看了的总统竞选第二场辩论，觉得华裔总统候选人 Andrew Yang 这次演讲得不错，显得他很有智慧的样子。不过，智商高的人在美国的学校里被人叫 nerd，那可是个贬义词。打智力牌，打math 牌玩政治行得通吗？美国的政治是非常的反智主义的，民主党更是反智主义的急先锋，靠反智主义起家。但看他能否冲破迷雾，就算能给乌烟瘴气的美国政坛带来一小股清新，也值了。
网友“海陬观者”不同意“民主党比共和党更加反智”一说，辩论如下：
从一战之后，美国的共和党的政治口号都是以 保守不作大改革为号召，类似于现在 Trump 的口号，不同的是 Trump 明的暗的承认，美国已经不再伟大了，所以才需要说 Make America Great Again. 如果美国依旧伟大，又何必说 again 呢？
Andrew Yang is very articulate and intelligent. However, being articulate does not mean what he advocates makes sense. The universal basic income only makes sense if we abolish other welware measures all together.
nightrider 发表评论于
Agree with the blogger's stance.
Here is a nice explanation of the positive effect of the anti-intellectualism excerpted from the Wikipedia entry.
--------------------
In the book Intellectuals and Society (2009), Sowell said:
By encouraging, or even requiring, students to take stands where they have neither the knowledge nor the intellectual training to seriously examine complex issues, teachers promote the expression of unsubstantiated opinions, the venting of uninformed emotions, and the habit of acting on those opinions and emotions, while ignoring or dismissing opposing views, without having either the intellectual equipment or the personal experience to weigh one view against another in any serious way.
Hence, school teachers are part of the intelligentsia who recruit children in elementary school and teach them politics—to advocate for or to advocate against a public policy—as part of community-service projects; which political experience later assists them in earning admission to university. In that manner, the intellectuals of a society intervene and participate in social arenas of which they might not possess expert knowledge, and so unduly influence the formulation and realization of public policy. In the event, teaching political advocacy in elementary school encourages students to formulate opinions "without any intellectual training or prior knowledge of those issues, making constraints against falsity few or non-existent."
