Hmm. Intellectual elitism here?

I read a lot of posts here about the stupidity of most Americans. Do you believe you are informed/liberal because you are smarter than the rest of our population? Do you think the majority of Americans are idiots?

I dont consider myself smart but when I see the idiotism of many of my fellow countrymen I get angry.

The US has a long and bloody history of supporting Lynch Mobs; the Native Americans and the Blacks have our tire tracks across their backs.

Add to those; The newly runover Iraqi People.

Using the term "Sheeple" to describe the supporters of Lynch Mobs, is a very, very nice term when looked at in a larger view.

but ill informed fits. When vast majorities of Americans believe Saddam helped with 9/11, 20% of our budget is foreign aid, and a whole host of other provably false things that is ill informed no matter how one slices it.

In addition to ill-informed, I would also say MIS-informed.

The American media report real information? Not since the 2000 election. And most Americans have neither the time nor the interest to search for the real news on the internet. Remember that most people don't have access to the BBC, CBC or even WorldLink stations. So it's up to CNN or Fox to mis-inform the majority of Americans who have the time or inclination to even watch the news. So, no, the average American is not stupid, just ill/mis-informed.

While you ask a provocative question, it smacks of the right wing propaganda machine.

Here's another way to look at what you may think is elitism: Most liberals buy into an approach to understanding politics -- i.e., that the more you know about something, the more you understand it, the better you can try to fix it.

This is the essence of liberalism: understanding the problem, trying to fix it.

Some liberals ARE arrogant. Are the elitist conservatives any less numerous, or any less arrogant?

Arrogant people are arrogant people; they have members in any and all groups and political parties.

:)

the question isn't a RW talking point. well maybe it is but it is also valid if you read this board for more than a day or so. we do get frustrated that people don't have the same scope of understanding that we have gained and that frusration does show itself in the posts that refer to the stupid Americans, yada yada.

it bugs me when people try to pass off valid concerns as RW disruption or saying the other guys do it too. poking our heads in the sand, when it comes to our own behavior is not helpful, imho.

i do agree with this statement you made.

"This is the essence of liberalism: understanding the problem, trying to fix it."

I rented "The Killing Fields" this weekend. After I watched it with my husband we discussed it. The next day, he looked up more information on the Khamir Rouge. Today, I watched a taped documentary that aired on POV on PBS about a man who survived this period in Cambodian history because he could play the flute (despite the fact that all artists and other educated people were being mercileslly killed.) He is now trying to restore the cultural traditions that were lost during that period.

Yesterday at a luncheon I talked extensively about a woman's "career" in marketing. Do you think she would know anyting about the Kiling Fields in Cambodia? It is very doubtful. In fact, if you said "Cambodia" she'd probably think of "that kid" that Angelina Jolie adopted.

So, I'M the JERK? Because I try to find out why things are the way they are? Because I try to have some understanding, and as a result, compassion for people who have experienced something most of us could never dream of? Because I realize there is a world beyond my nice safe luncheon-filled life?

If it is elistist to make an effort to understand how events and politics affect not only me and my neighbors but also people whose lives are difficult beyond comprehension to the average person in the US and to vote according to what I have learned and realized, then I'll wear the badge proudly.

I don't believe most Americans are stupid. I do believe most are poorly informed and will admit that on certain issues I have not done the work to be well informed either.

I believe because many Americans are poorly informed that they are more likely to vote along party lines and are more likely to be swayed by emotional rather than rational appeals by politicians.

I believe many Americans are poorly informed because they (we) are passive when it comes to getting information about issues and events. We tend to wait to be fed the info rather than going into the library or wherever to find the info and to interpret it because that process requires a lot of hard work. Since many of the problems we face are very complex, it is very difficult for a person to be well informed about all problems. We also tend to focus on those problems that we perceive impact us directly or on those in which we have special expertise.

For example, I am a university professor and one of the areas I study is creative problem solving. I have a knowledge of problem-solving processes that many laypeople do not have.

Just the 49% that voted for Bush...........

Plus maybe a few that are so wrapped up in the flag that it's cut off the circulation to their brain.

Oh, yea the winners of the Annual Darwin Award.......but they don't count do they?

accept what the media pundits said in the wake of the 2000 debates - that Bush won every one - when the contrary truth was so painfully obvious.

I believe the American people are very smart. I think they are so trained to detect BS in media that they have a very keen sense of it in politics. There is a dearth of good NEWS sources, but that is a different issue. I think it's a huge mistake to discount the good common sense and savvy of Americans.

It was linked from the DU EOA the other day...
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

BERKELEY – Politically conservative agendas may range from supporting the Vietnam War to upholding traditional moral and religious values to opposing welfare. But are there consistent underlying motivations?

Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:

•Fear and aggression

•Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity

•Uncertainty avoidance

•Need for cognitive closure

•Terror management

"From our perspective, these psychological factors are capable of contributing to the adoption of conservative ideological contents, either independently or in combination," the researchers wrote in an article, "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," recently published in the American Psychological Association's Psychological Bulletin. /end

Also, I personally believe that liberals know how to operate their brains more productively than conservatives. So it's less about raw brain power and more about critical thinking.

I didn't know that there was actual medical evidence in that regards!

Thanks for the bookmark........I'll be checking out that puppy.

However......I'll still go with the flag thingy......much easier to explain to the average Rush listener ....... smaller words makes it easier for them.

:evilgrin:

"Characteristics of Critical / Uncritical Thinkers"
(or Liberals/Fundies, Democrats/Repubs, etc...)

Critical Thinkers

Are honest with themselves, acknowledging what they do not know, recognizing their limitations, and being watchful of their own errors.

Regard problems and controversial issues as exciting challenges.

Strive for understanding, keep curiosity alive, remain patient with complexity and ready to invest time to overcome confusion.

Set aside personal preferences and base judgments on evidence, deferring judgment whenever evidence is insufficient. They revise judgments when new evidence reveals error.

Are interested in other people's ideas, so are willing to read and listen attentively, even when they tend to disagree with the other person.

Recognize that extreme views (whether conservative or liberal) are seldom correct, so they avoid them, practice fair-mindedness, and seek a balanced view.

Practice restraint, controlling their feelings rather than being controlled by them, and thinking before acting.



Uncritical Thinkers


Pretend they know more than they do, ignore their limitations, and assume their views are error-free.

Regard problems and controversial issues as nuisances or threats to their ego.

Are impatient with complexity and thus would rather remain confused than make the effort to understand.

Base judgments on first impressions and gut reactions. They are unconcerned about the amount or quality of evidence and cling to earlier views steadfastly.

Are preoccupied with self and their own opinions, and so are unwilling to pay attention to others' views. At the first sign of disagreement they tend to think, "How can I refute this?"

Ignore the need for balance and give preference to views that support their established views.

Tend to follow their feelings and act impulsively.


-Vincent Ruggiero

traits of either. In fact the list itself contradicts its own message..

This is a joke right????

I have always thought that political conservatism springs from a base of fear and insecurity, with aggression a tool to combat it. If you look and sound baad, and come out fighting first, no one will ever see the underlying weakness.

I've also always thought that those who need absolutes; black and white with no "grey" areas to ponder and deal with, were also based on fear and insecurity, addressed by needing to always be "right," and needing for there always to be only one "right" answer or one "right" way to do or thing about something.

They need the security that comes with strict structure and a narrow viewpoint. Not stupid; just immature intellects.

Just my observations, and my viewpoint.

I bookmarked this study when it showed up a couple of days ago. I like finding evidence to support my observations!

From mothers who had a martini or two in a crucial stage of pregnancy. It's that inability to see the consequences of an action that makes me suspect this.

Anyone care to fund a study?

but I see a lot of intellectual laziness. I see a lot of people who can repeat things but not question them. I see a lot of people who are oblivious or disconnected. I see a lot of people who are not oblivious but STILL disconnected.

I-I-I see dead people. (metaphor)

to me! If smart=above average in intelligence and most (the majority) are smart, how many are average? Isn't average supposed to be the largest group, as in a statistically normal distribution?

It might be more accurate to say "The majority of Americans are smarter than some of their actions suggest." ;-)

Not to hijack a thread, but that is exactly what NCLB and the standards and accountability "movement" are all about. All kids will score higher than average on norm-referenced tests. In other words, all kids will score "better" than most of them did to establish and "average," or public ed has failed and we need vouchers and privatized, corporate schools aka Edison, etc.

Yeah, that's kind of scary.

It's always a nice bonus to have at least some component of self-esteem that's actually based on something substantive.

with the rest of the world.

Things aren't looking too good for the good old USA.

U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!

I think most Americans ARE intelligent enough to grasp the issues that are of importance in the natonal debate/civil discourse/etc. I also think that there is a portion of the population (perhaps even a sizeable portion) that chooses not to become informed about such matters, or that is unable to become informed. There are a number of reasons for this (in no particular order):

1. Lack of interest. Some people just don't give a damn. Really.
2. Preconceived biases and/or prejudice. This includes racial/ethnic/gender/etc. biases. These people may not WANT to become informed because it might challenge their preconceived beliefs.
3. Lack of time. Some people are just stretched so thin trying to scrape by in life that they just don't have the time to become informed. It's all they can do, literally, to take care of themselves and their children, pay their bills, and work work work.
4. Turned off by the hypocrisy. Some people are, simply, disillusioned with politics and want to have nothing to do with it.
5. Lack of resources. Not everybody has a computer with internet access, or cable TV, or a subscription to a newspaper.

There may be other reasons; these are some that come to mind. We may never reach the people in Category 2. The challenge for us as a party, however, is to speak out with a compelling message to reach people in the other groups that will GET THEIR ATTENTION and make them WANT to become more informed and make them want to become INVOLVED. Hell, if we can just get people to get off their asses and GO TO THE POLLS TO VOTE, we'd win by a landslide in most elections! Furthermore, we need to figure out a way to reach those people who lack the RESOURCES to become informed; that is, we need to take the message to them, rather than just putting it "out there" in the hope that they find it.

Bake

I think the problems are rooted in 2, 3, and 4; plus the mistaken notion that what happens is out of their control.

I live in a working class meighborhood; nice, but not the least bit luxurious. Many here work two jobs just to get by. Most people have come here from crime-ridden neighborhoods and struggle not to have to go back.

These are by no means lazy people; these people are the image I get when I hear the term "average Americans." Not a lot of college degress here but definitely not stupid or lazy.

Unfortunately, I do see some intellectual elitism here at DU and it really angers me. I tend to avoid the "serial practitioners."

because of the crap they eat (no nutrients go to the brain)

And the obesity and weight problems we have as a population.

Sedentary lifestyle

I could list all day......but the fact of the matter is there is not way we, as a group, can have the lifestyle we have and expect our BRAINS to work right.

So yeah......collectively, we are a bunch of dolts.

Are fat people fat because they are stupid, or are they stupid because they are fat?

simply because I share the same values as to what I think a govt's role is. But, alas, I must put up with their sarcasm, condescension and passive aggressiveness just to get a candidate elected.

So be it.

But to answer your intended Rhetorical question.......

1. We are talking about basic intelligence. The Q is: are americans below average intelligence?

2. My point (made pretty darned clearly) is that the diet, lack of exercise and lack of muscle tone causes our brains to not be as quick as they could be. (do you really want to turn this into a an accusation that I am saying "fat people are stupid" by denying basic physiological FACT?)

But to humor you and clarify further: The brain is amazing. It requires oxygen and nutrients and consistent stimuli for it to maintain its quickness and clarity. Collectively, Americans don't give their brains what they need to be as quick.

After a few generations of being raised on twinkies and coca colas, not exercising, reduced reading, increased sedentary lifestyles, I would say as a population that we are a bit behind other societies that DO feed their brains. Whether a person ends up FAT is symptom of this lifestyle.

We watch TONS of TV. We actually think we have fed ourselves FOOD when we go to McDonalds. We smoke, drink, overeat, lay around. And it gets worse with every generation.

And we think we are at the top of the scale in intelligence? Just the fact that we have to query this subject is evidence enough that we are clueless.

To be safe, I am of course generalizing about our population. We have a lot of really intelligent people. And a lot of really dumb people who are just born that way. Just like everywhere else.

That's a large, large computer.

Is that adequate smarts for you?

They make blanket statements that have no basis in fact based on their own personal prejudices.

As a fat guy with a functional brain, I think the DU tent has room for me, too. Jumping to the conclusion that there is a correlation between physical appearance and intelligence is the kind of leap of faith that equates with the notion that there have to be massive quantities of WMD in Iraq because Saddam is a bad guy. If you can provide scientific proof that there is an inverse relationship between body mass and IQ, I will listen and apologize. Until then please keep your prejudices to yourself.

Most of them happen to be Republicans ....

Lets face it: .... ALL of humanity suffer interminable ignorance, only some more than others ..... and that IS the reality ......

? If humans are so ignorant, how have they survived for 3 million years?

Would you consider placing the blame on cultures instead of the species?

Tribalism and xenophobia used to be favorable traits in the early stages of human evolution. Today they're not, but societies reward ignorance adn thus artificially keep it a favorable trait.

Ill venture we 'know' a few things: ....

1) ALL the automatic mind/body connections that form reflexive responses, like the Babinsky response, for instance ..... these are 'instincts' which are genetically implanted .... We dont actually 'know' we know this: we simply are prewired to respond to specific stimuli in specific ways ....


2) ANY 'learned' information gained from our time in the womb: ... as EACH 'subsystem' becomes operational; .... sight: We most likely sense the filtered light in the womb ..... sound: It is almost CERTAIN that babies recognize their mothers voice, because they have been listening to it for weeks .... touch: the babies body moves about the amniotic sac, making sense-contact as it goes, developing 'expereince' with its fingers, toes, hands and legs .... even 'closing the loop' by moving its limbs, and feeling the result of that movement .....

