The Lisp Paradox

Inferior tools allow less intelligent people to create what those with greater intelligence are unable to create with Lisp.

What does this paradox mean?

Are people who choose to use Lisp actually less intelligent than people who use other languages? Is Lisp actually inferior to and less productive than these other languages? Do the few people who are able to accomplish something in Lisp actually choose it for bragging rights, the way handicaps are used in sports?

Why do people put assembly language and Lisp in the same category of difficult languages? Shouldn't the high productivity of Lisp make it one of the easy languages, like Visual Basic, Python, PHP, and JavaScript? Why is it considered a difficult accomplishment to create something useful in Lisp?

>>23
The built-up abstractions exist, from filesystem access to GUIs and 3d acceleration.

Anytime anybody creates a wrapper, it's always responded with "But you're slower than just calling it directly!", "You're just calling the same thing as in $OTHER_LANGUAGE so why not use C?", and other such shortsighted shit.

The takeaway is that there is Only And Exactly ONE Proper™ Accepted™ way to do things, and it is anathema to rethink, reimplement, or deviate in any way. It has nothing to do with the virtues of what's being left behind or what's being explored. It is purely pro-herd/anti-herd religious mob reaction bullshit.