Sociopaths and those with a domination complex rise to the top in every system. For some odd reason, the masses love to be crushed under foot and exploited, so long as the leader is charismatic.
A large part of the issue is that the majority of people who have "becoming a politician" as one of their life goals tend to not be intelligent. They're people who A) want as much money as possible but don't see white collar crime as theft, and B) people who believe there is some kind of positive status associated with being a politician. They're essentially not far off being instagram influencers (a great example would be Jacinda Adjern who notoriously tried to please twitter, and was, as a result, despised by the country she was meant to be leading).
I kind of suspect actually intelligent people stay away from politics for the same reasons. The average politician accomplishes precious little; the average backbencher is not much more than a glorified secretary, and most ministers don't really have to do that much. Better to be in a position of some merit rather than a political position; police commissioner, etc.
@@Miranda17137 I think most individuals who work for Government or become Politician's do it because they aren't good enough to work in the Private Sector
"They're all dumb" - said the dumb one. Who really is dumb here, the one who fools a nation or the one who gets fooled time and time again. Intelligence and morality have little to do with each other, people wrongly conflate the two for no reason. An intelligent crook is way more dangerous than a dumb one.
Yeah, we tell them how wonderful they are and make sure they have lots of opportunities to get rich. What else would they believe? They're smart enough to know a good thing when they see it.
You missed the core element of the midwit which is above average intelligence but below average critical thinking and 'big-picture' conceptualization. Which is why they're so easily manipulated.
Might be good with fact & figures even, but don't have the intellectual capacity to conceptualise new outlooks with the information given - other than the crass & obvious.
@@Cha4k, pretty generous/optimistic of you to think that all of them were able to realise that was the viable range; I mean, do we want to joke on diane abbott some more, for example? Interviewer: "so, miss abbott, what is your answer?" Diane abbott: "In hindsight * drunken pause *, given all the data presented * more drunken stupor *, I believeeee * more-more drunk moment *... We can safely state Teapot percent!"
Eventually we're going to find somebody who is smart, charismatic, and dishonest who will promise to lead us to safety and they're going to lead us off a cliff.
This is one of the most sensible, spot-on, and no-nonsense explanations I have ever heard. Congratulations and thank you very much indeed for your insight. This surely applies to the rest of the world as a whole. Thank you sincerely.
The real problem with our times is that we let through people who would not have the aptitude and knowledge and skills to get into certain highly technical jobs. We have dumbed down entry requirements and we are paying for that
You can tell many of them are morons simply by the arguments they employ on the floor of the house. I am no genius but simply watching old interviews shows the level of intelligence was greater. I suspect even the less educated working class were more mentally robust having risen through the ranks of the unions or engaged in heavy industry. Both will have required rhetorical, reasoning and mathematical skills greater than the modern conditioning of the average humanities degree
I have noticed that, among Americans, there is no such thing as a discussion that follows one train of thought to a conclusion. Every conversation is sloganeering and innuendo until the conversation moves towards a controversial topic; at which point emotions runs high and everyone becomes an ideologue. I have also noticed that it is very easy to offend most Americans and they can't take a joke or brush-off even the mildest of rhetorical jabs. The West is supremely regressive.
And we've only been occupied by low IQ foreigners for 30 years or so. Imagine where Europe will be in 20 years. They're being absolutely flooded with an even less productive, lower IQ population.
@@neilreynolds3858 Yawn. Why are you responding re "Americans" here. The post concerns "midwit" UK rulers/politicians, and their supposed 120-ish IQ. Please tell me why replies here should have anything to do with "Americans" (US citizens?)
I think he said the word once. That's all it takes. The censor robot hears the word and like Pavlov's dog, it throws up a disclaimer. We're not just being ruled by midwits; we're being ruled by robots.
From experience, the problem is that reasonable people don't stay in these types of groups. Only extreme (sociopathic?) personalities thrive, and then they tend to congregate, and the cycle churns as thus.
They're fanatics, not psychopaths. What we see, but don't recognize since we dismiss the importance of religion, is the birth of a new religion. Fanatics will put up with immense amounts of boredom as long as it advances their agenda. Every movement has to have them. Eventually, they replace the people who are keeping the old system working and set up a new system in its place.
