Conflict Theory and Power

Anti-intellectualism is a social problem, not just a social issue, because it has a direct and immediate bearing on the lives of individuals and because it has a long-term deleterious effect on social, economic, and political progress. Without information, the people have no power. If the tools of critical thought are not taught to children, an entire generation lacks access to power. In fact, critical inquiry, science, and intellectual debate are necessary to prevent tyranny and oppression.

Especially in the current social and political climate in America, anti-intellectualism can become disastrous. Without fail, Trump's cabinet appointments and executive orders have reflected the trend towards anti-intellectualism: appointments of people who deny science and who disavow the power of public education. The anti-immigrant sentiment is not at all based on fact, for fact would show how integral immigrants are to American social, political, and economic life. Rather, the anti-immigrant sentiment is based on anti-intellectualism: on replacing fact with fear.

For this assignment, I want to explore anti-intellectualism by showing how three sociological theories: conflict theory, functionalism, and symbolic interactionism, explain the social problem. Conflict theory is rooted in Marxist theory, which shows how systematic exploitation leads to an imbalance of power and wealth distribution. Although conflict theory traditionally focuses on class conflict, the sociological theory can be applied to any social issue in which there is a conflict between those who possess power, status, or resources, and those who desire more power, status, or resources.

Anti-intellectualism is occasionally, but not always, an attempt by subordinate or low status persons to regain power by showing disdain for the power of knowledge, science, and critical thinking. Viewed in light of conflict theory, it may be possible to show how anti-intellectualism is an offensive defense in response to some groups' lack of access to the cultural capital needed to succeed in a competitive information-driven economy.

However, not all anti-intellectualism is a backlash against elitism in academia and it would be oversimplifying the issue to focus only on this application of conflict theory. Conflict theory can, for example, also show how anti-intellectualism is a trend used to keep low-status groups from attaining power. Anti-intellectualism is a worldview that systematically discredits knowledge, critical thought, and information.

People who come to believe that knowledge, critical thought, and information are tools of an imaginary elite can be easily swayed and influenced by nefarious groups like those who propelled Trump to power. According to conflict theory, information and critical thought should be viewed as a type of capital. Unlike conflict theory, consensus perspective shows how people actively seek a preservation of the status quo.

Consensus perspective is related to functionalism, because both show how problems like anti-intellectualism function to preserve existing hierarchies that in turn promote harmony -- however unethical the principles of that social harmony might be. Functionalism therefore highlights the way social norms and institutions enable the perpetuation of power. If anti-intellectualism becomes normative, then it functions as a way to perpetuate exploitative systems of corporate power conglomeration. Science, information, and critical thought help people to reach a consensus about ethical behavior.

Yet if ethical behavior conflicts with capitalist growth or the status quo, then persons possessing power may discredit information, intellect and science. The science draws attention to the effects of climate change, and ethics directly point to the need to mitigate those effects to prevent further damage. When progressive companies that value critical thought and science possess sufficient wealth and power, they may have the ability to influence political discourse and public policy.

Until a critical mass has been reached, though, the institutions that preserve power may seek to suppress knowledge and intellectual growth so that their products can continue to be sold and their politics and policies remain in place. Anti-intellectualism is a response by those in positions of power to potential change. Symbolic interactionism focuses on the role language and visual media plays in society. Critical thought, intellectualism, and information are all language-based, requiring literacy and symbolic interaction.

The anti-intellectual trend also tends to be an anti-media trend, in which the anti-intellectuals criticize both academia and the media for having a political agenda because their information or their research conflicts with their fragile worldview. In a global society, the role of language and communication become increasingly clear because language creates social barriers but can also be used to broaden perspectives. From the perspective of social interactionism, anti-intellectualism simply shuts down the communicative process and prevents meaningful change.

By denying the importance of intellectual discourse, a monolithic group of people comes to rely on.