海角大神

There鈥檚 a not-so-subtle side-eye tradition in America when it comes to its credentialed elites.聽聽

The muckety-mucks who make a mess of things, the 鈥減ointy-headed college professors聽who can鈥檛 even park a bicycle straight,鈥� the Ivy-educated class of experts and government bureaucrats who pull the levers of power from afar.

It often stands hand-in-hand with a reciprocal tradition of heroism for the self-made man who, armed with instinct, self-reliance, and force of will, forgoes the Ivy towers and makes a fortune through a more native creativity, unrestrained and unadulterated.

鈥淚 think it鈥檚 almost baked into the American character,鈥� says Wendy Rahn, a professor of political science the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, noting that historians have long traced a mindset of social egalitarianism that distinguished Americans from European distinctions based on birth and class.

鈥淪o to the extent that 鈥榚xperts鈥� are seen as violating that normative order, I think that there鈥檚 always been a suspicion that 鈥榯hey don't live in the real world,鈥� 鈥� continues Professor Rahn, an expert in populist movements. 鈥溾�榃e have experience and common sense鈥� 鈥� some elite with education and credentials who claims to know more than we do has never sat very well with people.鈥�

While this tradition of looking askance at those with pedigreed r茅sum茅s has also stood behind many and various populist movements in American history, scholars say, it has begun to morph into more than angry glares. Instead of a baked-in emphasis on self-reliance and 鈥渞ugged individualism,鈥� more and more Americans see an existential threat in the political other鈥檚 corrupt character and way of seeing the world.聽

Indeed, many of the populist appeals President Trump tweets out to his followers fall into patterns seen even before the nation鈥檚 founding, scholars say.聽Suspicion of experts is 鈥渁 long-lasting American tradition,鈥� says Claude Fischer, a sociologist at the University of California, Berkeley. 鈥淎nd I think there鈥檚 also a long-lasting American tradition to ride that politically.鈥�

In the 1952 presidential race, Dwight Eisenhower accused his opponent聽Adlai Stevenson, the former governor of Illinois, of using 鈥渁ristocratic explanations in Harvard words.鈥� President Lyndon Johnson said 鈥渟elf-styled intellectuals ... are聽more concerned with the trivia and the superficial than they are with the things that have really built America.鈥� Spiro Agnew, vice president during the Nixon administration, called the press 鈥渁n effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals.鈥�

鈥淏ut I think that the backlash against experts that we see today is different,鈥� says Matt Motta, a postdoctoral fellow studying the politics of science communication at the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania. 鈥淏oth sides still tend to appeal to experts when it鈥檚 convenient for them, when the experts agree with what they have to say.鈥�

鈥淏ut then, what I think we see going on now, is an attack on experts as individuals, as people 鈥� demonizing those experts who disagree with our ideological viewpoints, and denigrating their professionalism,鈥� Dr. Motta says.

Mr. Trump鈥檚 outsider presidency itself can be seen as a manifestation of this anti-elite strain. And the president has fed it: Not just an effete corps of snobs, Mr. Trump now calls reporters the 鈥渆nemy of the people.鈥� The president has also challenged the professionalism of the highest rungs of US law enforcement 鈥� affixing the title of 鈥渁ngry Democrats鈥� to Republicans with sterling reputations and impeccable r茅sum茅s. These include the special counsel Robert Mueller, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush. The Mexican ancestry聽of a judge born in Indiana and presiding over a class-action lawsuit involving one of his companies, Trump said, itself made the judge biased against him.

鈥淭he more that influential people give us a reason to mistrust one another, the more distrusting we get, and the more cynical we become of other people鈥檚 motives,鈥� says Asheley Landrum, a professor of science communication at the College of Media and Communication at Texas Tech University in Lubbock.

Not only does this tear at the national fabric, it also casually ignores that, in fact, the role of experts is essential. 鈥淲e do have to operate in a society that has a division of cognitive labor, where we have experts, and we need to rely on one another because we don鈥檛 have the time or resources to be experts in everything,鈥� Professor Landrum says.

Still, America鈥檚 general distrust of elites, many historians say, is nevertheless part of a tradition of independence and individualism that many believe has made the country 鈥渆xceptional.鈥� It unmoors individuals from hoary traditions, and along with a 鈥渉istory is bunk鈥� mindset, a spirit of self-reliance with an emphasis on experience enables a free-wheeling creativity, especially in industry and technology, yielding accomplishments rarely matched during the past two centuries.