I think you absolutely have to have a certain type of personality to pursue a life in politics. You have to enjoy the game of debating, backstabbing, bluffing, double-talk, and recently: newspeak. Notice how all politicians look the same. You won't find the "feared" alpha chad, sigma male (whatever that is), or the fitness guy. All politicians look pale, boring, and unfit. Like office vampires or something. One exception and that is the American politicians, they look like...cartoons.
Knowledge is knowing tomatoes are a fruit Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit cocktail. Our midwits never challenged never face real life so even a the tomato is a problem
Politicians are midwits by design. Essentially, midwits are middle managers which perfectly describes politicians' actual role. They are designed to handle some level of complexity without being smart enough to overthrow the current order (the UK is governed by a constitutional monarchy, and many people do not realise that the Government belongs to the monarchy as politicians are representatives of the King's power, there is no difference between the monarchy and the government). Politicians are also dumb enough to be manipulated by higher powers to carry out the agenda of the manipulator without realising it. This creates the illusion of democracy to the public whilst the higher powers (monarchy) can get what they want. This is all by design and not due to decreasing intelligence.
There should be a Gullibility Quotient. I've known a lot of intelligent people who couldn't tell when somebody was lying to them no matter how obvious it was.
Ironically your ability to string together a lot of five dollar words while misunderstanding the nuances of our uncodified constitution so profoundly that you believe that monarch is an active participant in government would probably suggest that you are yourself a sub-midwit.
I would argue that if true, this design was set in place by the forefathers of the current elite and monarchy. While I’m not as familiar with the UK, it’s apparent that the U.S. elite have devolved into mid level crime bosses who increasingly rely on hard power. They’re losing the narrative with their reckless behavior and overconfidence in the system.
Of course, A students, being intelligent, fathom the scope of their ignorance and intellectual limits and see no particular reasons for them not to exert a rather subservient position the best they can ; but C students who are incapable of conceiving anything like an intelligence above theirs think they have achieved the top of human excellence and what they lack in IQ, SAT, PISA etc. they supply with faith. A students work for C students, B students work for the government, which means that entrusting anything to the government is like entrusting it to a D-student body.
I'm pretty sure it's just the Dunning-Kruger effect in action. They're educated in a specific field and it makes them think they're educated in all fields. They over estimate their ability to solve all problems. I'll use myself as an example of what I mean. I'm a technical lead at a large company. I'm good at solving technical problems and not the worst at organising technical people. I'm not, however, very good at most other things. But, because of my high up position it's very easy to forget that. You know. I'm this high level, high earning, senior person that interacts with the directors and CEO on a regual basis. I must be pretty smart right? Well, I am. Within my domain. And that last bit is key!
Case in point: the current Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, Michelle Donelan, has a BA in history and politics. After university she worked in marketing for Marie Claire and for World Wrestling Entertainment! Granted, civil servants and SpAds will distil the finer points of the brief into easily digestible morsels, but is it wise to entrust the country's STEM policy implementation to someone who doesn't have a native understanding of and experience in the disciplines?
There was a Tory MP who went on Have I Got News For You after retiring and he explained that this is simply not the case. The civil serpents have no idea what anything is. Instead they arrange meetings with "experts" who usually turn out to be lobbyists. The lobbyists are professional persuaders and they're given briefs by whoever is paying them. They show up with files and graphs and charts of data from authoritative sounding places and after about 5 minutes you're completely lost but they absolutely sound like they know exactly what they're talking about and you should vote the way they've suggested. Then lobbyists opposed to whatever you've just decided show up with all the opposite graphs, charts and data. This goes back and forth between competing lobbyists right up to the morning of the vote. He concluded something along the lines of "I often found that I agreed with whoever I spoke to last."
You cannot convince me that we're surrounded by midwits --- because I've been convinced of that fact for _many years already_ (especially as regards incompetence with maths and statistics). We'd probably get a better elite if we went back to the tripartite system, with grammar schools, and university standards similar to those of the postwar era (1950s to 1970s), and made sure kids did much more maths & science than today (and far less woo). A lot of today's universities would have to be downgraded to "polytechnics", or whatever.
Good point , but please remember that the Polytechnic was primarily a Vocational institution. I studied Mechanical Engineering for example as a working Apprentice.
