"Systematic philosophical and practical anti-intellectualism such as we are witnessing appears to be something truly novel in the history of human culture"
About this Quote
“Truly novel” lands here like an alarm bell from someone who spent his life studying how cultures rise, cohere, and collapse. Huizinga isn’t lamenting a familiar cycle of philistinism or a passing anti-elite mood; he’s diagnosing a modern mutation: anti-intellectualism that is both systematic (organized, institutional, repeatable) and practical (wired into policy, schooling, media incentives, and daily habits). The menace isn’t ignorance. It’s a cultivated distrust of the very practices that make thinking public: expertise, argument, evidence, nuance.
The phrase “philosophical and practical” is doing heavy lifting. Huizinga suggests this isn’t just a mob’s impatience with professors; it’s an ideology with a theory of reality (truth is whatever works, or whatever “feels” authentic) paired with machinery that enforces it (propaganda, bureaucratic simplification, contempt for “mere” contemplation). Calling it “novel” is also a historian’s provocation. Earlier societies had superstition and censorship, sure, but they rarely framed the rejection of intellect as a virtue in itself, a badge of moral cleanliness against “decadent” thought.
Context matters: Huizinga wrote in the shadow of European mass politics and rising totalitarianism, where culture could be mobilized, standardized, and weaponized. His subtext is grimly procedural: once a society treats thinking as suspect, it becomes easier to replace judgment with slogans and substitute belonging for truth. The warning isn’t that elites will be misunderstood; it’s that culture can be engineered to stop wanting understanding at all.
The phrase “philosophical and practical” is doing heavy lifting. Huizinga suggests this isn’t just a mob’s impatience with professors; it’s an ideology with a theory of reality (truth is whatever works, or whatever “feels” authentic) paired with machinery that enforces it (propaganda, bureaucratic simplification, contempt for “mere” contemplation). Calling it “novel” is also a historian’s provocation. Earlier societies had superstition and censorship, sure, but they rarely framed the rejection of intellect as a virtue in itself, a badge of moral cleanliness against “decadent” thought.
Context matters: Huizinga wrote in the shadow of European mass politics and rising totalitarianism, where culture could be mobilized, standardized, and weaponized. His subtext is grimly procedural: once a society treats thinking as suspect, it becomes easier to replace judgment with slogans and substitute belonging for truth. The warning isn’t that elites will be misunderstood; it’s that culture can be engineered to stop wanting understanding at all.
Quote Details
| Topic | Knowledge |
|---|
More Quotes by Johan
Add to List




