One of the most recent statements made of Conservative or the Tea Party members is that they are “anti-intellectual,” or against the “educated class.” It has been said enough for me to think that it is a leftist talking point, so it therefore bears examining. While such a statement might be made about populist movements, I cannot say that this is at all true here.
I say that because the founders were intellectuals. They were leaders in society. Franklin was a publisher. Jefferson was an inventor. The list goes on and on.
- At the time of the convention, 13 men were merchants: Blount, Broom, Clymer, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Shields, Gilman, Gorham, Langdon, Robert Morris, Pierce, Sherman, and Wilson.
- Six were major land speculators: Blount, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Gorham, Robert Morris, and Wilson.
- Eleven speculated in securities on a large scale: Bedford, Blair, Clymer, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Franklin, King, Langdon, Robert Morris, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, and Sherman.
- Twelve owned or managed slave-operated plantations or large farms: Bassett, Blair, Blount, Butler, Carroll, Jenifer, Jefferson, Mason, Charles Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Rutledge, Spaight, and Washington. Madison also owned slaves, as did Franklin, who later freed his slaves and was a key founder of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society. Alexander Hamilton was opposed to slavery and, with John Jay and other anti-slavery advocates, helped to found the first African free school in New York City. Jay helped to found the New York Manumission Society and, when he was governor of New York in 1798, signed into law the state statute ending slavery as of 1821.
- Broom and Few were small farmers.
- Eight of the men received a substantial part of their income from public office: Baldwin, Blair, Brearly, Gilman, Livingston, Madison, and Rutledge.
- Three had retired from active economic endeavors: Franklin, McHenry, and Mifflin.
- Franklin and Williamson were scientists, in addition to their other activities.
- McClurg, McHenry, and Williamson were physicians, and Johnson was a college president.
Many of these men were from the top of American society. I can see no angry mobs full of ignorant rednecks here.
Most of them participated in the Constitutional Convention, and what these men did was far reaching. They recognized individual freedoms that government does not grant, but has an obligation to protect. They intentionally made the government small, with limits on its powers, in order to avoid tyranny. And, they made the smallest and the largest of us equal in the eyes of the law. The small illiterate farmer had the same rights as the wealthy merchant or landowner. (Note that at no time was the illiterate farmer eligible to confiscate part of the merchant’s wealth, but that is another story). In so doing, the founders created a means by which the illiterate farmer, or perhaps his children, might rise through work or knowledge, to assume another role or place in society. This equality of opportunity lead to The Unites States becoming the nation with the greatest innovation, wealth, and prosperity in human history. History is driven by individuals; those who have the right idea at the right time-those that choose to act instead of follow. Our system allows those people to be heard, and removes obstacles to their legal actions.
I will say that we are against is elitism. The founders created the nation, and while many went into (at times) government service at various levels, many others went back to work, or back to the farm. They left us to manage our own lives, without the tyrannical interference of government. On the other hand, our current elites crave power, and seek to wield that power in order to dictate most aspects of our lives. The elites sneer at the common man, or others that offer a dissenting opinion. They believe that they have a right to govern based on their education and so-called enlightenment. They believe that they alone are endowed with the knowledge with which to manage our education, careers, salaries and wages, diets, housing, transportation, energy consumption, childrearing, media consumption, medical care, retirements, and so on. They believe that our Constitution, based on a small government and individual freedoms, is outmoded and in need of re-interpretation. They believe that we are far too foolish and short sited to deal with our problem. In fact, how many times have we read that we are acting against our own self-interests? When we choose freedom, and the responsibility that comes with it, the elites view us as foolish and petulant children that are in need of ridicule and the “loving” guidance of the all powerful nanny state.