Well , we are where we are , no Authority ( as far as I know ) has planned for this which has clearly been highlighted by Ed. Is anyone in current Political circles aware of this decline at all ? @@simontmn
William F. Buckley said, "I’d rather be ruled by the first 2000 names in the Boston phone book than by the combined faculties of Harvard and MIT." Better to be governed by a broad, random collection of people (with a spectrum of intellectual abilities) than by Newtonian or Einsteinian geniuses. Far better. Not even close.
So true these "educated" people are brainwashed and so out of touch with reality. Way better to be ruled by a random collective that would be so much closer representation of the average person
There's been the suggestion that we scrap elections and fill offices by random selection to get a better government. Unfortunately, it would leave us even more in the hands of the bureaucracy and they seem to be even worse than the politicians.
What you fail to understand is that the MPs are simply middle management who do the work of their masters . If you dont understand that by now then you need to concentrate on critical thinking.
Midwit is a proxy for middle class. We are ruled by middle class men, whom in traditional terms correspond to the mercantile caste. These people have a pragmatic intelligence and would be the bean counters of the olden days. However they do not possess the courage and martial virtues of the warrior class nor the understanding of transcendent principles found in the priestly caste. They are shopkeepers by nature and are motivated by utility, status, power and commercial value.
Excellent observation. I think we have been ruled by midwits since the French revolution and Age of Industry, both which saw the rise of the middle class. This dominating middle class has removed the martial(aristocracy) and priestly(church) classes and uses the citizen-soldiers and political ideologues as, in my opinion poor, substitutes. That also explains the secularization of western societies, because the merchants are the least religious caste, as well as their incapability to grasp foreign cultures that are interlinked with religion, like the Muslim world, and incompatible with their own, ireligious one.
Excellent observation ,the Rishes in ancient India had it sorted along these lines of human behaviour , though over time unfortunately it degenerated into the Class system of today.
@@johnstanton8499 The caste system offends the midwit class because they see themselves as liberated "individuals" free from social ties and only motivated by rational interest. But that is the exact marker of someone belonging to this caste. Their practical cognition knows how to manipulate things for productive ends but they are not fit to contemplate the good, beautiful and true - hence unfit to rule by Platonic standards. All the ills of the modern world can be attributed to the liberation of this caste.
The problem with midwitocracy is that they are blind to their midwitery. They believe themselves to be the best and the brightest. With humility comes self-knowledge. They bull shit less and ask questions more.
Dr. Dutton should ask the WEF to provide him with their *Dark Triad Screening Exam* that potential candidates must pass before qualifying for the Elite Level Psychopathology Inculcation Process. That should explain a lot of what's happened in the last 30 years. I'd like to hear what the good Doctor has to say about the before and after numbers on the Dark Triad scorecard.
The issue is not intelligence but cockiness. Having a grandiose view of yourself, that you are more intelligent or more morally superior than the others, then taking decisions without much doubt and no rethinking/reconsidering whether you are wrong, patting yourself in the back of how you change the world in positive ways, etc. Statistics/Probability are the most prone to errors or counter-intuitive, as the way the human mind perceives probability many times don't match the reality. But midwit psychology plays a role here. The midwit is not just the IQ, but also the overconfidence, the certainty we have that we know more than the others and are really intelligent. For example,. in the problem with the two coins, I would expect a basic level to calculate: 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25 x100 = 25% That would be the end. But now the midwit because of the extra knowledge of the golden rule of probabilities that last time made them more smart than the conspiracy theorist, that there are cases where "The probability is independent of the previous probability" is like: - Listen me edcuate you lad! You think it's 25%, but the last coin toss is independent than the previous, so it must be 50%. Haha,. those youngsters who are not educated anymore, am I right :) But he was still wrong. If you ask what the probability is for the current coin toss it will be 50% and independent. But the question was "I toss two coins in a raw, what's the probability they both come heads". And yep, the way to expand your mind, think if it was a million. If the previous 999999 were whatever, the last one on it's own would be 50% if you think it isolated. But not if the question is to win the game all must land heads. It's either that probability/statistics are not obvious, language and expression of a problem can deceive, or certainty of midwits that they are more intelligent than they think (and also building an identity of superiority on that). Find out about the Monty Hall problem. That blew my mind at the time and probably I also failed to find the right answer at first. But also a lot of math PHDs who lambasted the lady who solved it in the quiz column of some magazine. I wouldn't say the PHDs were midwits, but they were too certain and didn't have some humility of self doubt before answering it, even a month later when the debate was going on.
