The continuing fanfare surrounding Sarah Palin reminds us that even stupid and detestable individuals can capitalize on populist outrage, which always seeks scapegoats and soundbites. At the core of the rightwing narrative that feeds on this outrage is the notion that America’s “elites” are oblivious to the needs and values of “ordinary” Americans, who are hardworking, law-abiding, and god-fearing, in contrast to an intellectual class that is secular and aloof.
While there are racial, class, and coastal v. inland undertones to this narrative, the predominant theme is anti-intellectualism. People with advanced degrees are frowned upon in favor of those who act based on their “gut” and the moral absolutes of religion. The number of people who disbelieve in evolution, question climate change, and are suspicious of rational argumentation is highly correlated with the demographics of the rightwing.
Unfortunately, because of the conservatives’ power to influence the media and therefore our political discourse, this anti-intellectualism has crept further into the mainstream. While Obama’s election victory was in some sense a repudiation of anti-intellectualism, the crowds that continue to fawn over Palin, and the entire Tea Party movement, are evidence that this pernicious strand is alive and well. It’s a dangerous strand as well: without our elites, America would no longer be a first-rate power.
From the Founding Fathers to the creators of Google, from the profound political insights that inspired the Constitution to the scientific insights that developed and expanded the internet, America’s prosperity has always been a product of our elites. It is America’s dominance in higher education that has generated the technology, and the wealth, that have made our economy No. l in the world (and our military as well).
I often pose this simple question to my students: Why is it that a secretary in the U.S. can live a middle class life, with a decent home, a car, and some luxury goods, while a secretary in India will likely live in poverty? Since they both do the same thing, how is it that one leads a relatively affluent life while the other lives in poverty? The answer is simple, but holds a profound truth. The secretary in the U.S. lives in a wealthy country, with a high overall standard of living. And why is that? It’s largely because of our elites, whose innovations have propelled our economy and our prosperity for decades.
Being able to produce elite thinkers and innovators, and to attract them from around the world, will only become more important as the new century progresses. Whereas much of America’s prosperity was once tied to our abundant natural resources, the share of our wealth that’s linked to this base is fast diminishing. As the economies of emerging powers like China, India, and Brazil continue to grow, America’s need to remain competitive and technologically “ahead of the curve” will be paramount.
Those who live in almost all of the “red states” (e.g., Palin’s Alaska) are net recipients of federal income from the “blue states”; similarly, they are huge net recipients of the fruits of the intellectual capital that is concentrated on America’s East and West Coasts (e.g., Silicon Valley and the Northeast Corridor). Instead of disparaging those at the forefront of U.S. science and technology, the rightwing should be trying to emulate them.
Ironically, if Middle America is going to remain prosperous in the future, it will be because the inland communities become hubs for new technology and manufacturing (like North Carolina’s Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Research Triangle); clinging to romantic, pastoral, and illusory notions of what constitutes the “real America” may draw in the crowds for Palin rallies and Tea Parties, but it’s ultimately bad for the region and bad for America.
Jason Scorse