So: .. human beings emerge from birth with EXTREMELY limited material expereince ........

JUST to give this a means of measurement: ... lets use the term:

ALL There Is To Know: .... ATITK ....... in other words ....

ATITK = ALL the possible FACTS that exist within the entire universe .... the location of EVERY object: its composition, its temperature, its acceleration, its relative and absolute positions ..... furthermore: .... add to these the HISTORY of these characteristics over time ....

Now: .. as you can see: ... human beings, who exist within a HUGE universe filled with INNUMERABLE objects which behave in strange and mostly unobserved ways ......

Human beings CANNOT POSSIBLY know about all these things .....

They are born inherently IGNORANT of these facts ......

And they die ignorant of these facts .......

EVEN if one were to ignore the whole universe, and to focus strictly on earthly matters: .... mankind knows only a sliver of the pie of knowledge .....

Man is born ignorant and REMAINS generally ignorant until death ....

Perhaps you are offended by the term 'ignorant', as if it implies am INTENTIONAL effort to remain uninformed: .. this is not the case: .... it simply means to be uninformed about facts due to lack of exposure to such facts .....

With ATITK as a guide: .... I would guess that mankind is born with a generous 0.0000000000001 % ATITK ...... and that mankind dies at about 0.0000000000011 % ATITK ..... These are just guesses, but they work for me ......

So yes: .... all humanity suffers interminable ignorance .... but its not what they DONT KNOW which aids their survivablity, it what they DO know ......

I might point out that survivability seems a stronger characteristic in some insect species than in hominid types .....

But there are personal experiences and social interactions that make them rationalize and act the way they want to think, or the way they believe they should think. You may have five or seven percent that really believe Bush, and think he is a good honest Christian man, but I think many more say it than believe it. I don't doubt that people want to trust the president, and that people want the military to do well, and want the USA to "win". There has to come a point where it is no longer reasonable to put aside doubt, and I believe the media play a role in that part.

So I believe people are in general thinking the way we think here. However there can be reasons for wanting to avoid acting on these thoughts, and I believe that is the "sheeple" effect in the polls and among average Republican voters. The good news is, similar thoughts are swirling around in everyone's mind, as regular conversation with people on the bus will make clear. When people are willing to act on these thoughts, Bush is toast. The media have a big role in making outrage towards Bush acceptable, and things have been looking up of late.

are intellectually lazy and lack motivation for seeking the truth. They're content to be told what to think (hence Fox News) and be done with it. Only when their laziness is CHALLENGED, such as the latest stories from in and around Washington, do they start paying attention. As lazy as they are, I don't think they like being lied to or manipulated, so Bush has plenty of reason for worry right now. Of course they may decide to forget all about it, that depends how many other scandals are on the fire at any given moment. Let's face it, to most Americans, Kobe Bryant is much more fascinating than yellow cake. There aren't any BJs from interns involved here.

I always think of the Milgram experiments...

http://www.new-life.net/milgram.htm

...are selfish above all else. Unfortunately, this is a first step on the slippery slope to barbarism, and the root of humanity's self-imposed misery.

One of the profligate manifestations of this baseness is myopia. And, yes, the seeds of this "willful ignorance" are indeed a certain amount of stupidity since anyone with foresight realizes idiocy's cancerous character.

If someone is born with a natural limitation on their intelligence, I can't bear them ill will as long as their attempts are genuine and exhaustive. Their struggle to fill their mind and soul matters.

But, those who CHOOSE to shutter their eyes, to rebuke enlightenment, disgust me.

... I find it very disheartening, too.

Whenever I take the time to actually interact with people, I usually find that they're much more thoughtful that people on here give them credit for... certainly not the "sheeple" that I hear them so derisively called.

That said, I think we are in a certain "elite"... the information elite. Thanks to the web and wonderful resources on it like DU, BuzzFlash, BartCop, TruthOut, etc. we have all sorts of information that the much of the American public (depending on corporate media) is lacking. It's our job to get this information out there. Nobody is served by dismissing most people as "sheep".

They follow the 'philosophy' of nazi 'philosopher' Leo Strauss. (Wolfy is one of his students)

"Those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior".

"Perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them."

The Vision of the Annointed.

I hate that bastard...hate to admit it too, I read his book: Barbarians at the Gates...he makes good points--most is above my head...too many big college type words ;)
He makes good points, but I know deep down he is wrong...I wish I had the intellecutal ammo to refute his crap.
Seriously, I would someone could dicredit or renounce his ideas with significant backing...prove that he is wrong..that his sources are bunk..

