This isn't a question or a discussion thread that intends to circle-jerk about how bad and idiotic Erik Walker is. He does that enough himself. Instead, Erik Walker represents a very vocal minority, usually existing in geographical locations experiencing spiraling deindustrialization, and are usually mobilized and manipulated by special interests and politicians to influence policy that affects a larger majority. 

How can or how should a society that embodies freedom of thought and freedom of speech effectively deal with the very real destructive nature of that minority that holds the mentality of Erik Walker? Don't focus so much on Erik specifically but instead the mentality that Erik has. I know it can be hard to disconnect the two but I would rather not personally attack Erik but rather his ideology as it represents something larger. Some may see them as inseparable and if that's the case  then so be it. 

I'm interested in this and what other people think about this issue because we see in many cases religious zealotry overtaking common sense legislation and far right fundamental christian ideologues taking many political seats with the intent of legislating morality and religion into a very secular nation. The obvious impulse may seem to just try and silence those individuals for the greater good of the whole but I think most can see the danger with that kind of solution.

The irony about Erik's mentality is that he tried his hand at higher education and failed, yet seems invigorated in his crusade against reason and scientific inquiry, and spreads it throughout the myumbc forums and who knows where else. For most of us we see through Erik's thinly veiled attempts at discourse cloaked in dogmatic anti-intellectualism and oppressive scriptural passages.
Interestingly many people with previous knowledge of Erik's tactics and the inevitable outcomes of discussions with him still engage him. Why?

Furthermore, as explained in the opening, generally discussions with Erik's mentality end up in a state of aporia where everyone is frustrated and Erik Walker's mentality undoubtedly walks away from the discussions further entrenched and convinced of its validity. One can easily see the parallels to this mentality and that of far-right religious political campaigns and politicians.

This type of anti-intellectualism seems to be a very pressing issue in American politics and indeed seems to be making headway in other parts of the world; see Australia, Canada, and the UK for further examples. How should this be dealt with? What are your opinions? 

For me the answer lay in secular education emphasizing philosophical skepticism. By skepticism I don't mean the contemporary notion of skepticism as an end-state but rather skepticism as a process. I think Erik's mentality survives due to the knowledge that there are those that will engage it. By educating people in rational and logical discourse and hard sciences it seems likely that the destructive mentality Erik Walker holds would fade away. This doesn't mean religion, which seems attached to his mentality, would fade away, but would seem to cease to be pertinent in addressing local, national, and global issues. 

Any comments by Erik Walker will be ignored by me and only serve as real-time examples to the rest of the community.