c/o Getty Images
Over the past year, we have witnessed the federal government attack education time after time. Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to gradually dismantle the Department of Education, cut or threatened to cut federal grant funding for several higher education institutions, announced quotas on the number of international students that higher education institutions can take, mandated that schools and universities end diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, and much more.
But why? These actions are not random; rather, they signify a deeper, more systemic disdain for intellectualism itself. To fully understand the motives behind the administration’s crusade against education, it is essential to explore the underlying ideology behind the phenomenon of anti-intellectualism in our society.
The term anti-intellectualism was coined by historian Richard Hofstadter in his 1963 book, “Anti-Intellectualism in American Life.” He proposed that anti-intellectualism has three distinct manifestations: religious anti-rationalism, populist anti-elitism, and unreflective instrumentalism. Religious anti-rationalism is an overdependence on faith and religion to the point of rejecting critical thinking, logic, and reasoning. Populist anti-elitism refers to the general distrust of elites—whether that be government politicians, health experts, or academic intellectuals—due to the belief that their interests are detached from the interests of common people. Unreflective instrumentalism is the idea that any sort of theoretical inquiry without immediate utilitarian benefits is valueless to society.
Hofstadter distinguishes between being intelligent and being an intellectual. Intelligence involves critically understanding and responding to situations, while intellect reflects on meaning and evaluates those responses, representing a deeper level of thought. He also criticizes one-hundred percenters, people unwilling to question their beliefs, as close-minded and intolerant of nuance and ambiguity.
Having better understood the term, we can now assess the ways in which anti-intellectualism has permeated American society. Although the book was written decades ago (and the concept has existed for centuries before that), it has lost none of its relevance since. The effects of anti-intellectualism are becoming increasingly prevalent in several aspects of American life, having direct political, scientific, and social impacts.
In the past decade especially, we have seen a great rise in religious anti-rationalism. Everything from vaccines to climate change to sexuality and gender ideology has become a source of debate, challenging people to reassess their perspectives on these topics through the lens of religion. Even though the United States is still a majority Christian country, belief in Christianity has been on the decline for decades, which has led to a rather prevalent movement of Christian nationalism in an attempt to “revive” the religion. Many far-right Christians in particular cite religious texts as a source for their beliefs, often twisting the original meanings to support their political agendas, refusing to acknowledge science or evidence when it counters them. This has been seen having direct policy effects numerous times with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, threats of revoking LGBTQ+ rights, and pushing against separation of church and state.
Ironically, though, a major factor in the decline in Christian population of America over the past 25 years is actually due to the severe politicization of the religion. Ultimately, the issue with allowing religion to dictate our laws is that such rule does not allow for a diversity of faith: The government gains the ability to penalize citizens whose beliefs do not align with those of the people in power. Conflating religious beliefs with politics not only undermines legitimate scientific reasoning and personal freedoms, but it also erodes the very foundation of a pluralistic democracy built on the coexistence of diverse beliefs.
Populist anti-elitism is another pillar which has been around for centuries. In the late 19th century, populist movements arose from the distrust of concentrated power and as an effort to defend farmers and laborers against economic exploitation by industrial monopolies and political elites.
However, the current movement of populist anti-elitism is less about seeking solutions to grievances regarding justice. Rather, it’s more of a cultural backlash against expertise, education, and progressive ideals. Despite being an elite himself and maintaining very close relations with other elites, Trump’s messaging focuses on attacking certain cultural and political establishments while portraying himself as an outsider on the side of the people fighting a corrupt system. Both Trump’s first and second presidential terms have been marked by a sort of authoritarian populism: He has successfully persuaded many Americans that certain identity-based groups pose an existential threat, leading some to justify or even embrace extreme measures in response. His rhetoric and policies have attacked and marginalized a broad range of citizens, including immigrants, racial and ethnic minorities, religious minorities, the LGBTQ+ community, and women.
Numerous critics and organizations have condemned Trump for taking extreme, and in some cases illegal, authoritarian measures, including, but not limited to, using the Department of Justice (DOJ) to target his opponents, an assault on immigrants and human rights, his deployment of the military and federal agents against citizens, his undermining of democratic institutions, and an expansion of executive power. By posing these groups as a threat to American society, he has thus been able to effectively discredit many academics, scientists, journalists, and public servants who disagree with him as being corrupt elites who do not maintain the interests of real Americans. This rebranding of anti-elitism, weaponizing resentment to delegitimize institutions of knowledge, has shifted the focus to identity politics. The result is a political climate where emotion and loyalty increasingly outweigh reason and evidence, undermining both the nation’s capacities for democratic discourse and informed decision-making.
Unreflective instrumentalism is certainly the most subtly pervasive branch of anti-intellectualism, slowly seeping into the country’s values on education and public policy. Schools and universities are being increasingly evaluated not for their roles in cultivating critical thinking, but on their ability to generate measurable economic outcomes. This shift has led to a general defunding of education, both as a whole and especially in the arts and humanities, fields which are being routinely dismissed as impractical and futile. This approach has extended beyond academia; governmental decisions often prioritize short-term political and financial gains over long-term social welfare and scientific preparedness. The Trump administration has exacerbated this dynamic several times through the passing of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, rejection of climate science, widespread deregulation of worker protections across sectors, efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, border enforcement tactics, and, most notably, the defunding of educational institutions.
The persistent devaluation of public service, research funding, and education reveals a culture that rewards productivity over understanding. Over time, this mindset won’t just weaken our schools or undervalue the arts but will deteriorate the future of progress and innovation itself. When we measure knowledge only by its quantifiable returns, we strip education of its true purpose: facilitating curiosity, creativity, critical thought. A society that prizes profit over understanding may grow richer in numbers, but it will grow poorer in thought.
The Trump administration’s persistent assault on education is not simply an isolated political strategy. Rather, it reflects a deeper national struggle. Anti-intellectualism, in all of its forms, poses a quiet but critical threat to our democracy. When we allow religious extremism to overpower science, populist outrage to drown out expertise, and education to become a means to an end, the nation loses the ability to think critically, question power, and envision progress.
According to the Pew Research Center, the partisan education gap has grown dramatically since 2016, with college-educated voters leaning more towards Democrats and non-college voters leaning towards Republicans. This widening divide has turned education and intellect itself into a political battleground, allowing leaders to exploit the distrust of experts and dismantling institutions of learning as a way to deepen social polarization. If this trajectory continues, the very principles that once made America a global superpower will lead to its disintegration. To preserve our democracy and humanity, we must remember that education, reason, and inquiry are not partisan tools but rather the very foundations of a progressive and prosperous society.
Shloka Bhattacharyya is a member of the class of 2028 and can be reached at sbhattachary@wesleyan.edu.
Leave a Reply