Thomas Sowell's articles from Capitalism Magazine are hauled out with such reverence, you'd think they were missing tablets from God to Moses!

Here's something insightful he offers:

(snip) The liberal vision of Rush Limbaugh is that he is some guy who appeals to ignorant rednecks and Joe Sixpacks. As with so many things that liberals believe, they feel no need to test their notions against reality. Actual research on Rush Limbaugh's audience has shown that they are above average in both education and income.

Anyone who actually listens to Rush's show knows that those listeners who phone in are usually pretty savvy folks, and clearly a cut above those who phone in on other radio or television programs. But many liberals have such a sense of superiority that it would never occur to them to listen and learn. (snip/...)

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2489

Thomas Sowell needs to hear D.U. contributor, Guy James, of the increasingly worshipped "The Guy James Show," ready to air every Saturday, 3:00 to 6:00 p.m., EST. DU'ers call in EVERY SATURDAY, and it can be heard online, at www.theguyjamesshow.com

You'll have a great chance to sense the difference between Democrats and the always delightful Republicans who call to offer the benefit of their opinions (threats).

Most just are not long range in their thinking.

Immediacy of the moment trumps all for most.

I would like to think that most DU'ers are long range thinkers which is why we understand that what * is doing will harm us down the road (Social Security, Medicare, gutting of needed safety net programs).

As time gets closer to the election in 2004 more folks will then be thinking about the things that we have been stating here for the past years.

:(

I did not spend seven years going to evil universities and lots of my free time reading in order to think myself less intelligent and informed than the average bear. But like the boy in the Iron Giant, I never really thought I was smarter than my classmates, I just worked harder.

However, not all reading creates information. Lots of people do lots of reading, not to become informed, but to have their biases strengthened. The papers and newscasts are full of lies and misinformation - ie the writings of William Safire, Joseph Perkins, Bill Thompson, Cal Thomas, Tony Snow, etc. A good book I found in my otherwise worthless local chain bookstore is: "Lies my teacher told me". From its final chapter:

"Both the allegiance and the socialization process cause the educated to believe that what America does is right. Public opinion polls show the nonthinking results. In late spring 1966, just before we began bombing Hanoi and Haiphong in North Vietnam, Americans were split 50/50 as to whether we should bomb the targets. After bombing began, 85% favored the bombing while only 15% opposed. The sudden shift was the result, not the cause, of the government's decision to bomb. The same allegiance and socialization processes operated again when policy changed in the opposite direction. In 1968 war sentiment was waning: but 51% of Americans opposed a bombing halt. A month later, after President Johnson announced a bombing halt, 71% favored the halt. Thus 23% of our citizens changed their minds within a month, mirroring the shift in government policy. This swaying of thought by policy affects attitudes on issues ranging from our space program to environmental policy and shows the so-called 'silent majority' to be an unthinking majority as well. Educated people are overrepresented among these straws in the wind....Therefore we might expect that the MORE traditional schooling in history that Americans have, the less they will understand Vietnam or any other historically based problem. This is why educated people were more hawkish on the Vietnam War...educated people were and are more likely to be Republicans, while high school dropouts are more likely to be Democrats. Hawkish right wing Republicans, including the core supporters of Barry Goldwater in 1964, of Ronald Reagan in 1980, and of groups like the John Birch Society, come disproportionately from the most educated and affluent segments of our society, particularly dentists and physicians."

Yes, the majority of the Americans are idiots, in a sense. 87% couldn't find Iraq no a map around the end of 2002. Millions read the Reader's Digests, the height of unreflective hedonism, one of the five major types of anti-intellectualism according to Richard Hofstadter. Between 50% and 90% think Saddam perpetrated the WTC attacks. American cultures reveres people who succeed and publicize their success - high-profile businessmen, salesmen, atheletes, pop singers - rather than people who actually contribute to content and not only image, such as scientists, intellectuals, teachers, social workers. American culture is predominantly patriotic, in the sense that people willfully submit to the state as their value instead of ensure that the state submits to them.

did you take math?

He was shocked when he discovered that. That should've been about enough to get him kicked out of the White House in 1956 or booed whenever he talked about education.

Here is a series of numbers 1,3,4,4,7,7,7,7,8,8,9,10. What is the average? How many in the series are below average?
There are at least three types of averages
1) mean = sum(1 to N)/N
2) median = half above and half below
3) mode = most common value

Your statement is only true for the median, and my Webster's defines average as either 1) or 3).

