On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> So what is your point? Does the fact that US populism was not as rabidly
> anti-semitic as some of the European varieties exonerate it?
Wojtek, it wasn't anti-semitic at all. America in the 19th century was the least anti-semitic country in the world. And populism was like every other American institution in this respect.
> Does the fact that Hofstadter erred in one area mean that his entire
> argument on US anti-intellectualism is false?
His argument about populism is that every enthusiastic and popular political movement is inherently dangerous, because passion and crowds are inherently irrational. For him, all movements of the right and left are deep down all the same. Their purported grievances are fictions not to be taken seriously. What they are really animated by -- what they can only be animated by, because it is the only thing that can stir movements to enthusiasm -- are grievances of the id.
Thus, the only rational place is the center, and the only trustworthy actors are experts. The problem with movements is that they undercut faith in such people.
Is this what you believe? You're welcome to it.
I don't see what it has to do with anti-intellectualism, though. Populism wasn't anti-intellectual. Populism and progressivism was where all the ideas were in that era -- and where all the intellectuals were. It was the corrupt political establishment that was anti-intellectual on principle. They thought ideas created expectations and got in the way of backroom deals.
Michael