Articles Comments

SENTRY JOURNAL » intellectual » Are Conservatives Anti-intellectual?

Are Conservatives Anti-intellectual?

One of the more common statements made of Conservative or the Tea Party members is that they are “anti-intellectual,” or against the “educated class.”   It has been said enough for me to think that it is a leftist talking point, so it therefore bears examining.  While such a statement might be made about populist movements, I cannot say that this is at all true here.

I say that because the founders were intellectuals.  They were leaders in society.  Franklin was a publisher.  Jefferson was an inventor.  The list goes on and on.

  • At the time of the convention, 13 men were merchants: Blount, Broom, Clymer, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Shields, Gilman, Gorham, Langdon, Robert Morris, Pierce, Sherman, and Wilson.
  • Six were major land speculators: Blount, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Gorham, Robert Morris, and Wilson.
  • Eleven speculated in securities on a large scale: Bedford, Blair, Clymer, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Franklin, King, Langdon, Robert Morris, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, and Sherman.
  • Twelve owned or managed slave-operated plantations or large farms: Bassett, Blair, Blount, Butler, Carroll, Jenifer, Jefferson, Mason, Charles Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Rutledge, Spaight, and Washington. Madison also owned slaves, as did Franklin, who later freed his slaves and was a key founder of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society. Alexander Hamilton was opposed to slavery and, with John Jay and other anti-slavery advocates, helped to found the first African free school in New York City. Jay helped to found the New York Manumission Society and, when he was governor of New York in 1798, signed into law the state statute ending slavery as of 1821.
  • Broom and Few were small farmers.
  • Eight of the men received a substantial part of their income from public office: Baldwin, Blair, Brearly, Gilman, Livingston, Madison, and Rutledge.
  • Three had retired from active economic endeavors: Franklin, McHenry, and Mifflin.
  • Franklin and Williamson were scientists, in addition to their other activities.
  • McClurg, McHenry, and Williamson were physicians, and Johnson was a college president.

Many of these men were from the top of American society.  I can see no angry mobs full of ignorant rednecks here.

Most of them participated in the Constitutional Convention, and what these men did was far reaching.    They recognized individual freedoms that government does not grant, but has an obligation to protect.  They intentionally made the government small, with limits on its powers, in order to avoid tyranny.  And, they made the smallest and the largest of us equal in the eyes of the law.  The small illiterate farmer had the same rights as the wealthy merchant or landowner.  (Note that at no time was the illiterate farmer eligible to confiscate part of the merchant’s wealth, but that is another story).  In so doing, the founders created a means by which the illiterate farmer, or perhaps his children, might rise through work or knowledge, to assume another role or place in society.  This equality of opportunity lead to The Unites States becoming the nation with the greatest innovation, wealth, and prosperity in human history.  History is driven by individuals; those who have the right idea at the right time-those that choose to act instead of follow. Our system allows those people to be heard, and removes obstacles to their legal actions.

I will say that we are against is elitism.  The founders created the nation, and while many went into (at times) government service at various levels, many others went back to work, or back to the farm.  They left us to manage our own lives, without the tyrannical interference of government.  On the other hand, our current elites crave power, and seek to wield that power in order to dictate most aspects of our lives.  The elites sneer at the common man, or others that offer a dissenting opinion.  They believe that they have a right to govern based on their education and so-called enlightenment.  They believe that they alone are endowed with the knowledge with which to manage our education, careers, salaries and wages, diets, housing, transportation, energy consumption, childrearing, media consumption, medical care, retirements, and so on.  They believe that our Constitution, based on a small government and individual freedoms, is outmoded and in need of re-interpretation.  They believe that we are far too foolish and short sited to deal with our problem.  In fact, how many times have we read that we are acting against our own self-interests?  When we choose freedom, and the responsibility that comes with it, the elites view us as foolish and petulant children that are in need of ridicule and the “loving” guidance of the all powerful nanny state.

To clarify the overall issue, Conservatives and allied groups respect education, and recognize its importance.  We want the education that prepares the individual for a role in our Constitutional Republic.  We want education that is locally controlled and not subject to political forces in Washington DC and state capitols.  We want education that teaches children how to read, write, and do mathematics. We want education that teaches children how to think independently by taking information and using logic to solve problems.  We want education that teaches our system of government, as well as our history, flaws and mistakes included.  We want education that teaches children how to recognize their own power as individuals.   The elites wants children to know how to put condoms on fruit, to be immersed in social justice and other fallacies of the left.  The elites want an educational product that belongs to the socialist/fascist herd, and looks to the elite for guidance.  They seek a mindless drone, not an individual. The results of elitist intervention in education are seen in high illiteracy, low graduation rates, and an exceedingly poor return for the monies invested.

In the end, Conservatives are not against education or intellectualism.  Intellectuals founded our Republic, and we need educated individuals to help maintain it.  We are against elitism-those who would use intellect, deception, and acquired power to deprive us of our individual liberties.

