In a general sense I am talking about anti-intellectualism. There is a bevy of studies on it on google scholar. I can recommend some books as well if you would like.
As for southern insecurity I am talking about the class dynamics in the south between southern gentry ie the plantation owners and the poorer sharecroppers and owners of smaller holdings. It also has to do with the souths response to losing the civil war, reconstruction, and the end of jim crow. There is a heavy dose of xenophobia but bascially when you start hearing people talk about damn yankees, carpet baggers or ivy leaugers who 'think they are so smart' then that is a modern incarnation of a dynamic that can be seen looking over history of the past 2 centuries.
When I used to live on the east coast, I didn't get the constant criticism because I want to 'look smart' but since I moved to Texas, it has been a constant refrain.
I am going to leave it at that.
No offense, this is broad generalization and that hypothecation is probably why you get a negative reinforcement (i.e. self-fulfilling) to your style.
First, there are examples of all stereotypes to which you can point that support a stereotype. It is true that on average the heartland tends to be less affluent and educated and is also less exposed other cultures, experiences etc. But anti-intellectualism is championed by an array of sects other than southerners. I submit it is more rooted in socio-economic factions than a simple landed gentry/sharecroppers. Pop culture tends to emanate from the coasts and the "Idiocracy" has been born and "monetized" more from the east coast and west coast than say Memphis.
People tend to congregate with like minded groups who possess similar education, economic and political beliefs. There is a natural aversion to assimilate or even understand anothers perspective. When someone overtly challenges someone else's "way of life" with condescension, arrogance, or void of empathy, people generally balk and reject. Sometimes people may like to change but may not from fear, others may not want to change at all. Perhaps some people are completely content with how their life is. Berating someone usually fails in either case.
I'll take it that you have a good retention and used the last phrase ("ivy leaugers who 'think they are so smart' ") as a arrow with a phrase I have used before as a Garrett observation. That's fine and probably fair. The only way to fully explain is to give a longer recount of my personal experience that have shaped my view. For anyone else reading, I suggest you blow off the next paragraph as the attempt is not to puff my chest, but to the risk of "pigeonholing" someone or a group.
I grew up in rural East Tennessee. My mother and father didnt have electricity growing up (until TVA). Now, My sister is a Judge in Nashville married to a Physician and faculty member at Vandy. I have 2 masters and a PHD in Financial Engineering. I have lived in Memphis, Knoxville, Atlanta, Charlotte, NY and LA with a brief 6-month stop in London. I also have extensive experience and knowledge of music (theory, composition, history,etc.). Paid my way through school performing and teaching guitar. Played with downright genius artists that may not be able to pick Chomsky from Jerry Jones, but that does not diminish their worth and genius. I currently work in Capital Markets/Finance/Risk divisions for a well known institution where I have to interact with people from Oxford, Harvard, Alabama, to ITT tech. The people who are "my southerners (i.e. people who grate on my nerves)" are the silver spoon ivy league frat brats. These are the smart people who developed the negative amortizing mortgages, I/Os, sub-prime securitizations , CDO squared, etc. I recall one telling me I was an idiot if I really thought real estate could fall by 25% and that people would always choose leverage if an underlying asset would always rise. The style of this group - more than other groups - is to belittle and condescend. The Oxford Brits, conversely, are arrogant, but they will debate a point and cede ground on average. So while it may seem I have a bias against ivy leaguers, I dont. I have learned to spot certain characteristics that tend to be clustered in many of them, but not all. One of best friends is a Princeton grad. The issue isn't intelligence - it's attitude and respect.
Maybe its just me, but when i go back to rural East Tennessee and talk with some friends who are plumbers, drywall finishers, etc. , I dont begin to lecture about how pathetic it is that they dont understand bid ask spread, Treasury auction covers, the fact the the Simpsons theme song is in the Lydian mode ("4th order from the Aeolian mode - which is a major scale you dolt"). I tend to tell them generalities about my job and my view on the markets. If they ask, I ease into subjects and not start with "Well low interest rates are better measured through a shifted lognormal model, where as a normal rate environment better tracts with a two-factor Hull-White type model."
It really is a matter of social awareness and respect. When I moved to LA and NY, I dont start every conversation championing guns. People who may have less structured book knowledge are at a disadvantage in the conversation. If I am really interested in a conversation, if I refrain from using that advantage, then it isnt a dialogue its a sermon. If "intellectuals" detest people who are content with their life and think dialogue is a waste of their time than they are bound to dismiss and turn off their ability to learn something from someone.
Now, I support your general sense that you shouldn't denigrate someone for being educated - and that does happen. But I find many of your posts pulling the condescending retort card pretty quick and it seems that is an easy way for you to dismiss any point not on its merit but from the messenger. Once that dynamic is set, the other side plays its card and its a feces fight
Overall, this is a football board and I dont really come here to talk, math, practice Hindi (for my wife), discuss politics or book review Tolstoy or recite Longfellow. In that case, I should try to converse with someone utilizing a mirrored style if I really want to discuss a topic. Now I still try to lay out my points in a logical and reasoned manner, which get lengthy, but sometimes, I just want to read some funny snark. I come here for the tootsie rolls and to other places for Lobster Fra Diablo.
