Rise of the anti-intellectual American

Reading a newspaper or magazine is a fraught activity these days in America. With the Republican primary battle heating up and the Tea Party in full cry, the lunacy is being ratcheted up to pathological levels.

It's a telling commentary on the state of the nation that those who were formerly considered fringe lunatics have now been recast as sober voices of the centre. When Fox News' Bill O'Reilly starts to seem like the avuncular voice of reason, one begins to grasp just how far down the rabbit-hole one has been led.

It's not just the extremist fringe (on both sides of the political spectrum) that I'm talking about either. Even mainstream American views have tilted sharply against the “establishment” – be it the government, the financial system, or the universities.

The anti-intellectual, anti-science rhetoric among the public has never been shriller, and elected officials, who are ever quick to stoop to pander, have picked up the call.

ANTI-SCIENCE IS IN

One of the candidates for the Republican nomination was recently forced on the defensive for his support to a vaccination drive for teenage girls. The government overreach was a valid critique, no doubt. But in this case, the criticism went beyond that to the very rationale of vaccinations.

One in ten American parents consider vaccination to be of questionable value, according to a recent survey. Not surprising, given that one of the candidates for the presidential nomination claimed that vaccination causes mental retardation. At least, that would explain the quality of some of the debates we've been forced to endure.

The vaccination brouhaha could be dismissed as a momentary flash in the smoking pan of a primary election season; but then one should also take note of the ongoing controversies over Evolution and Climate Change.

The latter may be considered a science in its infancy, but what of the scepticism over Evolution and Natural Selection? The very fact that something considered as an established science for decades is now a matter of debate should be enough to alarm anyone who does not consider an encyclopaedia an instrument of the Devil.

The fundamentalist religious factions who oppose the teaching of Evolution in classrooms because it doesn't have the Jehovah seal of approval have been enjoying a revival. At the very least, they've succeeded in sowing some doubt in the minds of the fickle majority. There's even a scientific sounding alternative – Intelligent Design, which says that the universe was created by an intelligent being.

Of course, it can be claimed not to be a religious theory because it doesn't mention God. So you see, it's just as scientific as that other monkey business. Charles Darwin must be turning in his grave. Or burning in hell. Depends on whom you ask.

FROM BUSH TO TEA PARTY

The anti-intellectual streak in American policy that was personified by the George W. Bush presidency has been honed and perfected by the likes of Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann, and now finds full throat in the baying of the Tea Party. This is a new breed of politician, who wears his ignorance as a badge of honour, considers reading a liberal affectation, and shoots from the hip while thinking with his gut.

The presidential primary debates reflect this necrosis of the body politic. Who wants to debate nuanced policy issues and risk being labelled a bore, when one can just fling talking points and clichés at each other to see what sticks, then shout “God bless America” all together, and get back to the serious business of raising money.

The main objective of the serious candidates at these debates seems to be to avoid saying anything of substance, thus avoiding the trap of being held accountable for anything. The one notable exception is Ron Paul, who speaks his mind and says what he believes, and is promptly labelled “unelectable” for his pains.

George W. Bush once famously claimed to have peered into Vladimir Putin's soul, when he would have been better served keeping his eyes on the prize. He was a president who led with his gut, and his presidency gave America, and the whole world, indigestion.

His successor has gone in the opposite direction and has got so completely lost in the nuance of leadership that he's forgotten to actually lead. Unfortunately, the pendulum now seems to be swinging the other way again. We seem to have lost the knack of the happy medium, and this is shaping up to be a long and loud election season.

The marketplace of ideas, rather than being an arena for duelling ideas to compete on their merits, increasingly resembles a fish-market, where the monger with the loudest hustle drowns out all others, no matter how putrid his wares.

I wonder if the Flat Earth Society is accepting new members.

COMMENT NOW