concerns, but with people having none of their own and only mimicking what they're told to do and think.
It is true that education does not equate to intelligence. But, for a potential voter I would rather they have education than intelligence. The Right always demonizes the educated because their people are, for the most part, not educated. Without education, breadth of knowledge, or any deeper understanding you end up with the god, guns, and (anti)gays crowd. Do you think it is only coincidence that the conservative / literal bible crowd backs the anti-education party? Do you think gun loving homophobes are well versed in any subject matter that is not covered by Guns and Ammo?
People should work harder to be well-informed about their candidates believe, and not just what the MSM tells them. The American dream is to achieve everything from nothing, but if we don't strive to be the best at everything we do (as individuals), and dare I say, be ELITE, we the American people can never achieve anything, and as a nation of individuals who are not the best we are capable of making ourselves, we never stand a chance being a great nation. This isn't about denigrating the uneducated, this is about Americans believing what they are told by a system that is broken, and rolling over in complacency, when just a little excellence from each and every one of us would be all it would take to fix this nation and take it back for ourselves, the American people, who for too long have lived in the dark shadow of our own government, hiding under the cloak that we so ignorantly call Democracy.
America, the power is in your hands, better yourself, and we all win.
After speinding all day at the polls on primary day here in Texas I was astounded at the ridiculous reasons people voted for both candidates. One voted Hillary because Obama was Muslim and he didn't like his preacher (like that made sense!) Another voted for Obama because women weren't meant to be over men...not how God planned it... and this was a woman in her 30's!!! I blame the media for much of the misinformation and chopping and slicing of the electorate. I support Senator Obama and I am a non-college graduate, working, 51 year old white woman who did my research and picked the candidate I feel is best for the country and the future of my grandchild. If anything points out the failure of our education system this election does! We need everyone to make this country work ...the college educated and the non-college educated but what we really need is a politically educated electorate!
Couldn't have said it better, although I would like to add, "Step away from the cable news, people!"
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