True, in a larger, more random distribution, such a disparity may tend to average out, but in regard to your statement, my geometry teacher would raise his index finger and say "not necessarily"

....Most Americans don't make that effort. It's not a question of them being stupid...they're ignorant of facts...they've been conditioned since day one to not question authority figures, to accept whatever passes for history at the moment and to believe the great American Dream(that if you work hard, you'll get ahead)...swallowing the red, white and blue version of America and never really looking underneath.

Ignorance can be cured-stupidity is terminal.

But certainly self-absorbed, ill informed and disinterested.

The majority see a headline or a mention on the scroll bar and accept it as fact. They aren't looking for the retraction (ie WMD claims) on page 6 three days later.

It is a simple matter of statistics.

Why the majority of americans are uninformed has more to do with the media than anything else.

They care about other things. When I had 5 kids at home I just saw the top part of what was going on. I have time to play around with this stuff now. I am also a loner. Yesterday all the men and women, at a party, were talking about guns and they all knew all this stuff as it was of interest to them. I sat and was out of the picture. It is uninteresting to me and I had not come from a family that had guns or ever used one, but we did talk gov. at the table and had to know things even as children. I also had a minor in Social things in college so it was a lot of history and a great love to me.

For many I think there exists a rational ignorance. That is, it is in their own interest, rationally, to remain ignorant as the cost of becoming informed is very high. Politics is complicated, particularly with regard to complex arguments and issues like tax reform, national defense/foreign policy, and environmental policy. A benefit, for lack of a better word, to straight ticket voting which as I understand it involves punching one lever and marking every candidate Democratic or Republican and then reading from a published list from that party how to vote on initiatives simplifies the process somewhat but one must still pick a party to trust. Choosing that party also takes some level of self-education on the issues. Some are very busy with children and working, they could tell you much about the things they know about however for the things that you and I believe are relevant - politics, elections, etc. - they are ignorant. Not because they are stupid but because they allot their time differently. Some may indeed choose bread and circuses, or fast food and television, over becoming informed out of laziness but I wonder if for some others there is a subtle recognition, an unconcious understanding, that the television, music, and food consumed for pleasure currently would change drastically if they became informed sufficiently. For instance a reading of Fast Food Nation, and consideration of its contents, would perhaps push one away from fast food which can be a source of pleasure as it is 'tasty'. So to that effecct not only is there a time sacrifice in choosing to be educated, but also a pleasure sacrifice - perhaps.

By the statistics I've seen I'm of above average intelligence or at least scholastic/academic aptitude, but I'm not sure I'd put much stock in that. Certainly I'm good at performing those intelligence measures, but I have significant trouble in other areas many people might find easy - cooking for instance, I'm lucky if I can successfully make a sandwich or cook rice in a pan or recognizing movie stars - I call half a dozen actors Christopher Walken. So I don't believe I'm smarter than the rest of the population, but I would venture to guess that I'm much more informed than most - although then again here within DU I am consistently amazed at the information various posters are able to recall, indicating that they are much more informed than I - IG, Eloriel, DSC, BLM, Jacianto, Wonk, Mika, Khephra, Nicholas J, Jody, and many others who I don't know off the top of my head.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

these are the possibilitys <somewhat tongue in cheek>

1) i am wrong (stupid), and the "intelligent" half of the population listens to rush and ann because they are right (smart).

or

2) they are wrong (stupid), and the "intelligent" half of the population reads, listens, discusses all sides of an issue trying to come to a real solution, which sometimes results in deadlock, but make an earnest effort to try and comprehend the issue, because we are right (smart)

....not necessarily "smarter".

smart is relative

i maybe more informed than some
and others,well, we just see things differently.

an aside, i detest the word stupid.

but many of us are lazy, too lazy to become informed. There is a lot of ignorance (lack of knowledge--not lack of intelligence) out there and it's prime-pickin's for the likes of Faux etc.

If you disagree then just listen to the callers on C-Span who support the Simian or read letters to the editor that are along those lines. (In my local paper I recently saw a rightie demanding to know why folks are "taunting" Bush "Where's Saddam? Where's bin Laden?" and she went on to say nobody taunted FDR with "where's Hitler"--hello? They found his dead body. No mystery there.--Ignorance, plain and simple) They are angry, incoherent and horribly ill-informed. This is indisputable.

Julie

here's a link to today's chicago tribune "voice of the people" letters to the editors section which frosted my ass this morning. obviously the editors at a large metropolotan newspaper must be somewhat intelligent and they must also be informed, how can thay and why do they print some of this tripe?? granted, they are a repug pub but you would think they would try to publish well thought out and informed opinions. this sort of thing needs a strong response by all du-ers.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/letters/

(as an aside, why does it seem that the worst offenders, ie:blind bushie backers, seem to be of the female persuasion?)

