Intelligence...... Society and Politics
I was having some general musings today about the value of intelligence in our society. The Katy Couric situation got to me.
There seems to be such a disconnect between the academic reward for intellect and the value of intelligence within our society as a whole.
Pretty much life, starts out teaching us through the educational system that intelligence is wonderful. We are lauded for our cognitive reasoning and pursuit of intellectual excellence at all levels in academia. There are things like the Honor Roll, Honor Society, degrees with honors and acceptatance into academic fraternitys. Yet, all this turns out to be a false set of incentives when it comes to being successful outside of academia.
The public at large, nor corporate culture rewards intelligence nor the pursuit of excellence in your field. Otherwise, a woman with far better credentials would be anchoring the network nightly news. Where this really hits home is in politics, though. If we look at the most intelligent political candidates and Presidents of our time they have been Democrats.
Individuals like Al Gore, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and John Kerry are all highly intelligent individuals and yet within the culture at large there is so much disdain for intelligence, that candidates like Kerry and Gore wind up being misconstrued and berated for what essentially should be admirable and overwhelmingly the choice to represent our nation. I have a difficult time thinking of a really intelligent GOP person, other than Sununu and Kissinger. But they have not ever been set forth as leaders of their party. Only Democrats choose individuals with high intellect to lead.
This to me is depressing. I am so disgusted that we have instead for a President an individual who is the antithesis of intelligence and grossly incompetent. How can one have faith that this nation will ever become great again, when the masses are willing to be lead by idiots, while tarring and feathering those who offer the brightest political acumen in terms of policy and global leadership?
Katy Couric, exemplifys this same descend into mediocrity. I do not want 'perky' news, I want news with substance. I do not need drop outs and inexperienced nicompoops representing me in watching and heading up agencies.....I want excellence and intelligence. How ever can we get to back on track?
I share your dismay at the public's disregard for intelligence...but the sad reality is that it were ever thus. There was a lengthy (and lively) discussion of the subject here (although the beginning of my post got cut off in the site move; full post is here). Short version: Republicans embrace anti-intellectualism (and have for more than 50 years, although maybe never so enthusiastically as they do now) because it works.
(And apologies for whoring my own posts...but they are on topic.)
April 6, 2006 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it was David Halberstam who described our process of electing a president as roughly akin to the process of a college fraternity electing its president.
Imagine if Lincoln were trying to get elected today. The MSM would say he's much too maudlin and given to fancy rhetoric oriented towards pointy headed types. Plus he's too ugly.
With no radio or tv forcing the sound-biting of so much speech, and a pace of life that was a whole lot slower and less urban, maybe this meant there was greater tolerance for expression that was not sound-bited. Most adults didn't have the vote at the time. And there weren't presidential primaries. The party leaders/bosses picked the nominees.
Still, the situation is what it is. I think B Clinton showed that a candidate with a razor sharp intellect can communicate clearly enough on both intellectual and non-intellectual levels with enough voters to win and be effective. Being able to appeal to people on emotional and other non-intellectual levels does not need to go along with being intellectually subpar. We need to nominate really smart and capable people who also are likable and know how to relate to voters on more than a strictly intellectual level. To my way of thinking John Edwards meets this description, which is one reason why I voted for him over Kerry in the Virginia primary notwithstanding doubts about his national security and overall experience bona fides and vulnerabilities on those fronts.
Bitching about it isn't going to get us anywhere--no matter how tempting at times (and I fall into that sometimes as well). Our party has so much more to offer the average American than the Republican party does. Would that our candidates communicated the positive and caring spirit animating our policies instead of relying almost totally on bland appeals to reason and intellect.
April 6, 2006 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink