Quote:
Originally Posted by wittynickname
To try to break the cycle of the last few pages of ridiculousness, I heard the author of this New York Times piece on NPR earlier this week, and it was a really interesting segment.
Basically, the GOP has been a lot of intelligent, educated people playing down their worldly ways in order to cater to the "average Joe," going against intellectualism and elitism.
After decades of that, finally they have a candidate that embodies all of this. He's not educated in the affairs of the world, the affairs of the country, he has no real grasp of how politics work at all. The GOP finally has their actual anti-intellectual candidate.
The rise of Trump is essentially their own fault for celebrating feeling over fact, emotion over education.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/01/op...ald-trump.html |
The party has been an unholy union of appeals to uneducated intuitions over what seems to them to be always changing scientific facts and a group of the very elites the claim to eschew promoting a particular form of capitalism. So yes, I think anti-intellectualism is a big part of it. However, I wonder how much of it is anti-establishment, how much is a push back against what is perceived as social marginalization, and how much is anti-intellecutalism.