What is the topic?

The Anti-Elitist Aspect of Smart-Shaming and how it affects the voting behaviors of
Filipinos
(Working title)

● Smart-shaming is the act of shaming (by mocking) someone who appears to be smart or
smarter than others, and Filipino concepts of shame and smart(ness) are linked to the
motivations of such an act.

○ Smart-shaming is a common occurrence in the Philippines.

○ Smart shaming is a byproduct of anti-intellectualism, which is defined as a

generalized suspicion and mistrust of intellectuals and experts of whatever kind
resulting from a disdain for scholarly and intellectual pursuits.

■ Anti-intellectualism is an anti-elitist rhetoric.

● Elitism is a belief or notion in which power/authority is given to a

select individuals who have intrinsic and desirable qualities such as
wealth, power, physical attractiveness, notability, special skills,
experience, lineage, and other desirable traits. Anti-elitism is the
“substantial residue of mistrust and resentment toward intellectuals
among those who have been systematically excluded from privileged
access to the culture of critical discourse” (Rigney 1991, 444)

● Julia Jasmine Madrazo-Sta. Romana of GMA News elucidated that

the colonization of the Spaniards and Americans in the Philippines
triggered Filipinos to develop this notion of hostility against
individualism and elitism; since quality education was only accessible
to a few Filipinos, especially the elite. This created a rift between
ordinary Filipinos and Filipino intellectuals, who are perceived as
elitists.

● Historically speaking, dictators utilized anti-intellectualism as a propaganda tool against

intellectuals to silence their criticisms and opinions about dictatorial regimes — for instance,
Martial Law.

● Filipinos call for quality education, yet they themselves shame and mock the ones voicing out
their opinions.

● Filipinos apparently distrusted Western constructs such as individualism and elitism (Austria
and Diaz 2019). It may also be a postcolonial reaction to smart people whereby shamers
protect themselves from these supposed “Western”ideals. The distrust has led to the
generalized consensus that intellectuals or smart people are closed-minded and are merely
 out to take advantage of the common people. In connection, anti-intellectual populism seems
to be a reac-tion to the privileged elite who are trying to keep hold of their power.

● Some of the factors of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. winning in the 2022 National Elections is the
use of anti-intellectualism and anti-elitist attitude of his supporters. These supporters held a
campaign that would whitewash the time during Marcos Sr. Regime. The campaign would
falsely describe Martial Law as the golden age of the Philippines. This misinformation spread
on social media, which Marcos Jr. allegedly used to his advantage to appeal to the common
masses. Additionally, Marcos Jr. also has the support of former president Rodrigo Duterte,
who is described as a populist. Marcos Jr. would come to adopt his populist rhetoric.

● Leni’s campaign is described as elitist. Leni has a good track record and policy plans, as well
as a complete education background. Supporting Robredo, as well as disavowing Marcos, is
often framed as a matter of intelligence, moral character, or both.

● Populism, a worldview that sees political conflict as primarily between ordinary citizens and a
privileged societal elite. Populists perceive the ordinary, such as low and mid class citizens,
as the good while the elite, like upper class society, are corrupt. It is also a movement
wherein common people identify a spokesperson or leader to champion their causes. They
deeply relate with this spokesperson in terms of identity or language.

● There is likely to be a strong connection between populism and anti-intellectualism.

Suspicion of experts can be rooted in a perception that their knowledge will be used to
control ordinary citizens, which shades into populist discourse. As Brewer notes “American
populism tends to be highly resentful of being told by experts ‘we know best’” (2017, 253).
Some populists may see experts as part of the ruling elite because of their status and
importance in policy debates.

○ Populism is a source of anti-intellectualism, but it is not the byproduct. The degree to

which intellectuals and experts are identified as part of the ruling elite likely varies at
the individual-level and over time (Rigney 1991).