Share
Matt

Written by

I believe that future generations should have the same opportunities that myself, and those that came before me, had. My parents taught me that I could do anything I wanted to do. I don’t want to have to tell my daughter, “You can do whatever the government tells you to do.” We are at a crossroads in this country; are we going to be free, or are we going to be slaves to the nanny state. I choose freedom. I can be found at the Conservative Hideout, or at the Conservative Hideout RapidFire

Filed under: intellectual · Tags: , , , ,

opinions powered by SendLove.to
Comments
  • proof February 20, 2011 at 8:15 PM

    Liberals like to say that conservatives can’t be intellectuals, because they think they’re intellectuals and if we draw different conclusions than they do, then we must not be.
    proof recently posted..Themes Like Old TimesMy Profile

  • Harrison February 20, 2011 at 9:47 PM

    I don’t think you answered the question. Being for education, etc… is not the same as being intellectual. I think we have to go after this definition:

    a person who places a high value on or pursues things of interest to the intellect or the more complex forms and fields of knowledge, as aesthetic or philosophical matters, especially on an abstract and general level.

    Perhaps the simple fact is that Liberals tend to feel they are more “evolved” whether it is drinking a latte instead of Folgers or reading The Economist instead of Us magazine. I am grossly stereotyping here…

    Liberals see Red State Americans as driving pick-up tricks, wearing plaid shirts, riding dirt bikes or going to rodeos instead, for example, of catching the latest foreign film festival.

    So much of these discussions should be about Social Class instead of “intellectualism” although the higher Social Classes tend to be more intellectual.

    I guess it comes down to whether you follow NASCAR or Formula 1. Do you like football or tennis? Do you insist upon titanium eyeglasses or the plastic ones from COSTCO?

    THAT is how I would define the gulf between Liberals and Conservatives, as crass as it sounds.

    • Matt February 22, 2011 at 12:18 AM

      Education is just an example. The pursuit of ideas and truth should be a good definition of intellectualism. I don’t know that anyone has to have a wall full of degrees to pursue truth.

      Ironically, the would-be intellectuals do judge others by rather superficial standards. However, they do that in order to dismiss the holder of the idea rather than actually discuss the ideas. How very intellectual.
      Matt recently posted..And so it Begins- Liberals Launch Racist Attacks Against Herman CainMy Profile

  • Harrison February 20, 2011 at 10:29 PM

    I sent this to Reddit and the comments are typically Liberal and absurd but I thought you’d like to read them:

    http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/fpbk1/are_conservatives_antiintellectual/

  • Martin February 20, 2011 at 11:30 PM

    Funny how the only people that want to make an honest effort at understanding the founding of this country, the ones reading the Federalist, and studying the founding documents, (look at the resurgence of book sales on American History), are labeled as non-intellectual. Instead we have idiot after idiot in Congress mislabeling the three branches of government, acting incredulous when someone asks about constitutionality, and demeaning their “subjects” – by suggesting it’s unthinkable that they read a bill before passing it.

    Not only are they elitist, but they have no basis for their pretensions.
    Martin recently posted..The Ladies of Boston Stage a Coffee PartyMy Profile

  • Jim Gourdie February 21, 2011 at 6:54 AM

    Intellectualism knows no political boundaries. And, it doesn’t necessarily have to do with education. I’ve known a few people who were functionally illiterate; yet they were without any doubt intellectuals. The difference that I see between conservative intellectuals and liberal intellectuals is that the conservative one are also blessed with common sense.

  • LibertyAtStake February 21, 2011 at 7:34 AM

    I, for one, am anti-pseudo-intellectual. While all pseudo-intellectuals are not explicitly Leftist (see David Brooks), all Leftists seem to be pseudo-intellectual.

    d(^_^)b
    http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
    “Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
    LibertyAtStake recently posted..An Open Letter To Our Unionized Public ServantsMy Profile

  • Country Thinker February 21, 2011 at 11:16 AM

    The “anti-intellectual” claim is laughable. I graduated summa cum laude from the University of Miami School of Law, and I describe myself as a “Country Class intellectual” on my blog. I drive a pickup truck, live on a dirt road, and love my vegetable garden. I also have subscriptions to the Wall Street Journal and The Economist. Nonetheless, I am proud to call myself a libertarian tea partier.

    Consider some other members of my family: Dad has a PhD in Chemical Engineering (Ohio State) and was a professor for over 30 years at Toledo. He’s a libertarian/conservative. My oldest brother has a PhD in Industrial Engineering (Penn State) and is a professor at Wisconsin-Stout. My other brother has an MBA and a law degree, and currently is a lobbyist. Both are conservative.

    The Lacksonen clan is well-educated. We all hold advanced degrees and have worked or are working in liberal and Ruling Class professions (law, higher education, government). None of us has a single ounce of liberalism in us.

    The idea that non-liberals are anti-intellectual or unintellectual isn’t just laughably ignorant, it’s insulting.

  • Teresa February 21, 2011 at 8:09 PM

    Liberals are not intellectuals. They are power hungry, nanny state elitists who want to control every aspect of our lives because they think the government knows what’s best for the individual. The fact that liberals think the government knows best and that individuals are so dumb that they need the government in every aspect of their lives means that liberals are in actuality promoting anti-intellectualism. Conservatives are for the individual being self-reliant so we are very much for intellectualism.
    Teresa recently posted..So- Candy Crowley thinks Obama is quite popular overseas ReallyMy Profile