?

Log in

Debate
Open for discussion
Geniocracy 
30e-jan-2004 12:39 am
Geniocracy

“First of all, let us look at the political and economic aspects of life. What kind of people allows humanity to progress? The geniuses. Therefore your world must appreciate its geniuses and allow them to govern the Earth.

First of all, power was in the hands of brutes, who were superior to others because of their muscular strength. Next in power were the rich, who used their money to employ many ‘brutes’ in their service. Then came the politicians who ensnared the people of democratic countries with their own hopes –not to mention military men whose success has been based around the rational organization of brutality.

The only types of people you have never placed in power are the ones who help humanity to progress. Whether they discovered the wheel, gunpowder, the internal combustion engine, or the atom, the geniuses have always allowed less intelligent people in power to benefit from their inventions. Often such people have used peaceful inventions for murderous ends. All that must be changed.

For this to happen, you must abolish all your electoral and polling systems because in their present form they are completely unsuited to human development. Each person is a useful cell in this huge body we call humanity. The cell in your foot should not decide whether or not your hand should pick up a given object. It is the brain, which must decide, and if the object in question is good, the cell of your foot will benefit from it. It is not up to the foot to vote. Its job is simply to transport the body – including the brain – and it is not capable of judging if what the hand takes is good or not.

Votes only have a positive effect when there is an equivalence of knowledge and intellect. Copernicus was condemned by a majority of incompetent people because he was the only one at that time who had a sufficiently high level of comprehension. Although the Church – this is to say the majority – believed the Earth was the center of the universe, this trued out to be wrong. The earth really revolved around the sun and Copernicus – the minority - turned out to be right.

When the first cars were invented, if we had asked everyone to vote to establish whether cars should be allowed to exist or not, the majority, who knew nothing about cars and did not care, would have responded negatively and you would still be riding in a horse and cart. So, how can you change all that?

These days, you have psychologists who are capable of creating tests to evaluate the intelligence and aptitude of every individual. These tests should be applied systematically from infancy onward in order to define each individual’s orientation towards subjects studied.

When individuals reach a responsible age, their intellectual coefficient can be measured and included on their identity or voter’s card. Only those with an intellectual capacity of at least fifty per cent above the average should be eligible for a public post. To vote, individuals would need an intellectual coefficient of at least ten per cent above average. If such a system existed now, many of your present politicians would not hold the positions they do today.

This is a totally democratic system. There are many engineers, for example, who are of lower than average intelligence, but who have very good memories and have obtained several academic degrees because of this.

On the other hand, there are many laborers or farm workers who have no specialized education at all, but whose intelligence is fifty per cent above the average. What is totally unacceptable now is that the voice of someone whom you might vulgarly call “a cretin” is worth as much as that of a genius who has thought maturely about the way he or she is going to vote. In some small cities elections are won by the candidate who buys people the most drinks – not by the individuals whose policies are the most interesting.

Therefore right from the start, the right to vote should be reserved for those people whose brains are more suited to thinking and finding solutions to problems – that is to say an elite group of high intelligence. This does not necessarily mean those people who have done the most studying.

We are talking about placing the genius in power, and you may call that ‘Geniocracy’.”

The Message given by Extra-Terrestrials pp.85-87
Comments 
29e-jan-2004 10:29 am (UTC)
I think you're describing what the founding fathers had intended, in a unique way. Using a label such as genius will bring plenty of people here to insult you or the greater insult of ignoring you.

I do wish ignorant people wouldn't vote as often, but a declared genius may only be good at mathematics and have no perception of politics.

I, personally, liked how the founding fathers only allowed landowners to vote, for the main purpose, because they ran businesses and realized how the government (a big business) worked.
3e-fév-2004 10:37 am (UTC)
It's fortunate for mankind that your proposal has not become reality. First of all, you don't have to be an Einstein to be a leader. But you do have to be an Einstein (or a Fermi, Planck, Hawking, Keppler, Priestley, etc.) to lead the scientific community to new discoveries and ideas that will benefit mankind.

One of the hallmarks of great leadership is the recognition that one doesn't possess all the answers. That's what specialists, advisors, and committees are for. A leader must know how to assemble the greatest minds as his own mastermind group to assist him in the intelligent leadership of his country. George Bush is a prime example of a leader who ignores the advice and counsel of those whose job it is to provide him with the wealth of information and expertise that he could never possess by himself. In that sense, he is a flawed leader. To summarize that thought, a leader must be good at leadership, not at knowing all the answers himself.

The second flaw in your theory is the one that would require a certain IQ level in order to qualify to vote. This is reminiscent of Hitler's vision of a "master race" (which failed miserably). If only those with high IQ's could vote, whose interests do you think would be represented by the elected government? Certainly not those with the lower IQs. Is the hidden message of your plan something along the lines of exterminating those in the lower IQ brackets? Sort of sounds like that would be the next logical step.

Oh, and if psychologists were put in charge of doing the evaluating of each individual's IQ, I wonder whose interests those tests would serve? Mmmhmmm. We might soon end up with a nation of wealthy, privileged, untouchable pschologists.

No, my friend, you need to go back to the drawing board. All segments of society must be represented by our government. Intelligence does not guarantee wisdom, and often wisdom is possessed in greatest measure by the simpler folks. I think our system is at least in the right ball park.
15e-fév-2004 09:00 pm (UTC) - Holy Ford, pass the soma, Dude!
Didn't care for an adaptation of a line from the The Tempest? That's cool. Didn't feel like responding to the fact it was clear reference to Brave New World ? Fine. Disagree about the clear criticism that novel, and much of Western political theory since the 18th century, levels at your hypothesis? I'm willing to debate that any day of the week. Deleting my post because you find its point of view unpleasant or bothersome will just start me quoting Orwell. And you don't want me quoting Orwell.
This page was loaded fév 25e 2017, 1:35 pm GMT.