> [WS:] I do not think that this is what Frank or for that matter Hofstadter argued. Both put that phenomenon squarely on the right. If memory serves, Hofstadter has some discussion of progressive anti-intellectualism, but this is merely a footnote to his main claim that this is mainly a product of religious kookery and business conservatism.
>
> The left, both American and European has some anti-intellectual overtones cf. Futurists, esp. Mayakovsky) which were also played out by the EE communist regimes (e.g. during the 1968 revolts) - but it is directed more at bourgeois morals than science. In fact, science was generally in high regard in communist movements - which shaprly differentiates it from right American populism and anti-intellectualism, which was generally suspicious of science.
>
No, this is my point. Until the 1930's, the US never have a political "left" of the kind you're talking about, except for some evanescent (though important) popular movements. When you say "the left," you're referring to people who in some sense or another are critical of capitalism and the market from a democratic, egalitarian point of view. That was almost non-existent in the US.
Speaking broadly, throughout the 19th century and beyond, politics was split between a conservative camp, made up of the Best Men of Society (bankers, industrialists, Yale Divinity professors, etc.) and all those millions of the middling sort who, seeking middle-class respectability, looked to them for political/cultural leadership. These people were "conservative" because they represented or supported the biggest vested interests and were openly skeptical of democracy and popular exuberance of all kinds. They were elitist in the sense that they embraced science, intellectualism, expertise and all the social views that go with these.
The other camp was made up of those who glorified "democracy," the "common man," "the people," "equality," etc. In this sense they were the "progressives" or at least the "anti-conservatives," and again, were seen as such at the time. Yet the whole style of demagogy you're referring to came from *them* and was always targeted at the *conservatives*.
SA