One ought always to test one's motive for doing things. I have recognised that within myself (as is human tendency) there is the desire to have power and to be praised by men or even to be highly esteemed. I, though in principle, am against elitism and classicism and all those other categories that we have constructed to place people into, have in practice categorised persons by my intellectual verbiage. It is obvious to those who have not had the opportunities and exposure that I have had to learning that I am "learned" and they - unlearned. Inadvertently, I have made myself superior. How often do/es academics and/or intellectualism do that in our society!? Many are guilty (as I am) of creating this chasm between those who "brite" and those who "dunce". Yet, we talk about erasing the margins that divide race, gender, socio-economic status and the like. How often has any one of you bought a book - a scholarly piece of work, and found that the superfluous language (big wod foh suh) makes you feel like you are reading in a foreign language? Is it possible that the profundity within the superfluity is still attainable within simplicity? Are those who write concerned that the "common" man understands what is expressed or is their concern really about impressing those within the academy and/or the said common man who will buy the book (because those within the academy get a free copy to tell dem how "brite dem is" and pat dem shoulder).
I would love to contribute and I would even hope that some would consider me an intellectual. But, is intellectualism worth it if all it does is create another margin? I dare to posit that even as we academise and intellectualise, we ought to ensure that what we churn out is accessible. We ought to ensure that our motive is not to magnify ourselves through our knowledge while others are shrunken in their ignorance because of us. I seek profusely after an intellectualism that seeks the highest good of my brethren and sistren dem. I seek profusely for superfluous intellectualism to recognise and par with grass roots intellectualism (becah it 'av reasoning pon every level).
I dare not generalise here! Oh no! For that in not what I intend. My intention is not to bash those who exercise their intellect, it is not even saying that we shouldn't motivate our society to be one that strives for excellence but as we do it, let those who consider themselves strong carry those who are perceived as weak (the ongle way to get into the position to carry the weak is to stoop). A society that is progressive needs everyone to be moving in unison... that takes some condescension. May I never be so bright that I become irrelevant, disassociated or even obsolete. Today, I choose to peel of the mask of conceit - intellectualism.