The coming year brims with potential and curiosity!
Critique of Traditional Intelligence
For years, voices from the political left have critiqued traditional understandings of intelligence.
Proponents of standard English face accusations of upholding systemic oppression, leading to a narrative where middle-class individuals, who tend to use this language naturally, are seen as imposing unfair cultural expectations on others.
When lawyers argue that using non-standard English in legal documents could hinder courtroom success, the left counters that this merely underscores a legal system tainted by systemic racism.
They assert that a truly fair justice system would celebrate cultural diversity and different forms of expression.
Initially focused on written communication, this critique has expanded its reach to include mathematics, which some assert embodies a Western-centric model that further entrenches social disparities.
Additionally, college curricula have come under fire for allegedly prioritizing the works of deceased white males, overshadowing a variety of perspectives.
This progressive viewpoint seems to advocate for a rejection of the quest for knowledge itself.
At first, this ideology troubled me, but then I noticed how the right responded: with a counterattack.
The Rise of Anti-Intellectualism
The MAGA movement launched a campaign against the so-called elite—those knowledgeable figures who often hold sway in society.
Their message was blunt: dismiss these elites and push them out of power.
Ironically, this situation is perplexing.
Americans typically take pride in technological advancements driven by intellectual endeavors.
Remember July 1969, when Neil Armstrong landed on the moon? That achievement captured the nation’s admiration.
The NASA director at the time, Thomas Paine, held a Ph.D. from Stanford—a clear representation of the elite.
It’s safe to say that the complicated math needed for Apollo 11’s success was executed by skilled experts, and the communication among NASA staff relied on standard English.
Today, many struggling financially often possess advanced gadgets, demonstrating society’s respect for the impact of intellectual contributions.
Yet, if you ask the average person, you might hear a dismissive view toward “intellectuals.”
Right now, the Republican Party grapples with this ideological divide.
Vivek Ramaswamy recently expressed his concerns about the anti-intellectual sentiment permeating American culture, criticizing a societal trend that seemingly prefers mediocrity over excellence.
He pointed out the inclination to celebrate athletes at the expense of scholars and suggested expanding the H-1B visa program to recruit educated immigrants for high-demand tech roles.
Interestingly, Ramaswamy’s comments resonate with sentiments previously expressed by figures like Hillary Clinton, indicating that many Americans may not prioritize informed decision-making.
MAGA supporters reacted quickly, advised Ramaswamy to return to his origins, suggesting that his views didn’t resonate with their base.
Navigating the Divide
This anti-intellectual sentiment also casts shadows on well-known figures like Elon Musk, who have recently stepped into the political arena.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump finds himself navigating a difficult path, balancing support between the populist segment that fueled his rise and the wealthy donors backing his endeavors.
As the months progress, the fissures within the Republican Party will likely become more pronounced: Should regulations be loosened in ways that could disadvantage ordinary workers in favor of corporations? Is it more prudent to impose tariffs on China to protect American jobs, or should Tesla be allowed to grow its operations there?
These crucial questions reveal disparate interests between the billionaire elite and the MAGA base.
Navigating this divide is no simple task.
As for me, I stand firmly in favor of intellectualism.
I admire those who express themselves in clear, standard English and grasp complex mathematical ideas.
I welcome guidance from individuals with advanced degrees or specialized expertise beyond my comprehension.
However, it seems I occupy a minority position in this debate.
Despite my beliefs, I don’t align with Trump’s communication style; his social media presence often lacks the sophistication I value.
On the other hand, individuals like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. convey the notion that in-depth understanding of complex subjects isn’t always necessary for effective governance.
Aligning with a base that dismisses intellectualism could push Trump away from the affluent segments of his party, a scenario he likely seeks to avoid.
What initially appeared to be a bleak 2025 now hints at an exceptionally engaging year ahead, offering a front-row seat to observe the unfolding dynamics in a deeply divided America.
Source: Above the Law