With politicians, you're filtering for egoists, so of course they're going to over-estimate their capabilities. This is how they realised their positions in the first place, the gift of the blag. And it doesn't stop with politicians, very many upward trajectory individuals in the corporate world are similarly intellectually disappointing. Not the highly driven creatives whom found businesses of course, but the monkey branching sociopaths that utilize existing systems, to rise in status.
They don't want creative types in government. They rock the boat. They want people who will do what they're told. Increasingly, that means somebody who will do whatever a computer tells them to do.
@@neilreynolds3858 Yes, there's a dichotomy between the air of competence projected by the actors in the convenient farce called government and their actual ability to lead anything at all. Thankfully for them, they don't have to lead, just go through the motions and read their scripts. Over time though, the type attracted to this kind of life, has gotten so ineffective, that even the normie is beginning to notice. Or perhaps it's that what they have to sell is so counter to what anyone even remotely wants, that this alone lifts the mask.
We have always been ruled by Midwits, at least since bureaucracy replaced early feudalism. The alternative is a sub-midwit warrior aristocracy. What matters is the midwit values and attitudes. I'm not sure the kind of high IQ technocracy envisioned by Dominic Cummings is either possible or desirable.
Very true. We saw what happened when we had govt by experts during Covid : We were caged, masked, lied to and stolen from at a record rate by business. I'd far rather a House of Commons full of cleaners than lawyers, then we might get money spent where it is needed and no more money wasted on virtue signalling and grandiose schemes.
I'm not so sure about that. The quality of writing in the 1500s, for instance, does not seem to have been much inferior to that produced in the 19th century, and that of the 19th century seems, if anything, to be often superior to what is produced today.
I dunno... you can find a LWTV clip from the 70s of a political debate... Barbara Castle, Charles Murray, Enoch Powell, Michael Foote... these were genuinely intelligent people...
it's the homogenisation of peoples outlooks on how the world should look via social media transplanting or removing organic thought before it flourishes, this is what creates the NPC social order, then add some desperation and bad parenting into the mix..
Yes and no....we know logically that 1 coin toss can either be heads or tails...so it's an even chance (50%). Therefore, we can eliminate 50% as the answer when prompted with two tosses.
Over the past 20+ years I've been more and more shocked at the blatant preferencing of short term gain over long term sustainability when it comes to governmental decisions. It has become a serious problem where politicians essentially sabotage both the public and their successors available options just to quickly inflate some budget numbers right now. There is no regard for requirements and stability 10, 20 or 30 years down the line, and it's happening in almost all countries.
Indeed, it's all about how quickly the new company president can inflate his golden parachute. He will jump the moment his line go up next quarter thinking bites the company in the ass. I wish we went back to family owned businesses again, not a bunch of faceless shareholders electing dark triad MBAs to make line go up next quarter.
Not religious, but it's occurred to me that bible study was an excellent intellectual and moral exercise engaged in by the majority in childhood, and its abandonment has lowered the level of thinking.
Whilst I agree with your thesis, we are ruled (At least in Parliament), by Midwits, I would make an argument, that those of high IQ are by no means the best leaders of men in this world. An example, from my own experience. At Royal Air Force Officer Training College (RAF Cranwell). We had an initial intake of roughly 40 people. A wide range of intellects, skill sets and physical abilities. We lost two people moving from term one to term two. We had already been selected to go to the College through reasonably challenging entry examinations/testing. The two people we lost, both had First Class Degrees from Oxford University (History or some such degree). They both had a brain the size of a planet, but were incapable of command, struggled to work in teams, and could barley make their own beds/iron their clothes. But they were impressive in other ways for sure, nice guys. They failed the course, and others, with presumably lower IQs, passed, often without issue, and were certainly able to lead and command their teams more effectively. I learned an excellent lesson from this experience, and have never held people with a piece of paper that says Oxford/Cambridge/Harvard etc the same to this day; unless they can demonstrate they are the 1 in a 1000 who posses intellect, and leadership skill. These people are worth their weight in gold, but there are very few of them. Undoubtably, they will have become high achievers, in one area or another, but they were not leaders of men. Yours Sincerely, A. Midwit :-)
No military leaders are not anything near "rule" , the intelligence needed there is not any more than 120, those of higher levels should not be in the military but places that can utilize the IQ, also these failures could be moved to strategy and tactics that kind of leader, being a commander is more based on the skill and arms, fighting ability.
