We had the "Age Of Reason". We had the "Age Of Enlightenment". We may not yet be entering an "Age" of Anti-Intellectualism, but we are certainly flirting with it. If and when it ends depends on the present-day intellectuals and those with good common sense to defend against the assault on reason that’s taking place. If those with good common sense and their intellectual leaders can't defeat the present attack, the ignorant, the bigots, and then the barbarians of the world will take over.
The two new trends that have entered and dominated the mainstream are the supporters of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. What both have in common, other than that they are both front runners in the race for the Presidency, is the blatant disregard for the logic or truthfulness of the arguments they make; supporters acceptance of such arguments, regardless of these discrepancies, legitimizes, fosters, and condones anti-intellectualism.
Perhaps the most ignorant thing Trump is for, and the most dangerous, is he considers China, Japan, Mexico, and most other nations with a trade surplus our enemies. He believes that they are playing us for "suckers". He is not for free trade, which has made this world immensely better off. He is for trade sanctions, trade barriers, import taxes on foreign goods and quotas -- all which could lead to a trade war, and like the 1930's, lead the world into a great depression.
If it were up to Trump, he would raise import taxes on foreign goods by 25% which is the equivalent of slapping a tax on all American citizens. (His supporters cheer this. We will tax our imports by 25% - that’ll teach 'em!) This will only succeed in lowering the standard of living of all Americans. Talk about "stupid politicians",Trump advocates going to war with hard working immigrants in this country for wanting to work, and initiating a trade war with half the nations abroad for wanting to trade. No President could do more harm than Donald Trump if he fosters a full blown trade war.
Which brings us to Hillary. Hillary is no better.
In recent polls Hillary Clinton is seen as untrustworthy and lying about the many scandals that surround her. Even those that like her don't trust her. Yet, her fans will still vote for her. This is just another example of anti-intellectualism.
Even after Benghazi she is still revered by Democrats. The unusual circumstances that have surrounded her for her entire political career are ignored. In the months leading up to the Benghazi attack, Hillary's State Department cut security in Libya. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., is one of many that accused Hillary of "dereliction of duty" that led to the deaths of the four Americans.
According to many who have looked into the Benghazi incident, the State Department not only failed to honor repeated requests for additional security, but instead actually reduced security in Libya. Many firmly believe a relatively small contingent of armed military guards would have prevented the attack, and those four lives would not have been lost.
What is equally damning, Hillary lied about the nature of the attack and continued to cover it up after knowing the true facts. She continued to insist that the attack was motivated by a video (of no real importance before or after the killings) and refused to call the attack a terrorist attack. In fact, she never used the term terrorist at all in the weeks that followed. Yet, recently she called Republicans terrorists for being pro-life. What kind of value structure does this reveal?
What is the Clinton supporter’s reaction to this? They don’t care. They love Hillary no matter what.
In the Clinton Foundation scandal, cash flowed to the Clinton Foundation as Russians pressed for control of an American-owned uranium company. Several people and entities involved in the deal allegedly gave millions to the Clinton Foundation, and rewarded Bill Clinton handsomely for public speaking, at the same time that Hillary Clinton was on a U.S. government panel reviewing the uranium deal.
That committee is made up of nine federal agencies and departments, including the State Department, and five White House offices, and the allegation is that Clinton may have helped the deal go through in return for donations to her family’s foundation. The Clinton's deny this, but it is under investigation given the amount of circumstantial evidence surrounding the deal.
Clinton supporters don’t care. Any allegation of wrong-doing is sluffed off as a "vast right wing conspiracy".
And then there's the E-mail server scandal where Hillary blatantly ignored State Dept. rules on personal servers, classified information, and sensitive documents that may have been compromised jeopardizing national security. There's enough evidence of total disregard for the nation's security to prompt the FBI to begin an investigation of the matter. Evidently somebody other than the "vast" Right Wing has some serious questions about some serious breaches of national security.
Three recent scandals and three investigations ongoing and the Clinton supporters don’t care. If the presidential election was held today, polls show Hillary would be our next President in spite of her dubious character.
These are just three of the latest scandals that involve Hillary. But the history of scandals goes back to 1975. For those that want an in depth investigation into Hillary's past Click here: From Whitewater to Benghazi: A Primer on Bill and Hillary Clinton Scandals - The Atlantic
Let me make it clear that I am not attacking the candidates. I am attacking the supporters of these candidates for supporting them. I don't care if you like them. I don't care if you like their style, their looks, their confidence, their sex, or their determination to "get things done". It's not about them. It's about the future of this country.
There are good and reasonable alternatives to both candidates, and considering their past and present behavior, there is absolutely no reason to support either of them. I respond to well thought-out, fact-based arguments, not to obnoxious slurs and intimidation in the place of facts. And I respond to truth-seeking candidates with high integrity and great character, not to deceit, cover-ups, and outright lying.
Anti-intellectualism should not be rewarded. It should be fought tooth and nail, lest we wake up one day and find our country in the hands of the incompetent, the ruthless, and the power hungry. That will lead to a world that I'm sure none of us would want to live in.
In choosing the candidate that you want to be the President of the United States, I urge you to base your decision on logic and reason, well-founded arguments, and moral premises -- not emotion and infatuation. Like I said, we can do much better than the two front runners today – in both parties!
Paul Nathan
paulnathan.biz