I'll make this quick, because a deluge of journalism work leaves me without the time to devote to a proper post. The above xkcd comic is one of the best takedowns of a big gripe of mine that comes up repeatedly: the dubbing of entire swaths of the human population "sheeple" or ignorant scum because they aren't going about their lives the same way you might be. This is often paired with the assertion that said stupidity has increased, and people are dumber than they use to be.
So you're smart. Great. Intelligence is a beautiful thing to have. But the world is full of remarkably bright people who make really dumb calls, and people of average intellect who've made brilliant ones. The world is also full of extremely intelligent people with elaborate justifications for very bad ideas. Reality is awakening to the fact that there are a thousand and one talents, each of which might be perfectly adapted to a situation where others are useless.
There is vast and appalling ignorance in the world but, really, this isn't new and it's actually improved dramatically. If someone wants to argue that the current industrialized world, with widespread literacy and a far lower possibility of dying by violence, is less catastrophically dumb than a land where 99.9 percent of the population can't read and regularly indulge in nailing a cat to a tree and headbutting it to death, go for it.
Also, where the fuck do the elect get off assuming a magical invulnerability from ignorance? Newsflash: you've been appallingly ignorant at some point in your life. I sure as hell have, and no doubt still am on some fronts. The fact is, any self-proclaimed genius probably isn't half as smart as they think they are and the people they dismiss are probably fairly smart in areas they won't acknowledge.
I rant a lot here, but I believe any thinker has to keep in mind the old saw about Socrates' wisdom: everyone's ignorant, and he was wise because he knew his own ignorance.
I do know this, though: dismissive condescension is a monumentally stupid way to deal with the world.
If Americans are so smart, can you explain the popularity of Limbaugh, Beck and O'Reilly? :D
Posted by: KC | July 20, 2010 at 08:18 PM
Believe it or not, I completely agree. No character trait is quite so revolting as intellectual snobbery. Maybe I'm a tad over-sensitive to this, being that I come from a part of the country that is widely stereotyped as ignorant and backward, but it definitely stings when I hear or see large groups of people indiscriminately labeled as ignorant or otherwise worthless. Some of the greatest people in the history of the world were called ignorant hicks by their contemporaries, and some of them were in fact illiterate and uneducated. In contrast, some of the most evil people the world has ever seen were highly educated and intelligent. Some of the best people I've ever had the good fortune to meet were extremely "backward" by today's common standards, and yet still managed to be good, honest, caring people, who despite their lack of formal education had plenty of wisdom of their own about life and the way folks ought to treat one another.
In fact, I'd venture to say that a lot of those people are better off in many ways, because they may have shielded themselves knowingly or otherwise from the technological and economic cliff the rest of us are rushing headlong to jump off of. I'd venture to say the real dumbasses are those of us who place our faith in the good will of international corporations and governments in the pockets of big business, and the "Invisible Hand" of the Almighty Market.
I don't mean to disparage education, science, or technological advance by any stretch of the imagination. I am far from being an anarcho-primitivist, and I don't share the deep distrust of all things academic some of our neighbors possess. However, if I may quote a well-known philosopher on this subject, it may help to illuminate my position a bit further.
"Don't be too proud of this technological terror. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of The Force".
By which Lord Vader means to say that just because we have developed all sorts of electronic wizardry does not mean we have conquered nature, or traveled very far from our "uncivilized" roots. We have enhanced our lives in many ways, but in many ways we are also still the bloodthirsty barbarians we always were. Intelligence is relative, and in the grand scheme of things none of us is really that intelligent at all, yet we are all pretty smart in some way or another, for better or for worse.
Posted by: Josh | July 20, 2010 at 08:34 PM
Like Josh above, I agree. But it bears noting, for my own part, that identifying idiocy when it comes down the pipe is not only necessary, but vital, to thwarting it's further stranglehold. Maybe it's just a stranglehold on stupidity being popular, and not an actual hold on the masses. But either is frightening, isn't it? I like this query that was posed to me: Would the world be a better place if more people of higher intelligence were breeding, instead of people who think lard, salt and Limbaugh are the pinnacle of human achievements?
Posted by: Jerem Morrow | July 20, 2010 at 08:54 PM
Hey, further thought, as I had at least a smidgen to do with the fire behind this post 8^P - At times, I identify something as being moronic or "proof humanity deserves obliteration", and I assume it's understood as being humorously hyperbolic. I think, per discussions, that one the whole, we agree across the board. Still, I enjoy playing devil's advocate. You just happen to be +50 levels more suave about it than I. Bastardo!
Posted by: Jerem Morrow | July 20, 2010 at 09:09 PM
Preach it, brother. There's nothing I find so repulsive in a bright person as disdain for the people they think of as "stupid."
What really worries me is the eliminationist rhetoric that seems to come pouring forth from this attitude, as if some forms of elimination are morally sound. And we all know that our understanding of intelligence is not without a host of prejudices. How many logical steps separate this attitude from regular old bigotry?
Posted by: toenolla | July 21, 2010 at 11:40 AM
So how *should* someone express their disdain of a particular group of people they deem less intelligent? I recall you stating in an article that rioters torching mom & pop stores is 'monumentally stupid'. Are you not guilty of the same generalization you're talking about in this article? Or is this only for those that make wider generalizations? And, if so, where is the dividing line between it being ok to call something 'stupid' and being someone that falls into the category you're talking about here?
Posted by: KC | July 21, 2010 at 05:53 PM
Thank you! I've long shuddered at the term "sheeple". It's a cop out for real dialog... a cudgel for use by those who do not wish to articulate the specifics of their gripes against others' behavior and/or feel compelled to maintain a sense of indignant superiority.
Posted by: giania | July 28, 2010 at 10:19 PM
Sharon Astyk deals with a variation of this in a recent post at http://j.mp/TragicSense
But, umm, aren't you setting up a straw man by positing a land where illiterates headbut cats nailed to trees?
Posted by: Jim | July 28, 2010 at 10:32 PM