To be a “leader of men” you need the skills of a conman--tell them what they want to hear, promise heaven on Earth, etc. Hitler, the most successful politician ever, was the prime example. He led the squirming masses where he wanted to take them. To say someone is a 'leader of men' is not a compliment.
I think you are very generous to describe people unable to work out that the chance of tossing a coin twice and getting heads as "midwits". Such people are not able and unfortunately do seem to run things!
Depends on how you look at the coin toss. EVERY coin toss is a 50/50 proposition. But yes, a series of coin tosses would result in a diminishing chance of repeating the same heads or tails to occur.
Probability is a concept that some people just cannot grasp. If you said that you tossed 1000 coins, they may have had less issue and logic would have kicked in.
The full definition is: "Someone who is around average intelligence but is so opinionated and full of themselves that they think they're some kind of genius. Midwits have a shallow understanding of things and at first can seem a bit smart, until you dig deeper and realize they're just posers."
@@r.s.4174Those are some characteristics which often attend midwittery but the actually state is defined only by mildly above average iq. Its no bad thing as long as you have commensurate humility.
@LeoRegum not according to the guy who coined and popularized the term, Vox Day. He also coined Gamma, Delta, and Sigma males, none of which are used as intended in common parlance.
@@WinterInTheForestnah, it's such a recognisable look. It will go out of fashion, or the algorithm will throttle it. Hopefully the "ai" bubble will burst soon enough and we can have done with all this toss!
@@eighteenfiftynine It's still early so we really don't know yet. Many inventions began this way, with people calling it just a fad and that it would never last. The telephone, radio, television and the internet to name a few. For the sake of art and creativity however, I hope you're right.
@winterintheforest6242 Reminds me of those very old Satirical Comic strips making fun of cars and how they would never catch on because Horses were much more reliable.
The thing we miss about intelligence is the enthusiasm and understanding various interests in your spare time besides being intelligent and capable what you learnt. When you go through school and university you are taught what is necessary should be to get a reasonable job in the outside world what i personally call the Highway Code of learning. People in the past that became great scientists and politicians among other things have an outside enthusiasm to study further and self taught various things like hobbies other interests outside what they learnt like i do. A lot of people when i talk to those at work literally have no real interests in anything outside their jobs they are too tired unless going out entertaining or holidays so people have become lazy and self indulgent as they get older start to become even more stupid and incapable. Im no specialists or psychologist but where i work people are becoming more stupid compared to my parents generation. They believe everything that media trends and arent self critical thinking things through. A lot of our politicians in the past were great readers a great sense of general knowledge which helped them have great memories for oratory skills watching them now they have as much inspiration as your general company board meetings. Yes it is sad. Ll
I've recently watched a vid by Gordan Murry Smith (TNT) about inventing and solving problems, in that he says that it's his other interests like pottery that help him solve problems - something totally unrelated can still give you a different perspective on a new problem; if you have no other interests, don't read books and don't take an interest in all the things around you, you are unlikely to understand, let alone solve anything.
this math issue is deeper than mere misunderstanding many of my math teachers would insist that each coin flip is a unique event with no correlation to the last, and therefore every outcome is a 50% value but that never made any sense to me, it feels like everything always comes back to the issue of education
The square of my hypotenuse is equal to the sums of squares of all the Mid Wits on the other two sides. Hahaha. Now I go on to prove mathematically via proof by contradiction that Nit Wits are Mid Wits then win the Nobel peace prize for mathematics. Hahaha. You do know that Aluminium is turned into pure Gold at 297 degrees Celsius via Phonon Resonance. Hahaha. Great research as usual. Loved your book too with the cover of Gin Alley.