I know a couple of women who are Rush-bots and blind supporters of the Simian.

They are drawn to blow-hard men, one in fact has a father very much like Rush, hate-spewing, uninformed rascist.

Folks tend to gravitate to what they know. Even if it's horrible.

Julie

Individually, smart. Collectively, not so smart.

And that's what most Americans are-ignorant. They aren't idiots.

before the election. And a large number supported them anyway. And still do...

...is not the same as more "intelligent."

Most americans are lazy and child-like in their relation to politics and current events.

and more importantly- shockingly uninquisitive. they just don't care.

keep up with the jonses, and pay no attention to the men behind the curtain.

The more an educated man learns, the more he realizes he does not know that much.

Big paraphrase of Confucius/

but he generally knows more than the un-educated man.

just as the inquisitive person knows more than the non-inquisitive,
and the informed person is aware of more than the un-informed person.

and the rupukes prefer an an electorate that remains un-educated, non-inquisitive, and un-informed...why do you suppose that is?

Two jobs makes it a little hard to find time to reflect on the news.

they aren't getting ahead, or see any reason to believe they ever will. For them, the two jobs is what keeps them barely afloat.

If we write off the great unwashed in America we are little better than the right. When we engage in intellectual effeteism we are overlooking our liberal principle that states that we are for policies that include all the people. That is what makes us different from the right. They mouth the words while enacting polices which build protective walls around the rights of the privileged.

We should keep in mind that most Americans are in or have just risen from the underclass. We should not miss the point made by Howard Zinn, most Americans are not and never have been part of the power structure of this country. Those lucky enough to have obtained an advanced education should not look down on those who due largely to the circumstances beyond their control did not.

the liberal message as long as we have this kind of disdain for them.

"smart" and "stupid" are pretty broad terms, anyway.

I don't consider myself stupid, but I've certainly done and said some stupid things in my life, and probably will in the future. I am also ignorant about a lot of things in life, try to learn what I can about some things, and have chosen to not spend time learning about other things. The people who are involved in and/or well-informed about the topics that I do not understand well (or choose not to understand well) might very well think of me as stupid.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that (rightly or wrongly) some Americans simply choose not to spend their time developing an awareness of issues about which many DUers feel passionately. When willful ignorance or apathy is declared on a topic that will directly have an effect on their lives, then "stupid" might be an apt description -- but for many Americans, they have either not been directly affected by the issues we discuss here, or they have not expanded their empathatic circle to encompass those who are affected, or they have not taken the time to consider how they will be affected by events in the future.

Of course, it's probably more complicated than that. :)

things they hear on TV, which is where most people get their news.

I don't fault them for not being as well-informed as I and other DUers are, because not everyone has the time to spend to do it. I DO fault them for not thinking past the ends of their noses.
E.G., why weren't any of our allies willing to join us against Iraq if Iraq were such a threat? Why wasn't the UN as a whole willing to go along with this? Etc.

Eloriel

Though the combination of heavily "armed" forces at work here does combine to give the effect that a vast majority of the population is "stupid".

The Confderate Broederbund, Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, whatever you want to call it, has created a program for takeover (and, no, I don't know that it was drawn up in detail in a smoky back room as such, but more of "hub & spoke" sort of a implicit conspiracy, though it often has fallen into, what for anyone with less powerful friends, a RICO-violating web of corruption) that spends literally billions of dollars and has attacked every level of our democratic-republic. But, for these purposes, let us focus on those aspects of the Bushevik Program that conspire to make it appear as if the American People are "stupid".

1) The Right-Wing Sub-Media: The Right-Wing Sub-Media, wherever it appears, functions as a Party Function. From their beginnings they have held to a different standard that traditional journalism. Far far striving for fact-based objectivity, they defend their Party, voluntarily (the paychecks likely stop coming if that changes) more than 99% of the time. They have been created to be the Mighty Wurlitzer that Grover Norquist speaks of openly, which can play any tune for however long Upper Management wants. They do their job well. Through some strange combination of fate, bullying, ruthlessness, and singlemindedness, they have, by a vast majority of the populace, been given the same stamp of legitimacy as the Mainstream Media, which for all it's faults and flaws was designed with an underlying bedrock of ethics and rules for conduct.

2) Advances in the Sciences of Personlity Profiling, Advertsising, Marketing, Public Relations: Some 70 years have passed since Goebbels created what I would call Industrial Propaganda. The Soviet version was tired and ham-fisted, no comparison really. On a large-scale, in America, we did not used our ever increasing power to mold and predict the human psyche to much other than to hawk products. Many people even viewed that as a tremendous abuse of power. Now, the dazzles removed from our eyes by extremity (as they remain in so many others), we see that the Right-Wing (the Busheviks?) have been using these tactics to some other end. Odious as this is, even more frightening is that the Democrats have no corresponding machinery of this type. Of they did at least there could be some balance.

