As others have generally pointed out, 'intellectualism' isn't the problem. Instead, it's a particular brand of intellectualism that economically benefits from

As others have generally pointed out, 'intellectualism' isn't the problem. Instead, it's a particular brand of intellectualism that economically benefits from maintaining its established system. These intellectuals have little incentive to change their established position from which they profit. and they profit a lot. Generally, the traditional intellectual world can't keep up with the pace of the rest of the culture. We consumers and participants of intellectualism want cheaper, faster, more variety and niche. The current intellectual establishment benefits from the opposite. Intellectualism is alive and well on the Internet. In fact this blog post and reaction to it is evidence. It's just that the traditional expert model doesn't scale into real economies. Many forces continue to work against it. As with other capital, intellectual capital will flow, like liquid, through the least resistant path. If one seeks influence and participation over intellectual topics, why would they spend many years going through the motions of attaining credibility and standing, when they can establish their presence much quicker along other routes? All of the objects and roles referenced in the article (e.g. books, experts, etc.) have continued value, and they won't disappear, they will just be augmented by technology.