To clarify the overall issue, Conservatives and allied groups respect education, and recognize its importance. We want the education that prepares the individual for a role in our Constitutional Republic. We want education that is locally controlled and not subject to political forces in Washington DC and state capitols. We want education that teaches children how to read, write, and do mathematics. We want education that teaches children how to think independently by taking information and using logic to solve problems. We want education that teaches our system of government, as well as our history, flaws and mistakes included. We want education that teaches children how to recognize their own power as individuals. The elites wants children to know how to put condoms on fruit, to be immersed in social justice and other fallacies of the left. The elites want an educational product that belongs to the socialist/fascist herd, and looks to the elite for guidance. They seek a mindless drone, not an individual. The results of elitist intervention in education are seen in high illiteracy, low graduation rates, and an exceedingly poor return for the monies invested.
In the end, Conservatives are not against education or intellectualism. Intellectuals founded our Republic, and we need educated individuals to help maintain it. We are against elitism-those who would use intellect, deception, and acquired power to deprive us of our individual liberties.
Do you favor the restoration of our Republic?
Do you dislike the nanny state?
Do you believe that our Constitution should be followed?
Have you joined the RESISTANCE? .
Be part of the solution!
Conservative Hideout Recommends
- Killing the God Who Isn't Against White People - Jeremiah Wright's Theology (maggiesnotebook)
- Sean Hannity interviews Rush Limbaugh – Segment 2 (LonelyConservative)
- Is liberalism anti-intellectual? (WesternFront America)
Related posts:


![Recommend [conservativehideout]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/arkayne-media/img/badge/logo-recommend-badge-medium.png)






“All men are created equal” means what it says. Faux-nobility by way of an Ivy League diploma is un-American, and the ordinary patriot responds accordingly.
We are a nation born of rebellion and we retain much of that nature. Skepticism of the wisdom of the high-n-mighty is in our bloodstream.
Well said Innominatus. They claim the right to govern based on their dogmatic clinging to renamed disproved ideas.
Amen!
Besides, I might be just some dumb redneck from Michigan, er, “fly-over country,” but I’d put my IQ scores up against any of these Beltway, so-called “intellectuals,” any day of the week!
I think most all the commenters here would pwn them.
If the Conservatives would stop listing to / supporting those who insist that the Earth/Universe is 6,000 years old they would get more support.
But as long as major sites like FreeRepublic.Com and Conservapedia are allowed to go unchallenged with their near continual bashing of science this idea that conservatives aren’t smart / hate science will continue.
Well folks, here be a troll. Just for educational purposes, I let him through. He’s using some of the typical troll techniques. He’s ignoring the content of the post, and follows up with an ad hominem attack. This is an attempt to hijack the discussion, buy taking the topic away from what is being said, to defending ourselves. Of course, anything said in response to this will be ignored. Don’t bother responding any further, he’s just troll.
Actually take a look at the two sites I mentioned and see how they treat science. I doubt you will because insults are easier than actually acknologing that the Conservative movement has some people in it who believe crazy things.
For example Phyllis Schlafly’s son runs CP and he truly believes that black holes are a liberal invention meant to keep people away from the Bible http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Black_hole – There’s a broader point here. Why the big push for black holes by liberals, and big protests against any objection to them? If it turned out empirically that promoting black holes tends to cause people to read the Bible less, would you still push this so much? Certainly there is no practical justification to pushing black holes; no one will ever be helped by them in any way.–Andy Schlafly 12:03, 13 November 2009 (EST)
The many rants about an Old Earth on Freerepublic are also pretty interesting.
For as long as the Conservative movement welcomes in such people they will be viewed in a negative way. Do you really want the Conservative movement to be branded as a bunch of science hating / vaccine hatting morons?
Nice try to stir up internal divisions. Enjoy your ban.
Now that the troll is no more, he was trying to get us to attack Christians and other folks in the movement. Nice of him to try to separate us.
Aw, I wanted to toy with him… just a bit.
Too late Don. We’ll see if he knows the internets, as a ban can be circumvented in about 5 seconds.
For me, the funny part was when I pointed out what he was doing, and he did it some more! That’s pretty one dimensional, isn’t it? LD has far better trolls at his place.
Well done Matt!