3) The "Weakness of (small d)democratic Institutions" (in this case, the Fourth Estate, but many mroe can be argued) to paraphrase Leo Strauss: William Kristol, in a rare admission for a conservative and thus unpublicized in an Orwellian double-standard we've all become accustomed to, once said the "Liberal Media" wasn't very powerful, but was a convenient foil on which to pile conservative excuses. This was an is now especially a hideous understatement, as the "Liberal Media" being so unpowerful, small, underfunded and laughably unpublicized as to be nearly irrelevant and go unheard.

I could go on and on about various other facets of the Bushevik destruction of the Old American Republic, but I will stick to the topic of those things which give the illusion of "American Stupidity".

4) The use of Revolutionary Rhetoric by Those in Control: If we count the Attempted Coup of 1998, it can be accuraely said that the Right-Wing has controlled completely nearly every political discussion in what laughably passes for a "Fair and Balanced" National Dialogue. Talk Radio is 95% or more Right-Wing. The "Liberal Media" of NBC, ABC, and CBS largely follow Right-Wing Sub-Media dictattes, leads, and non-stories (when they aren't covering Celebrity News). As often, it is a convenient excuse and a tremendous bullyrag on the occasion that these stations or others actually report on what Busheviks are saying or actually doing. In other words, just as across the rest of the spectrum, the Busheviks paint themselves as victims when they are completely and utterly in control. This is a dangerous course to take. It smacks of Orwellian fascism. When the agressors pity themselves as victim, then there becomes no limit to what they can do in the name of their victimhood.

To put it simply, "How Many Successful Republican "Revolutions" Need to Be Waged Before Victory Can Be Declared?" Many are frightened and enraged by what the future answer might be.

I don't think I'm any smarter than the rest of the population, and I don't think the majority of Americans are idiots.

I do think it is a mistake to think that most Americans are idiots or stupid, because that premise could color your thinking about what motivitates the average American.

I do think the vast majority of Americans have a very deep understanding of what freedom and liberty is; they may not be able to express it as eloquently as most here can, but they will sure know when someone is taking it away from them.

Do I think I'm smarter than the average American when it comes to politics? Yes.

Do I think I'm smarter than the average American when it comes to American Idol? No.

Being intellectual is in the eye of the beholder. :)

deliberately by the corp media.

the REAL question is... what are we gonna do about that?

i've always said... PASS THE WORD :bounce:

peace

i'm glad you brought this subject up, though. i laugh whenever i see the latest poll on cnn or elsewhere.

given the 'intellect' of the average American, i have no reason to take any of these polls seriously. for example, how can the average American here no anything about the benefits/implications of the peace process in Israel/Palestine.

Most? I don't know, but certainly a great many.

Ain't no getting around the fact that you can't support Bush and be smart. I'm sorry.

I'd like to propose that there is also a 'comfortability' factor that drives us.

. it is uncomfortable to have to deal with foreigners.
. it is uncomfortable to travel outside the U.S., question or berate those that do, ignore the cultural differences and become fascinated and obsessive with some negative truth or untruth related to a difference in cultures, then berate or laugh at it. It is even comfortable to retell it over and over.
. it may even be uncomfortable to run into their fellow church member who has adopted a 'foreign infant'.
. it is comfortable to listen to Rush or Pat who sound just like their preacher and it is comfortable to repeat what they say.
. it is comfortable to belong to a group of people who get to listen to major corporate news networks whose hosts and guest experts say just exactly what they believe. It's comfortable to listen to them to learn how something that doesn't make sense can be made to make sense.
. it is comfortabe to rely on one source for meaning.
. sharing prejudices that allow a person to fit in is comfortable.
. it is comfortable to deny our murderous past and get pumped up about the flag.
. it is comfortable to condemn and not want to understand people who don't believe in their God or their bible.

Most of search for comfort because of our discomfort.
A secondary factor is what we want to be ingrained in us.

Mine is the belief (if you want to use religion) that God made man and woman in his likeness, God did not make just Americans in his likeness. We only occupy one little area of the earth. We are obligated to share the earth. We are no better than others, but have shown prowess in working as slaves or like slaves for our familes and have been given outstanding technological leadership and opportunites so that in two centuries we have been able to lead technologically. But the myth that we have led as a democracy has now been turned into a bald faced lie. We are not a superior people. We are a struggling nation. We're not even sure of everything about our enemy who were born on our shores and are supposed to be leading us.