@@neilreynolds3858with the recent discoveries of academic fraud at the top of most of the Ivy League, I don't think we can reasonably assume they're particularly intelligent or knowledgeable.
Parliament is the FA Cup. The Football Association Cup used to be the apogee of a footballing career, with successful managers nursing a sense of failure if they retired without winning it, whatever else they achieved. Today, a life in politics is an opportunity for third tier players to shine.
Better debates would help them understand where they stand regarding their ignorance. I mean, sort of moderated debates, like in a court, where people can be stopped when they make false statements and the truth can be checked, and false statements are dismissed. Their math can be checked and corrected as they go. Arguments with logical fallacies would be dismissed. It always bothered me in college that I could pick holes in the arguments of professors and students alike, and when even they realized that their arguments were false and foolish they would shut down the argument and shut me up, and treat the whole subject as inconclusive - time to move on. I wished there were a debate moderator or judge who would prevent them from doing that and force them to listen to all my arguments until they were forced to acknowledge that I was right and they were wrong. All they would do was kick me out, demand that I shut up, and avoid me, while they went blissfully on with their stupid doctrines. In college, they all looked like midwit idiots to me, the professors and the students, going wild with stupid theories like deconstruction. it was too easy to get them to the point where they were accusing me of using logic to make them sound stupid and foolish. So, they were intelligent enough to know they were wrong, but they didn't have the character to admit it, or to actually change their stupid ideas and ideals. They were being promoted because the people running the system wanted carefully cultivated and obedient psychopaths to believe and enforce their technocratic system. An employer once explained to me that he wanted employees who were smart enough to do the work, and he deliberately aimed to keep them busy with the details of the work, but not smart enough to figure out how he was making money. Not smart enough to see the big picture and go off on their own competing with his business. I think that was the general idea. They wanted skilled slaves, who would not think for themselves, and wouldn't see how dysfunctional the whole system was. Basically, they just wanted people to be robots, performing prescribed tasks. Even doctors and lawyers were just highly specialized robots. Politicians are robotic liars and cheaters, reading teleprompters, and not understanding what they say any better than parrots. The mid-wits often told me their philosophies right to my face: "logic was proven invalid." "There is no such thing as right or wrong." "Everyone has their own reality." "The world is over-populated and people need to die." "Everybody lies." "Everybody cheats." "You can't judge me." And they had a general attitude of superiority and spiritual and moral arrogance. It was a toxic mixture of very stupid and bad philosophies and it all came from the mouths of professionals like lawyers, doctors, and ranking college students and professors. It wasn't just that they were intelligent, but not intelligent enough - it was that they were being confused and brain washed by much more clever people, who ought to have been arrested and locked up. I longed for a referee in debates to tell them they were wrong, and to move the argument on to what to do about the people who were confusing and brain washing them. Because I was eager to get on with arresting the authorities.
Midwits were deliberately created and actively selected and promoted. It was a socially and economically suicidal policy. Clever people should have been promoted, but they wouldn't even allow IQ tests for employment. I don't know about Britain, but they would not hire people with high IQs to be cops. I think they discriminated heavily against intelligent people who saw through their act and talked about removing them. Certain professors always downgraded me for the purpose of outcome-based education. I was obviously smarter than everyone in most of my classes, so they said they had to grade me on another scale of my own. I saw the work of the other students and it was appalling. They were offended when I asked how they had graduated from high school, but their work would have flunked grade school. Professors just kept passing them because they were raking in a fortune from overpriced tuition and guaranteed student loans. (I had been warning other students against student loans since the eighties, saying they led to overpricing, and it would make them debt slaves. Now, of course it is an issue, as the government debates forgiving a trillion of dollars in student loans, which have become virtually unpayable. Such problems were obvious to anyone with any intelligence, but no one wanted to look at them. They just wanted the money for the college experience - like a sort of vacation in Wonderland, and a visit to the Mad Hatter's Tea party, which were the college debates. Real debates stopped a long time ago. Real debates would show the foolishness and lies of so many politicians and corporate leaders, even to the midwits.
