Robert Nozick: Why are Intellectuals Socialists?

Jason Kuznicki discusses the left-leaning tendencies of public intellectuals. Basis is an essay by Robert Nozick that proposes a cause for this tendency. Robert Nozick, in his essay "Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?" proposed that many highly-educated public intellectuals tend to lean towards collectivism and political authoritarianism because they expect society to work best in the way that schools and the academic system (which is the system they are most familiar with) operates.
---
If you like the content, subscribe!

[khaccanhle]

A university functions much like a Soviet bureau. It is a small group of experts in academia and administrative structures who chose from the top down the people who advance as well as the allocation of funds.
So they naturally extend their world to the world of everyone else.
At least that's what I noticed in University.

[flawlessstrategy]

3:30 Ha, what a coincidence. I was just about to post Dinesh D'Souza's quote on this subject and it seems eerily similar to the one mentioned here. I assume Dinesh got the idea from Nozick's essay, since it's even worded similarly.


“We have a smoldering segment of our population sunken in envy, and resentment, and self-hatred. And then along come two visitors to see him. One is the Intellectual, and the other is the Community Organizer. One is the College Professor and the other is the Politician. […] These are the two most envious and resentful groups in America. They are the most bitter. They are the most petty, and they are the nastiest people on the planet. […]



Why would politicians, and why would intellectuals in this country feel that way? Because this is an entrepreneurial society that awards rewards to people who create value for consumers.
Ancient societies had intellectuals - Men of Letters - they were at the top. They were the people who were at Court. And they mastered… they had a product that they produced; it was called “words.” Usually words of flattery. At which the intellectuals were really good at, and as a result they had a lot of power. But when Capitalism came along, all the French costumes had to come off, all the Men of Letters had to go away, and they have to start publishing journals and teaching in universities.
[…] From the professor’s point of view he’s the most educated; he’s the smartest guy in America. And yet these other guys who seem much less smart are doing so much better. Why? And so the professor begins to feel something must be wrong with the society that awards rewards in this way. We need to rearrange society so my group – the thinkers; the intellectuals – come to power. And the politician feels the same way. And so we have a tripartite alliance.” – Dinesh D’Souza

_A World Without America_ watch?v=goKXTXwT_4g @ 36:25




I'm and intellectual, philosopher, and wordsmith, etc. I used to be liberal and even socialist, but am now way more conservative. Seems to me that many of the liberal, communist, socialist, left seem to be intellectually dishonest now, in order to push their own agenda and narratives. To put it succinctly, they are flat-out liars. And if you must lie to support your points of view, then your points of view are wrong.


One of the straws that finally broke the camel's back for me was discovering how many of my socialist friends really believed that it was totally justifiable that they should be allowed to just sit at home all day and never work. Yet, get to have a home, electricity, air conditioning, refrigerator, food, internet, beer, cigarettes, and everything without ever having to work for any of it? So, I ask, "Well, if you don't want to work for the things you need and want, then where is the incentive for others to work to create and provide these things to you?" It's absurd. I mean, you want a house, and I build houses; I want food, and you're a farmer. We're trading those things. Then, you suddenly decide you no longer want to grow food but you still want to live in a house... It's obvious that you have broken some contract here. Then you are expecting me to work for free. Ultimately, this is slavery.



Advocating slavery... The group who constantly virtue signals their _imagined_ moral superiority. Imagine that.

[biggest]

You've asked the question incorrectly. It should be.... "Why do people that studiously avoid careers or lifestyles that will entail them having to put long periods of genuine effort in to making a living, endlessly harp on about the importance of systems that will allow them to harvest from the efforts of others that do work hard?" it almost answers itself when posed in that sense.

[Tespri]

Mutiple reasons. Thomas Sowell had good points about this
1. Fallacy of knowledge:
They think they are qualified to be new leaders of the society just because they study. They do not understand how complex mechanisms there are in running a functional economy. Hence they think they would be new philosopher kings in their new society.
2. Ivory tower:
They deal with only hypothetical level and lack experience from the real world. None of them have ever done any labor work in real life, nor contributed to the society.
3. Security:
They are generally weak willed people who wish to have daddy figure defending them even when they are adults. They don't want to take responsibility of their own lives.
4. Religion:
It's basically modern religion, as said in the video. However it's religion for atheists. Since they don't believe in universal justice or after life. Then they try to create the justice and heaven on earth. Even though objectively speaking off... We are now better off than ever before, for them it's not fast enough.
5. Lack of understanding over economics:
They think that economics is a zero sum game, and think that money is more important than actual resources. This is why socialist economies tend to suffer from inflation since they think that money can fix everything, while they lack fundamental understanding what money stands for. Printing more money and spreading it around isn't going to increase the supply of the resources.

