Why does the US hate intelligence

Post Reply New Topic

I was at a therapy session today where I was complaining to my therapist how the one thing I am good at is hated in the US. If you use your intelligence to make a lot of money, like becoming a CEO, everything seems to think that you should be punished, and that you made money unfairly, etc. However, no one seems to be bothered by actors/actresses/musicians/athletes making a lot of money off of their talent, and politicians aren't saying that they aren't paying their fair share and that they need to have it taken away from them.

So why is intelligence bad but these other talents ok?

For the CEO example: It's because there are alot of huge companies that really DO act in nasty ways to get the money that they make. Typically, people see the CEOs of those companies as having alot of control (which is pretty true, as far as I know, in some cases) and thus, they dislike those people. It's not about them being smart. It's about the things they do, or the things that people THINK they do, to get what they have.

I have very high intelligence myself, or so I'm told, but as I dont have any aspirations and do not work, there is no "position" for me to get into that could be seen as a source of bad things, and thus, nobody cares or sees a problem.

Of course, there are other reasons for people to think things like this, many of which are more than a bit silly, but yeah, it's not necessarily a direct disliking of "intelligence".

I don't think people in the US HATE intelligence. I believe it arouses many people's suspicions, though.

It's just a basic human nature to fear (hate) someone who is smarter than you, and because Autistics are often seen as smart, we get the brunt of the hate.

Are you figuring performers/athletes would be exempt from any wealth-related tax increases? I don't know where you're getting that. I think there are less arguments in favor of those people being taxed because no one ever argues against them being taxed.

Anti-intellectualist prejudice tends to be more marked in pioneer societies, like the USA, New Zealand, Australia (I don't know about Canada - has the French influence somehow modified the typical colonialist prejudice?) One theory is that the settlement of territory by colonialist pioneers (in relatively recent times, historically speaking) created a bias toward favouring practical skills, "common sense" and a brass tacks do-it-don't-think-about-it kind of approach, coupled with an intolerance for what may have been perceived as slacking! Western Europe countries like France have the opposite bias, intellectual endeavour is admired and respected and regarded as a very important part of the overall cultural heritage that enriches La Belle France.

For all the slurs thrown at academics in their so-called "ivory towers", it rarely occurs to the accusers that the towers are a refuge from the prejudice that has not yet matured into tolerance and inclusivity. Overall, also the world is currently becoming generally a far more intolerant and divisive place or at least that is my impression - sectionalism has increased and boundaries of difference have hardened more into battle lines, symbolically at least.. every day now people are bombarded with media and popular comment based on "us and them" thinking and that encourages prejudicial attitudes generally.

That's probably true--the notion of "actions speak louder than words" is pretty paramount in most of the USA, and in the "pioneer" societies which you alluded to.

In Europe, the same attitude, I have found, is paramount amongst some "blue collar" sorts of folks.

I'm primarily a word man myself--so I feel this prejudice, and have felt it all my life. I don't have mechanical aptitude, and I'd rather sit around reading a book than milk that cow.

I have also felt that some people who reside in the "ivory tower" do not want to engage with the hoi polloi. Some, fortunately, do want to extend themselves, thereby providing potential for some real action as pertains essential items like autism awareness.

For something like autism awareness, I believe we have to break the blood-brain barrier between various schools of thought, so that this awareness trickles down from the symposium to the corner bar.

People hate intelligence. They feel intimidated, scared, threatened, etc. I think people value social skills wayyyy more.

I don't assume most CEOs are smart....Sure there are ones like Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates who seem more intellectual than social but they probably got to their spot by being the most cunning not the smartest.

I never hear that they are "evil" for having large paychecks, that they need to be punished for it, all the garbage that we say about CEOs and people who make money outside of entertainment.

Actually both of those two had massive amounts of social and economic privilege growing up. It was in no small part those advantages that enabled them to so easily create their corporations and grow them. They also both have a certain ...reputation for not being very nice people if they think someone or certain rules are in their way to getting what they want.



While I've certainly seen examples of that in the business world and there is a certain...anti-intellectualism/anti-science among some American Fundamentalists, I've found that once people know I am not trying to out-climb them on any social ladder they relax. I'm guessing that's because so much effort in a business setting is *bluffing*. If companies were run rationally and people simply did their portion of what was needed it'd be far more efficient. And, there would be no need for general or department managers, or the rest of the management hierarchy, only a few project managers. I blame an environment of unbridled capitalism. It is set up so that climbing, hording, stepping on others and clawing your way to the top is seen as the highest virtue. It's no surprise then when the people who are good at that see someone smarter as a threat - physical prowess is not as relevant and they already know they are more socially skilled. From there I think it simply bleeds out to the rest of our culture.

^Yes I completely agree, they benefited from being privileged. It's something I've been considering a lot now when I read about "successful CEOs." Most of these successful startup guys came from money.

Umm I think the issue people take is CEOs of massive corporations who evade taxes, use exploitative tactics to cut costs and what not, pay their employees the bare minimum and generally feed into the corruption of the government via using their wealth as political sway. It's a specific kind of wealthy elite CEO that people are bothered by not every wealthy person regardless of how they gained wealth.

Also I don't think most actors, actresses, musicians and athletes are making nearly as much money as the wealthy elite 1%...and also aren't behaving as maliciously to get the wealth they have. I mean people pay actors, actresses, musicians and athletes because people like entertainment. Also none of those are exactly easy work actually if you really think about it, physically and mentally draining. Though I might note that most bands I listen to are largely making their living that way...not just doing it for fun while sitting on a stock pile of wealth they could just retire off of whenever they want. Some more pop star sort of 'musicians' might have that kind of option however.

Actors, actresses, musicians and athletes aren't the ones being credited as 'job creators' whilst siphoning most of this nations wealth to their stock piles via exploitative means and means with questionable legality. Hell not even every wealthy CEO is doing that...some do run legit businesses, pay good wages, don't evade taxes and don't exploit employees and/or foriegn cheap labor. It's the subset of wealthy elite 1%ers that people are angry about.

Not sure where you got that people who become wealthy via using their intellectual abilities/intelligence for accomplisments are the ones people take issue with or that intelligence is bad. It's exploitation, tax evasion, hogging and things like that which are bad.

It could be that many intelligent people, in the eyes of the average person, don't do enough to share their intelligence. If they are so smart, why don't they solve world hunger? End wars? ...

I have seen cases in which presumably smart people won't engage in endless question answering or arguments with less intelligent people.

Both sides get equal hate

"Uneducated racist rednecks"
"Uncaring psychopathic CEOs"
et cetera

Bigotry knows no bounds.

That was true 100 to 200 years ago... Nowadays I can tell you, it's better to be smart in the US than in France. Much, much better, in comparison. In France, equality is confused with egalitarianism, where being equals means erasing natural differences. I'd have a lot to say about it, personal experience.

That's not what bigotry is...that is just describing types of people, who as far as I know exist and aren't mythological creatures.

Bigotry is a complete intolerance to beliefs, ideas and opinions that differ from ones own and the people that hold them.