We the People...Are Stupid (And a Little Ignorant on the Side)

“No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the America public.”  So saith H.L. Mencken; sour curmudgeon he may be, but he is also one of the more insightful figures in the history of American punditry.  Much of the American public is stupid.  And ignorant.

     Case in point:  CNN polled people who watched Trump’s first speech to a joint session of Congress.  Nearly 70% said that the speech made them more optimistic about the direction of the country and that Trump’s policies would move us in the right direction.  And much of the “lying” press is on about how presidential Trump was.  Wow.

     Just what sort of speech was it?  I think it is safe to suppose that someone wrote it for Trump without very much input from Trump.  Stylistically, it was unlike anything we have heard from Trump in the past.  It was composed largely of complete sentences.  The language was not unnecessarily lurid.  It was at least superficially coherent.  And, what is perhaps most interesting, Trump stuck to the script.

     But the content was pure Trump:  nationalistic bombast; villification of various bad actors who are the cause of all our problems; vague and grandiose promises ranging from millions of good jobs to American footprints on other planets.  All to be accomplished by the great leader himself, supported by righteous and invigorated Americans who have risen up against blah blah blah.   You can read it here for yourself.  (And I am sure you can find a video somewhere on the net if you are too lazy to read.)  You might also want to read this to give yourself a bit of context.

     The problem is that great masses of Americans are stupid and ignorant.  And they are so by choice, because the antidote to stupidity and ignorance—critical thinking and a good faith effort to align one’s view of the world with the evidence—is difficult.  It takes work, it involves uncertainty, and it requires an openness to other perspectives than one’s own.  The words of the great leader are much more reliable; they tell you what you want to hear in terms that are easy to understand.

     Many Americans have no understanding of how the economy works—how wealth is created and distributed, how jobs are created.  And I do not mean to say that they do not have a correct understanding; I mean to say that they have no notion at all, correct or otherwise.  The economy is a vast and mysterious entity, controlled by shadowy forces only dimly seen.  So when the great leader says he will create a million jobs, they have no reason to doubt that he will make it so.  

     Many Americans have no knowledge of our history of involvement in the Middle East, so they  have no idea why they hate us.  (At least one of Trump’s own advisors professes not to know why they hate us.)  And, of course, ignorance about the Constitution and the workings of government is pervasive.  Too many Americans don’t want to think, and wouldn’t know what to think about if they did.  

     This situation is not really new.  Anti-intellectualism has always been an important theme in US political culture, as Susan Jacoby documents quite effectively in The Age of American Unreason.  The only thing that is different now is that the institutions that enable society to resist this anti-intellectualism—most importantly, a strong educational system and a free press—are in a decidedly weakened condition.

     Of course, not everyone in America is stupid and ignorant.  I am writing this the day after the speech; the stock market opened up 200 points and closed up over 300 points.  The smart money knows.  Everything about the Trump administration so far—the appointments, the policy pronouncements, the executive orders—indicates that the interests of the rich will continue to be prioritized.  Regulatory agencies will be eviscerated, money will be borrowed to finance massive subsidies to the corporate sector, taxes on the wealthy will be lowered, social programs will be trashed, and every aspect of government will be monetized.  

     The wisdom of Adam Smith seems relevant here:

Whenever the legislature attempts to regulate the differences between masters and their workmen, its counsellors are always the masters.  When the regulation, therefore, is in favour of the workmen, it is always just and equitable; but it is sometimes otherwise when in favour of the masters.  [Wealth of Nations, Book I, Chapter Ten, Part II] 

We have made the “masters” not just the counsellors of the government, but its executive branch.  I guess we will just have to wait and see how that turns out.