You may only read this site if you've purchased Our Kampf from Amazon or Powell's or me
• • •
"Mike and Jon, Jon and Mike—I've known them both for years, and, clearly, one of them is very funny. As for the other: truly one of the great hangers-on of our time."—Steve Bodow, head writer, The Daily Show

"Who can really judge what's funny? If humor is a subjective medium, then can there be something that is really and truly hilarious? Me. This book."—Daniel Handler, author, Adverbs, and personal representative of Lemony Snicket

"The good news: I thought Our Kampf was consistently hilarious. The bad news: I’m the guy who wrote Monkeybone."—Sam Hamm, screenwriter, Batman, Batman Returns, and Homecoming

July 02, 2008

New Tomdispatch

link

How Ignorant Are We?
The Voters Choose… but on the Basis of What?

By Rick Shenkman

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." -- Thomas Jefferson

Just how stupid are we? Pretty stupid, it would seem, when we come across headlines like this: "Homer Simpson, Yes -- 1st Amendment 'Doh,' Survey Finds" (Associated Press 3/1/06).

"About 1 in 4 Americans can name more than one of the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment (freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition for redress of grievances.) But more than half of Americans can name at least two members of the fictional cartoon family, according to a survey.

"The study by the new McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum found that 22 percent of Americans could name all five Simpson family members, compared with just 1 in 1,000 people who could name all five First Amendment freedoms."

But what does it mean exactly to say that American voters are stupid? About this there is unfortunately no consensus. Like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, who confessed not knowing how to define pornography, we are apt simply to throw up our hands in frustration and say: We know it when we see it. But unless we attempt a definition of some sort, we risk incoherence, dooming our investigation of stupidity from the outset. Stupidity cannot mean, as Humpty Dumpty would have it, whatever we say it means.

The rest.

—Jonathan Schwarz

Posted at July 2, 2008 02:21 PM
Comments

As Forrest Gump's Mom always said, "Stupid is as stupid does."

Posted by: Mike Meyer at July 2, 2008 04:15 PM

The Quotations Page gives three from Friedrich von Schiller (1759 - 1805), German dramatist and poet:

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.

It does not prove a thing to be right because the majority say it is so.

Keep true to the dreams of thy youth.

May the Creative Forces of the Universe have mercy on our souls, if any.


Posted by: mistah charley, ph.d. at July 2, 2008 04:28 PM

I must point out elitist tendencies in the article.

1. Ignorance=stupidity?

There is enough evidence that one could almost conclude -- though admittedly this is a stretch -- that we are living in an Age of Ignorance.

There is ample evidence that with innovation and modernity comes complexity. To be able to catch up with the "important" daily events supposes that we all have unlimited time devoted to quashing some particular ignorance. Lucky for us that think-tank brainiacs and academics have time sufficient to stay ahead of the complexity.

But in fact only a small percentage of people take advantage of the great new resources at hand.

Apparently staying ahead of complexity is a full time job in itself.

2. The normal state of information is dishonesty.

Second, is negligence: The disinclination to seek reliable sources of information about important news events.

Reliable sources? That's a full time job in itself when the general assumption in the article appears to be that conventional news outlets are unreliable. And they are. Therefore, we must navigate the internets and stay perpetually on The Google to discern the reliable sources from the unreliable.

I've been around the world a few times. I find American's are less concerned about the rest of the world (except when it comes to ideology), but not significantly stupider. They delude themselves, but it's out of self-serving convenience.

And Americans do demonstrate a noticeable incuriosity in things of concern to the rest of the world, but that's not rooted in stupidity as much as social manipulation.

Posted by: Labiche at July 2, 2008 04:53 PM

I probably wouldn't have gotten 'petition for redress of grievances'.

Posted by: saurabh at July 2, 2008 07:09 PM

Only one in five Americans can name all members of the Simpsons family? What, are you morons?

Posted by: Rob Weaver at July 3, 2008 12:17 AM

Jacques Brel, a Belgian singer, said that stupidity is like fat, it's only there cause you're not exercising enough.

Or something like that.

So indeed, there is no more "stupidity" in the American public than elsewhere. There is a lack of attention, that makes you look stupid.

Posted by: littlehorn at July 3, 2008 12:46 AM

When ya git greedy, ya git stupid too, AND ya git a little hypocritical on the "side" as the occasion demands. But mostly its 'cozz ya got greedy.

Posted by: Mike Meyer at July 3, 2008 01:36 AM

I agree -- ignorance and stupidity must not be conflated. Frankly, imo, your average human is "stupid" by average human standards. How is this possible? We edit out the errors of ourselves and people we like. Thus, most of us fail to measure up to what we think the "default" human should be like. I think this is why the reasonable person standard in law is inherently ironic: the reasonable person isn't average, he or she is ideal: such a person is functionally perfect, or at least as perfect as anyone can seek to be.

Knowledge of current events requires a significant amount of intelligence to process, as well as leisure time or a profession affiliated with such information. Due to propaganda and the perversion of intellectual issues in general (bias against "smart" people and passtimes associated with them) our average citizen can't tell fact from fiction. The harder he tries, the worse he may fail: remember the poll that showed Fox News viewers were _less_ well informed than those who didn't watch the news?

Posted by: No One of Consequence at July 3, 2008 11:14 AM

I'd argue that ignorance, stupidity, wooden-headedness, etc. are a greater danger now that it's harder for the powerful to control information and decision-making. Presidential candidates aren't picked by conventions of insiders anymore. Seniority doesn't mean nearly as much in Congress as it used to. The media don't help Presidents hide strokes/polio/extramarital affairs from the public. Bad ideas and false information that used to get rejected by editors get circulated widely.

I'm not arguing that we should return to those days. But if people have greater access to information (which still equals power), it might mean that the consequences of stupidity are greater than they used to be, even if the actual level of stupidity is the same as it has always been.

Posted by: Whistler Blue at July 3, 2008 07:14 PM

The stupid people get caught, that's why they call it stupid. If YOU knew YOU were to be caught, in theory, YOU wouldn't do it, in theory. If YOU don't get caught how could be called anything. FACE FACTS GEORGE AND DICK just got caught, that's all. Simple---it only gets complicated when WE decide what to do about it.

Posted by: Mike Meyer at July 3, 2008 09:16 PM