If it's a "cheap way to feel smart", then perhaps those that feel smart merely by watching the movie don't realize they are part of it.
Others don't need to feel smart, and simply find it funny and disquieting. I thought it was a brilliant satire when I watched it some years ago.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/are-you-smarter...
It's pretty disturbing that it explicitly endorses eugenics to do that, though.
Edit: If you disagree, please explain how "the world is going to hell because stupid people are breeding too much" isn't eugenics.
The whole movie seemed to be a cheap dig on stereotypes of rural/redneck behavior rather than any meaningful look at society. The conclusion that it hand-holds the audience is that the "wrong" kind of Americans don't respect intellectuals enough and they will ruin the country. The movie literally ends by the educated savior being respected for being smart.
I don't agree with your indictment of satire in general; I consider Idiocracy to be pretty ham-fisted in that regard. Especially compared to much better Mike Judge works like Office Space and Silicon Valley.
I thought the main point of the movie was that people's intelligence deteriorated past the point to recognize that they had lost their agency. Mocking lowbrow culture was an aspect of the satire, but I didn't see it as the main point.
Indeed, the fact that the entire economy is managed by automation and is outside of the control of actual people was an interesting look at the future.
Of all the great filter scenarios, that's one of the less horrifying.
The problem with trading barbs is that it triggers worse and ends in doom. There's plenty of room for critique that doesn't destroy the threads.
It's essentially saying if you like this movie, you are either a moron or support eugenics.
Earlier in the thread there is a post basically saying that people don't like KotH because they are arrogant coastal elitists who shit on small town culture because they don't understand it.
It's essentially the same as putting the blame for a schoolyard fight on the person who threw the last punch rather than the one who initiated the conflict. It creates an incentive for people to talk negatively knowing that the consequences of any conflict are more likely to fall upon those who challenge the negative behavior.
You're a good moderator but I've seen you do this many times (>10) and I'd like you to think about that.