鈥淏ut I guess the thing that worries me is just how much more politicized every aspect of American life has become from university life to the press and even athletics,鈥� says Rahn. 鈥淭hat to me is more fundamental than kind of the populism that鈥檚 landed on top of it, and that鈥檚 a much more difficult tide to turn back.鈥�

From climate change to GMOs

In the realm of science, too, traditional skepticism toward experts has also fueled vexing polarization.聽For those like Motta who trace American attitudes toward science and scientific consensus, the most glaring manifestation of distrust remains attitudes toward climate change on the right.聽

鈥淏ut one of the things that I often tell people is that it鈥檚 important to recognize that while the distrust of scientists and while the rejection of scientific consensus is more common on the ideological right, it exists on the ideological left as well,鈥� says Motta. 鈥淚t is less common, but there are certain issues on which liberals look a lot like conservatives in their rejection of science and scientific expertise.鈥�

For example, the issue of genetically modified organisms has long galvanized widespread opposition from left-wing groups. But like climate change, there is a broad scientific consensus among researchers: There is no factual evidence that GMOs present any risks to health.聽聽

鈥淔or some of the most anti-GMO activists, however, it鈥檚 more ideological,鈥� says Rahn. 鈥淚t鈥檚 more anti-corporate, anti-global capitalism, but I think for ordinary people, it鈥檚 mostly just not understanding what technology is all about and the fact that it鈥檚 food 鈥� it seems impure somehow.鈥�

Political polarization has transformed a general distrust of experts into various kinds of conspiracy theories. Opponents of both climate change and GMOs often point to funding sources, whether from industry sources or the government, and question the integrity and professionalism of researchers, suggesting they provide the findings they鈥檙e essentially paid to report.聽聽

鈥淭here are a lot of people out there who hold low levels of trust of聽a lot of different political institutions and related institutions,鈥� says Motta. 鈥淎nd we know that these people tend to be more prone to conspiratorial thinking, and are more likely to latch onto conspiracy theories and to not trust information coming from the government.鈥澛�

Beyond American individualism

There are exceptions: So far, distrust of professional expertise has not extended to certain professions, such as commercial pilot, astronaut, and structural and nuclear engineers.

鈥淣ow in people鈥檚 practical lives, people rely on having doctors who really are credentialed experts, and they turn to lawyers when they need lawyers,鈥� says Professor Fischer. 鈥淪till, this theme that anybody鈥檚 opinion is as good as anybody else鈥檚 opinion is, I think, very deep in American society.鈥�

鈥淏ut the extent to which Trump and Trump-like speakers call on things like the defense of white 海角大神 identity, they鈥檙e operating on what you might say is a different part of the American musical score 鈥� I mean, this is a different set of issues than just being expressions of American individualism,鈥� he says, referring to the country's cultural battles over race, religion, and sexuality.

In fact, the current emphasis on race and immigration in the current populist movement is hardly a celebration of rugged individualism, championed especially by conservative libertarians. 鈥淚f you鈥檙e a true libertarian, the fact that you鈥檙e born in this country or not born in this country, the fact that you鈥檙e white or you鈥檙e black, you speak English or you don鈥檛 speak English, is supposed to be irrelevant,鈥� says Fischer. 鈥淚t鈥檚 your performance in a sort of open market of competition that鈥檚 supposed to be the only thing that鈥檚 supposed to matter.鈥�

The irony of the growing cynicism and and even demonization of credentialed elites, says Landrum, is the fact that in a world getting exponentially more complex, people necessarily have to rely on experts.聽聽

鈥淚 think that a lot of this populism that we see now is some of that cynicism starting to take hold,鈥� she says. 鈥淎nd trust is somewhat fragile in our institutions, in our authorities.鈥�

鈥淎mericans do have this sort of special historical rebel attitude, or this idea of independence on the frontier where, we can do most things ourselves 鈥� you know, a local reliance, a self-reliance, an American kind of individualism,鈥� Landrum continues, especially in her home state of Texas. 鈥淏ut we still have the problem of not having the time or ability to do it on our own. We have to rely on each other 鈥� we don鈥檛 have the time or mental resources to know everything.鈥