> I think, over time, intellectuals in general became more critical of those power dynamics. Enlightenment thinkers were critical of religious dogma, liberal theorists were imagining an alternative to the monarchies of the day, socialists were critical of capitalist structures, and anarchists were critical of the emerging nation state.

I think of it as an onion that can be peeled, except when people peel off a layer or two (genuine or otherwise), they often find something (genuine or otherwise) so compelling that the possibility that there are more layers often slips their mind.

> The remaining intellectuals are fearful of speaking out too much, subverted to serve power unintentionally, suppressed entirely, or quietly sabotaged through language and information manipulation.

...~hypnotized

> Along with this deepening skepticism for the traditional structures of society came backlash. History could have probably gone one way or the other, but the way it went was a victory for the power structures against intellectual analysis. Today, I think, we're living in an era (a kind of Dark Age in a sense) where unjustified power structures have asserted themselves (mostly through violence, their primary tool) and seem invincible (and even inevitable).

I think the primary tool is propaganda - propaganda is an interesting word, because the unique way that each mind conceptualizes it (both in general but especially with respect to certain scenarios) is a function of propaganda itself. (Note: my usage of the word "propaganda" includes both deliberately nefarious kinds, as well as just plain old misinformation, regardless of motive).

> As far as social media, I think many experts in their field have little to gain and just don't engage.

Agree...but I am speaking of those that do, and among those there seems to be little diversity when it comes to behavior regarding beliefs/truth - many things come in a normal distribution, some of them are easy for the mind to accept (height), some are not (cognitive behavior).

> In person, I find that intellectuals are more than happy to engage in conversation. Excited even, given how few and far between it is to find someone willing or enthusiastic towards stimulating conversation.

Until one touches certain sensitive topics!

> We're trained by corporate propaganda (which we call advertising instead) to act based on our feelings ...

Agree...but I am proposing that there is a subset of ideas that ~no one can escape, that seem to be so intolerable to the mind, it melts down into logical and emotional chaos - we've all seen videos of batshit insane Trump supporters, I believe that ~all people can be brought to a similar state of mind (if perhaps to a lesser magnitude of accompanying bizarre behaviors).

> I've seen this sometimes, and I wonder if it's a form of learned helplessness.

Learned via propaganda is my intuition - my theory is: if someone starts talking about your plan but in a way that you haven't encountered before, or in a way that proposes opposing/modifying The System, fight or flight type heuristics kick in, and the conscious mind is helpless against that.

It's a wild and wacky world out there!!