From the Perspective of a Future English & Classics Major
Merriam-Webster dictionary offers two definitions for the term anti-intellectualism. The first being “the philosophic attitude or doctrine that assigns intellect or reason to a subordinate place or denies the power of intellect to grasp the true nature of things” and the second being “hostility toward or suspicion of intellectuals; hostility toward inquiring, speculative, or academic habits of thought.” Both of these definitions and responses to academia itself are being demonstrated in the current political climate of the US, with differing degrees of manipulation and natural response applied.
The Second Definition
The latter definition is a phenomenon seen throughout time, and is what I consider to be an understandable response. Academia as a field and as a profession in a capitalist society is seen as elitist, and not without reason. People who can afford to devote their lives to some sort of research or study must have a monetary or familial safety net to some degree. Therefore, it has traditionally only been the wealthy who are able to pursue these pathways. This has lessened somewhat in imperialist countries post-Industrial Revolution, the United States included, but it is still a very real and inaccessible dream for many in the working class.
Of course, it cannot be denied that those who have generally had access to “intellectual” pathways are also those that are in positions of power in society. These two things are inextricably correlated to opportunity and privilege.
It is only natural, then, that when the people in power are failing the majority, that academia is failing the majority as well. This is where the second definition comes into play, and it is a logical conclusion. In the United States, people are facing a multitude of problems, including but not limited to: ICE raids, inaccessible healthcare, and astronomically high costs of living. Something is obviously not working, the people in charge are obviously not doing their jobs properly, and if they’re so educated then there’s obviously something wrong with that education.
This issue stems from the aforementioned conflation of academia and power as equals. While knowledge is power, in an operational society knowledge is not restricted to the powerful. This conflation has oftentimes and still does ring true, it is a risky generalization to make because it implies that those without political and/or social power cannot acquire said education and therefore cannot hope to use this education to ameliorate the structures that are limiting their impact on society. It is a restrictive and ultimately destructive perspective that
From here, we see anti-intellectualism in the popular culture of the US. Unfortunately, this form of anti-intellectualism is playing into the hands of conservative politics.
The First Definition
It is not a secret that there have been extreme funding cuts to the Department of Education during President Trump’s second term. It is also not a secret that a lot of these cuts will affect access to scholarships for higher education through programs such as FAFSA and the Pell Grant. This is in effect putting education in the place of a “subordinate” position, or saying it does not have enough value to be funded by the federal government. It also works to restrict education to people with a higher socio-economic status. This is an institutional stance promoted by a government as opposed to a personal opinion.
The way the current administration is treating education is both reinforcing the idea that it is elitist and the idea that it is unnecessary. The idea that it is elitist is generating a cyclical phenomenon that reinforces the beliefs of people who are already skeptical of academia. The idea that it is unnecessary is a calculated move to keep the population of the United States under educated and therefore subordinate.
There is a reason that people in higher education tend to lean more liberal, and that is because a productive education is built off of the basis of progress. But a conservative political platform is built off of the basis of stagnancy or even regression. The two are inherently antithetical to one another. In order for a conservative government to maintain long term control in a country, there cannot be a large or successful group of people with higher education capable of toppling the platform on which conservative politics stand.
It is in Donald Trump’s personal interest, and the interest of his party members and Republican colleagues therefore, to not promote education and intellect to the general population. This again, is a dangerous rhetoric to spread because it prevents a society from moving forward in ways that combat discrimination and other destructive institutions.
The rise we are currently seeing in conservatism is very much rooted in a manipulation of the people to see education as something they do not need to engage in. At its core, this phenomenon is a political tactic, even when it seems like innocent internet discourse or even a meme.
How Anti-Intellectualism is Being Pushed Through Social Media’s Opinion of Literature
During and after the Covid-19 pandemic there was a huge uptick in the numbers of people who picked up books as a passtime, and this led to an entire subgenre of social media based on reading and books.
As a whole, anything that encourages people to read is good, because reading as an activity works your brain by forcing it to process the perspectives and opinions of other people. Reading anything is an “intellectual” activity, whether you are a fan of Twilight or the Epic Cycle, Rebecca Yarros or Jane Austen. This concept was generally accepted as true, with the exception of a few angry men that don’t like it when women raise their standards, until Trump was elected to his second term.
In 2026, and especially in the past few months, there has been a rise in people promoting some books as more educational or “smarter” than others. It is important to note here that I am referring specifically to fiction books, which are generally not evaluated for merit on the basis of hardcore intellect. As expected, it is the classic books which are being promoted as “better” or “superior.”
However, when they are promoted as “better” or “superior” they are subconsciously (or consciously) presented to the audience as inaccessible. The average person with a blue collar job cannot possibly be reading this work of exquisite expertise, can they? The answer that an elitist perspective would give you is no, they can’t (notice that elitism is coming back into the discussion, and that it was elitism that triggered a disdain for the educated in definition one). But the historical answer that has been proven time and time again is that classic or “smart” books are accessible so long as people are not told over and over again that they are not good enough to read them. And a scientific answer would argue that there are social-emotional and mental benefits to reading a classic or another work of fiction.
When the general view is that it is only some books that are worth reading, and that not everyone can read these books, a general sense of hopelessness is the resulting emotional impact of this atmosphere. If reading is such a hopeless activity for me, then why should I even try? Of course, reading is not a hopeless activity, it is being presented as such as part of a conservative cycle. Reading at all, reading anything, is resisting a power structure that would prefer its population to struggle to empathize with one another and form original thoughts.
Combating Anti-Intellecualism
Read. Write. Consume long-form media. Go down an obscure Wikipedia rabbit hole. The simple answer to combating intellectualism is to use your brain for an activity that you enjoy. I am promoting reading here, but maybe you’d prefer a sudoku puzzle. Or even an algebra problem set. It does not matter the perceived merit of what you are using your brain to do, what matters is that you are using your brain at all.
Side Note: Easy to Read Classics as Proof that Classics are Accesible
- The Odyssey by Homer, Translated by Emily Wilson
- Dracula by Bram Stoker
- Giovanni’s Room by James Baldwin