I still believe that many need to reintroduce themselves to the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Years of elitist steering of our educational system in this country has conditioned many to believe that government grants rights. They will always say we are uneducated, that we cling to mythical religious beliefs, and that we care more about the individual than the collective. My question to them is if they don’t believe in what was set forth by our Founding Fathers, what exactly do they believe? I would really like to hear their answer, because I’m pretty sure it will have very little to do with the America I envision.
Thank you John, and well said.
This is pretty much what they’ve been saying all along, Matt– that conservatives and “Tea Baggers” are ignorant, stupid rednecks who would make good extras in a remake of “Deliverance.”
They think if they say it long enough, it will become true. But like most propaganda, it will be disproven by reality.
I would rather have some “ignorant redneck” in control than a socialist freak from that famous school on the west coast near that city by the bay. At least the redneck is in touch with the common man while the Berkeley guy only knows what his socialist, anti-american, pot smoking profs fill his empty head with. The policies of these bastards has taken the once great state of CA into the tank and they want to run the country—give me a fricking break!
Considering that anyone who disagrees with the “progressives” is an “ignorant redneck,” the field is wide open!
What you are describing in your post Matt is typical class warfare by the left. They set up divisions in society in order that their agenda might be more readily accepted. Marking certain persons, corporations, or even whole segments of society as targets to be hated allows them to rally people to their cause.
I hesitate to beat the Reagan horse on this, but we need to deconstruct their arguments in the same fashion that he did. This breaks their power and stops their agenda from advancing. Had McCain done even a LITTLE of this during the campaign, he might have won.
I agree, my friend.
Excellent Post!! Yes, conservatives don’t want these elitists to make our choices for us and in essence to take our choices away from us. We are not mere robots. The Liberals can choose to function like robots, but I will not be like a robot giving up my liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness.
Thanks Teresa, and well said.
I planned on doing a follow up to my Technocracy post which focuses on Intellectualism and the corollaries of infused elitism. There is nothing wrong with Intellectualism, the danger appears in the form of a pervasive ideology. Intellectualism no longer becomes a vehicle for societal betterment, but a socio-political platform to propagate doctrine. This, in turn, leads to abrogation of individual liberties. History teaches us that, if we choose to listen.
By the way, if you want to know how intelligent liberals and progressives are, just watch “man-on-the-street” interviews. I have a theory that instead of brain tissue there is molded jello.
I forgot to add this, great post Matt.
Thanks LP. The more I read, and the more I see, the more I think that our leftist intellectuals really aren’t that intellectual at all. They’re ideologues. They aren’t promoting something new, different, or even unique. It’s nothing more than the stale repackaging of socialist/fascist strategies of the past. Off of which failed miserably whenever or wherever they are tried.
I would say that Conservatives are against snobbery. The snobbery of the Left is plain for all to see in how Sarah Palin has been treated. Whether you think she’s smart or stupid or qualified or not she has not been treated fairly. Ironically, this treatment is at the hands of Liberals who are supposed to stand up for women!
One does have to wonder how firmly one believes in education and intellectualism if things like evolution and the age of the universe are disputed.
I would agree on the snobbery. Their treatment of Palin not only shows their hypocrisy, but it also shows that maybe their ideas have not changed much over the last hundred years.
I would say we’re against stupidity, but you probably figured I’d say as much. Don’t spend more than you can make; don’t tax your citizenry into stagnation; don’t pursue policies of insanity to appease the farthest fringe element of society, Keep. It. Simple. Stupid.
How much clearer can it be?
I agree. Too bad Bush didn’t follow this rule. He wasn’t as big of a spender as Obama but he knew how to empty a cash register.
Harrison, that is one of the biggest misconceptions out there. I was complaining about Bush years ago. It was him and the Republicans in Congress that were largely responsible for our current Democratic administration. Had they simply kept their word and followed Conservative principals, we could have avoided much of what we are fighting now.
That we weren’t paying attention Bush’s excesses is the misconception. Not what you said.