I had been thinking about this lately as well.
The somewhat smart group recognize complexity of thought, but not the true essence of the thought itself. They are quite often impressed by bloviating, jargon, and euphemisms. The attention to smart-sounding things and the desire to be perceived as intelligent makes them easy pickings for anyone who can get some letters after their name or a position at some kind of institution and hand them a preconceived framework to not-think with. Rather than examining the real metaphysical contents of what is expounded by these external authorities, they look towards the authorities/institutions themselves as self-verifying. The people spouting Liberalism/atheism are the ones with TV shows, government positions, giant houses and nice clothes. Their manifest material success lends a sense of verisimilitude to their sayings and most people run with this.
The people occupying the sub-100 IQ zone are largely uncredentialed and the post-modern Liberal pop-culture has drilled it into the somewhat intelligent peoples' heads the idea that these lower IQ people are basically evil and that you should try as hard as possible to have zero overlap between your values/beliefs and theirs, otherwise you are a backwards boob, a neanderthal, a
[email protected]!$t, and on the "wrong side of history." As a result, commonsensical positions like "different groups of people are significantly different" become college grad repellants. So essentially, because the reality-denying positions in Western society are currently touted as the "smart" ones, people with a deep-seated revulsion for common sense, reality-based positions continue to file into the hollowed-out shells of our old institutions as the whole system decays around us.
The real red-pill is that the "stupid" person's position is fundamentally correct in most cases, but the lack of social status, wealth, and eloquence tied to these positions repulses the kinda-smart worldling despite its inherent truth.
