Western leftism associates acceptance of their worldview with intelligence and education and a rejection of their worldview with stupidity and ignorance. So to have someone who is highly intelligent and educated but rejects their worldview is something that's hard for them to swallow.
I'd also say it's a strategic/tactical advantage we have on our side that will cause our enemies to underestimate our abilities and opposition to their goals.
Western leftism associates acceptance of their worldview with intelligence and education and a rejection of their worldview with stupidity and ignorance
Not just leftism, but it is particularly egregious among them. I have noticed that everyone tends to think that if you reject their views, that you are 'stupid'. It's a sort of spacetime where observers who disagree with your views cannot see how intelligent you are (if you are), and those who agree generally will consider you 'intelligent'.
Regarding the Taliban, I think the 'intelligentsia' generally regard as educated those who have a certain kind of knowledge, namely abstract knowledge (if it can be called that) that they consider themselves specialists in. A farmer who knows exactly how to plant crops and take in the harvest does not have that, he's just an ignoramus, because he does not have that. Same for a hunter gatherer who can survive in an environment where the average pronouns leftist would perish within 24 hours. He may have all sorts of knowledge, but his knowledge does not 'count' in their worldview.
I think the 'intelligentsia' generally regard as educated those who have a certain kind of knowledge, namely abstract knowledge (if it can be called that) that they consider themselves specialists in
True there is a general bias against practical knowledge among the "intelligentsia" that (to an extent) crosses political boundaries. But I was also thinking in terms of members of the "intelligentsia" being part of the Taliban. I know these groups are all different, but certainly ISIS and Al Qaeda for example had degreed engineers that developed weapons and communications infrastructure. ISIS used to have its own digital magazine whose production value rivaled commercial publications in the West; that requires all number of skills. The Taliban would be the outlier if they didn't have those sorts of people somewhere in their organization, especially given their success.
I don't think the left specifically likes thinking about that, because it implies people are being trained in their worldview (by way of a university education) and rejecting it.
Western leftism associates acceptance of their worldview with intelligence and education and a rejection of their worldview with stupidity and ignorance. So to have someone who is highly intelligent and educated but rejects their worldview is something that's hard for them to swallow.
I'd also say it's a strategic/tactical advantage we have on our side that will cause our enemies to underestimate our abilities and opposition to their goals.
Not just leftism, but it is particularly egregious among them. I have noticed that everyone tends to think that if you reject their views, that you are 'stupid'. It's a sort of spacetime where observers who disagree with your views cannot see how intelligent you are (if you are), and those who agree generally will consider you 'intelligent'.
Regarding the Taliban, I think the 'intelligentsia' generally regard as educated those who have a certain kind of knowledge, namely abstract knowledge (if it can be called that) that they consider themselves specialists in. A farmer who knows exactly how to plant crops and take in the harvest does not have that, he's just an ignoramus, because he does not have that. Same for a hunter gatherer who can survive in an environment where the average pronouns leftist would perish within 24 hours. He may have all sorts of knowledge, but his knowledge does not 'count' in their worldview.
True there is a general bias against practical knowledge among the "intelligentsia" that (to an extent) crosses political boundaries. But I was also thinking in terms of members of the "intelligentsia" being part of the Taliban. I know these groups are all different, but certainly ISIS and Al Qaeda for example had degreed engineers that developed weapons and communications infrastructure. ISIS used to have its own digital magazine whose production value rivaled commercial publications in the West; that requires all number of skills. The Taliban would be the outlier if they didn't have those sorts of people somewhere in their organization, especially given their success.
I don't think the left specifically likes thinking about that, because it implies people are being trained in their worldview (by way of a university education) and rejecting it.