I read it. A lot of it makes a lot of sense. However, I have always had a bit of a problem with pseudo-intellectuals who treat their intellectualism like some sort of badge of honor. A lot of times, intellectualism doesn't really correlate with intelligence (and certainly not common sense). Many of the so--called intellectuals of the past were buffoons who couched their weaknesses in distracting things like flowery language and pedigree. So I can understand part of the backlash. However, to take it to the extreme that the republican party has been trying to take it to is pathetic. Sarah Palin represents this wing - where reasoning and artful discussion are a waste of time and something to be avoided. Whether she is or is not actually intelligent is beside the point. It is as though there is some sort of secret cabal who believes if they continue to dumb down the message and the argument, that they will be able to control the argument. It all makes sense though if you think about it as follows:
Perhaps what has actually happened is simple progression of traits through generations. 3 generations ago, the moneyed class that represented the republican party (represented by GHW Bush's father) were those who succeeded through manipulation of capital and society (thus, intelligence), and their successes were enhanced by intellectualism. Intellectualism was admired because it represented a leisurely life, something to aspire to.
The generation after that, while inheriting the pedigree and wealth, had less of the drive and intelligence but was able to compensate through upbringing and education. At that point, all they had was their intellectualism, which did not really translate to actual skill. Having never experienced anything other than a leisurely life, the drive to make sure they and their decendents would maintain it was not there. Complacency was. Thus, their attitudes and lifestyle breeds contempt from others in their generation who work harder yet gain less tangible success.
The next generation, with the continued inbreeding of gradually weakening intelligentsia brings with it continued self-satisfaction and money, yet even less drive, plus a backlash against the intellectualism of their parents, for whom that was all they had. Their parents lacked any kind of hardscrabble ("real") life and as children always see the weaknesses in their parents, it became beneficial to attain some real life experience, but only to appreciate what they have.
So thus, this current generation (represented by Bush and Palin) now is all about making financial gains, to create their own legacy. Intellectualism becomes far less profitable than simple brute force and manipulation of the weaker personalities. Again, intellectualism begins to be a negative trait, because intellectualism is the only true enemy of brute force. That is where we are now. The pendulum is perhaps swinging slightly towards intellectualism being prized again by a subset of the elite class (but these, of course, are the LIBERALS and ELITISTS who are everyone's enemies - see why they frame things this way?). But intellectualism is as of yet not a route to success and prestige - brute force is - keep the intelligent away by calling them liberals and elitists, thus marginalizing them. Hence, this is where Sarah Palin comes in. This is definitely where GWB came in. Even if he is intelligent, this part of his personality is a negative, and thus is marginalized. Palin is a logical step from this - a pure charicature of the things that can appeal to the rabble, while she can still be manipulated by those who wish to cling to power and keep it in as few hands as possible. Because true power is now not being in charge, it is controlling those who are in charge.
The natural progression, of course, is to regain intellectualism and even develop a backlash against money being the ultimate purpose of life. We can see this with so many young people of our generation being involved in charity (yet also continuing to be pulled by the draws of the easy, comfortable life). Making money for money's sake, without concern for others, will become and is becoming frowned upon - witness the backlash against investment bankers. Perhaps it is good for our society - more charity, less concentration of wealth in fewer hands.
No special forces in my background; I was worked with computers and networking in the Marines. I was with Marine Corps Base, Butler (Okinawa, Japan) and the training depot in San Diego for most of my enlistment.