[nascar]

To divert attention away from themselves and their blatant hypocrisy and double standards ie lavishing themselves in all the luxuries and trappings that only capitalism can provide.

[douglasthompson]

Because intellectuals have an innate desire to control the uncontrollable. Capitalism is chaotic and Socialism is order.

[billmelater]

Constrained vs. Unconstrained vision.  Thomas Sowell's books cover it pretty extensively.

[Woadyn]

Intellectuals naturally gravitate to Socialist ideology because it is actually a natural extension of the way the rest of their lives are kept in order. Capitalism is actually a completely unintuitive idea in the sense that it doesn't require heavy regulation for it to operate, in fact it relies heavily on the converse. I would argue that getting beyond the ideals of socialism is a litmus test for actual intelligence, especially considering today we have American history that has vividly displayed the effects of free market capitalism. For Adam Smith to see this in his time is really amazing.

[rastabarwell]

I wouldn't call them intellectuals. Teachers and professors have, only one, speciality. ONE. they know fuck all about anything else. They've been in school their whole life. Protected, told they're special.

[LambrettaFunk]

All your answers are in “Manufacturing Consent” (NC).

[harbinger]

I had some schooling in graphic design and I was told an example that I think applies here:

Say you are a designer and are hired to create advertising for an ice cream shop. You spend hours coming up with brilliant designs that combine subtle details that should enhance the presentation of the company. You bring your designs to the owner ready to explain how your designs will address everything he needs, but upon quickly glancing at your work, points to a graphic that you scribbled out in a couple seconds and says he likes that one. You try to describe the intricate details of your more inspired work, but he just says he likes that one and he wants to use it.

a) Do you harrumph, close your portfolio and leave, fuming at the inability of small-minded folk to understand subtlety and deeper meaning - of the hours of work you put into creating these masterpieces?

b) Do you do exactly what you were hired to do and sell him that piece?

Intellectuals go with *A*
Capitalism is all about *B*

Follow-up - Another instructor used a similar scenario to make an even greater point:

When you expect to be working for Fortune 500 companies and being paid to create designs for important people, but instead are hired to create designs for an ice cream shop, do your absolute best! Put all of your skill, knowledge and art into every single design whether it takes 2 seconds or 2 hours. The shop owner may not appreciate it, but someone who does may see it and inquire after who the designer was. Your work should always be authentically yours without the expectation that it will be fully appreciated by everyone. Be true to yourself.

Intellectuals seem to have lost focus on being true to themselves and fallen for the seductive call of fame and power. The only result will be resentment and greed, as they spiral down into Narcissus' pool to drown.

[flyingphoenix]

PLEASE upload more Nozick speeches and analyses!

[antonlampe]

Because they are so privileged to live in a functional society. They take these things (electricity, running water, stable economy, etc.) for granted.

[buddymac]

What are Intellectual Socialists? "Morons in a word." I'm trying with much difficulty to be kind.

[hermitthefrog]

"Intellectual" is a precocious label people who can't win arguments on merit give themselves.
Any self-respecting intelligent person would never accept the label "intellectual"... they correctly expect others to intrinsically recognize their intelligence.

[davidmouser]

Society values intellectuals who are smart enough to do something with said intellect.
Intellect by itself is of no value unless you can make use of it.

[christianyellic]

Not only hold those views, but believe they have invented the moral compass.

[eagleeyemind]

You are conflating Intellectuals and Academics. Not the same.

[caitlingood]

Intellectuals oppose capitalism because it is an economic philosophy which dictates that those with the most money should be the ones to shape society as they see fit. As you mentioned, you do not have to be smart to succeed in a capitalist environment- similarly, you don't have to be humane or well-intentioned. Therefore, according to capitalism, those best suited to shape the future of civilization have only to meet the criteria of accumulated wealth. Socialism dictates that the interests of the general populous must be considered and accounted for.

[christophergraves]

The problem with markets is that many people have mediocre to poor judgement about what is valuable. Wide segments of the population, for example, prefer the Kardashians to Brian Magee philosophy discussions. That is a big flaw.