"Intellectual Elite"

I have heard a good bit of chatter from pundits recently about the Anti-Intellectualism of the last thirty years slowly dying out. Beginning with the push to elect Ronald Reagan, anti-intellectualism has been a pervasive and strong ally of one party in particular, yet not the one that historically makes much sense. Republicans, long the party of fiscal geniuses and principles based on small government allowing a free market to work, has become the party of 'Joe' and almost proudly announces how its candidates don't know much about how the very things they are looking to have control over operate and work.

Where I differ from some of the pundits is that while I agree it is quite asinine, it isn't all that uncommon. It has been practiced in politics for as long as politics have been around. Labeling those who have made the effort to study and learn has manifested itself as 'elites', insinuating that they are part of a small inner circle of 'smart people' who run the world. Not unlike the leveling of Jews by anti-Semites, and sometimes mixing within them, anti-intellectualism finds its largest fan base within the working class.

During the McCarthy era, when America went on its witch hunt for Communists, America actually acted much like a Communist regime. The government controlled what went on television to a degree of censoring newscasts, cartoons were made, pandering to the groups that sought to drive communism out and anyone who didn't cooperate fully and with zeal was seen as unpatriotic and a possible threat to the government.

Sound familiar?

Way back in 2002 there was a movement to label anyone resistant to the idea of going to Iraq as "unpatriotic" and "sympathizing with terrorists." I seem to recall many debates with people who weren't using facts as a march to war, but fear. Fear of a faceless enemy that was very quickly assigned a turban and the Muslim faith. Muslim extremism has been a problem for centuries, just as Christian Extremism and Judaic Extremism have all had their time of rampant and senseless destruction (and some would say the Iraq war was a bit of both Christian and Jewish extremists exacting revenge under the cover of terrorism). This attack, 9-11, while obviously a terrible moment in any nations history and a tragedy for all involved, still did not grant carte blanche to the largest military power in the world to do whatever it felt like doing. And yet, that is precisely what happened. The US government fueled by any number of reasoning's, went into a country they overpowered easily with guns blazing, feigning a reasoning that didn't sit well with half of its own nation and yet anyone who disagreed was labeled as a traitor, a peace nick, a liberal, a sympathizer, unpatriotic, intellectual elite and naive. Notice those last two, Intellectual Elite, insinuating a vast knowledge that makes the owner of such out of touch with common man and its issues, and naive, ignorant of the worlds problems by way of simplicity. Don't those two negate each other? How can one be so intellectual to be considered among the elite, and yet naive?

The Iraq war was sold to the public on the basis of WMD's. Not liberating Iraqis. Not bringing democracy to the Middle East.

WMD's. Period.

The fear was, as it was repeated ad nauseum on CNN, MSNBC, FOX NEWS, and every other organization that broadcast American news and more specifically press conferences with heads of the Republican party, that Iraq not only HAD WMD's, but flaunted that fact and could technically strike the US within a matter of 20 minutes.

"Im tellin ya, folks! We better hurry up and get out there! Saddam could hit the button ANY MINUTE and we'd all be blown to hell with a nuke" they seemed to scream at us on a daily basis. The rationale behind this incredible claim was that we knew Saddam had a WMD because as the late great comedian Bill Hicks used to say "We checked the receipt."

But in the end, there were no WMD's and almost IMMEDIATELY after we went into Iraq and no cities in the US went ka-boom, people started asking questions. So the rational slowly changed. Suddenly we were there to bring democracy (note that does not read PEACE to the middle east, just democracy) and we would be greeted as liberators as soon as we could topple that regime already in place. The people are behind us we were told.

So Saddam fell.

"Where are the roses? Where are the parades? Where are the... oh shit, is that a ROCKET!?!"

Finally, here in 2008, Iraq is a relatively quiet place, mostly because we sent an extra army in to destroy the infrastructure of those who opposed our proposed government for the land and killed off any militants that stood in our way. They are learning to swallow their pride and realize they have been defeated, despite putting up a fight for many years, the last of their men are wounded and dying and they cannot fight any more. Just how every war ends... with the destruction of a generation of men.

Now, scathing as this is, it is not an attack on my beloved country so much as a look at it from a man who supports it with his entire heart. I love the United States of America. I am lucky to have been born here and would like to think had I been born anywhere else I would make my way here as it is truly the home of the great. But great people have not always run the great countries. Like it or not, the breed of anti-intellectualism, a fight against education and growth of the human psyche, has been led by men like George W. Bush. It has been led by his father and the predecessor before him, the icon of the Republican mantra Ronald Reagan. It has even been led by men who could have been great but instead did nothing to stop it, Clinton among them. This slow roll towards the Average Joe, or Joe the Plumber having his say in the government, and then when things go over his head, then that means not that he needs more education, not that he needs to pay more attention, but that things need to be dumbed down to his level, is KILLING our once and soon to be again great society.

Now, for a pressing question. Is Barack Obama the answer to these ill wills? Not entirely. But he is a step in the right direction. Not just his 'change' catchphrase, but growth. We as a nation need to grow up, take responsibility for completely engulfing ourselves in debt to countries we deplore on the surface (China to be blunt), and turn this ship around. I do not like the move towards socialism, fiscally, but the move towards catering to the rich HAS to stop and if a socialist approach is the only opposition we have to it, then it is what I feel more comfortable with. I do not like when a politician seems like he is above the normal people, feeling himself to be royalty, but if a ego driven politician is the only way to get someone in office with the brains to operate the machinery, then so be it. I am much more accepting of a man who thinks too much of himself at the controls than someone who thinks very little of anything at all.

In the end, Barack Obama is not my first choice to run this country... but he IS our best choice right now. More importantly, he is our SMARTEST choice. And that is exactly what Republicans seem to fear the most.