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?

>>8
Native simple AST lets you generate your own code expansions & transformations, which is a pain in the ass in most other languages, ending up in the worst case with boilerplate-heavy overburdened shit like Java.

Lisp implementations generate good native code. The spec is one of the most specific and complete, and each major implementation is well documented in its specifics and extensions.

I don't know why people feel the need to make up shit about something they know nothing about. Sort of like how moon landing deniers can't comprehend that people actually accomplish greater things than they can imagine, so they invent fantasies where they can believe it's simply not true.