A midwit typically doesn't form opinion on the basis of his own investigations so he cannot be easily shaken even by clear logical demonstration. He prefers to discover the acceptable belief handed down by the powerful and generate his own ex post facto reasoning to make it acceptable. But he will remain more sure of his belief than his reasoning, so you cannot easily move him. The best way to change his mind is to influence the opinion shapers.
This stats test is interesting - they must have known this and much harder stats in junior school, but for some reason they have forgotten this in adulthood.
This discussion would be impossible in Canada because we simply assume and take for granted that diplomas are education, and therefore congratulate ourselves on having the most educated populace and parliament in history. As for intelligence, it doesn’t exist; everyone is just as smart as everyone else, and has only to acquire diplomas and conform to orthodoxy to be both smart and educated.
As a midwit, I got the coin toss right. Unfortunately, I think most politicians are below midwit levels of IQ. They just need a high enough verbal IQ go acquire the necessary rhetorical skills.
I think it is a pre requisite to being a modern politician in the Anglosphere these days. I’m no mathematician myself but I think if a politician lacks accounting and finance abilities then they should be barred from politics entirely.
Another reason to consider is it being a product of any style of government in which anybody can enter the political class. Reason being, the will of the people overall will always hover around the average, and then taking competence into account, those who succeed will be above average by some deviation. The result is a country built around the average, most likely unintentionally. I don't even say this as a negative necessarily. I don't believe in perfect systems, and there are many benefits to living in a society for the average.
Only 25% of the members of the public getting it right, and British IQ is supposed to be quite good on the global scale. That is remarkably low. It should be obvious.
My country has plenty of powerful people who are well below midwit level. We have ostensibly intelligent and equally corrupt politicians too. At least the latter are competent enough to maintain a facade of altruism.
I think the idiocracy results in Pathocracy is a relatively lesser-known concept in political science and psychology, which refers to a system of government in which individuals with personality disorders, particularly those who exhibit psychopathic, narcissistic, and similar traits (i.e. the “evil of Cluster B“), hold significant power.
@tomrogers7110 true story my friend who's 7 yrs older than me had him as a substitute PE teacher at west point grey school and had the kids line up for red rover and he told them to "try and stop him" as he ran through them holding the ball boshing kids off with knees and elbows.....that's the prime Minister
The wording here is very important. Was the question possible to interpret as ”same result twice” which is indeed 50% since it doesn’t matter if the first toss was heads or tails or was it ”heads twice” with no ambiguity?
i havent watched the video yet but the answer is yes. it is inevitable in any system that does not prevent nepotism and cronyism; B people hire C people and C people hire D people because nobody likes to get shown up.
Kinda feel like that's just bound to happen with democracy eventually. Oftenly it's the society itself that doesn't know what's good for them. And generally people will pick candidates that are most relatable and in alignment with their own mediocrity.
I’m not surprised. I have it from a good source that Members of the House were unable to do the calculations required regarding the earnings and obligations of absent parents for the proposed Child Support Agency Bill
Neither Boris Johnson nor David Cameron are able to complete three sentences without using the word 'fantastic '. Sometimes they will it twice in two sentences. And if it Isn't fantastic, it will be brilliant, amazing or incredible. They use the vocabulary of 1960s pop culture.
“Amazin’!” - Brian Cox 😁 But yes, Bollox Johnson and Vapid Scameron are waste-of-space fakers who just so happen to have some facility at rote but that’s all, and are complete and utter schitz to boot.
I consider those two classic midwits of that class every sentence they put out made no sense. They were suppose to be intelligent have the best education.
Yeah, I preferred colossal and stupendous. It's advertising speak. Politics is an ad campaign for a quack medicine that will cure all you ills for a small price.
You should put more of those “smart” tiny hat [redacted] in charge, like we did in the States, and totally watch them NOT subvert your nation even further.
The average IQ stats out of their country puts the lie to the one statistic taken from a survey of some hundred private school elites that Benny likes to cite.
Would be more interesting to not look at MPs, but to look at those actually making decisions (there is an awful lot more to leadership and governance of a nation than voting in one of the two houses of parliament). Would be more interesting to see analysis on the abilities of cabinet, ministers, central government department non-executive directors, and senior civil servants. I dare say that even a SpAd who is in place for two years, will have a greater impact on the future of a nation than an individual who is shadow minister for a decade
