# Would a Country Work Better if Only Intellectuals Participated in Government? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 6, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331 "2015-03-06T02:17:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/141 "2015-03-09T22:00:35Z")
> [@Contemporary\_Logic](#): > > ``` > noun: meritocracy > government or the holding of power by people selected on the **basis of their ability.** > > ``` You have yet to demonstrate that anything about about the folks you deemed worthy gives them the ability to govern well. You’ve hypothesized that they would, but it’s based on pretty poor evidence and has ignored all the counter examples where an elite has governed to their own benefit. IMO, governing well isn’t just about intelligence or rationality. If you believe that it is the only factor that matters, you don’t understand people very well, and coincidentally you’d make an awful leader. I think that would hold true for the people you’ve singled out as well. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/142 "2015-03-09T22:18:08Z")
> [@Contemporary\_Logic](#): > > Search Results > > ``` > mer·i·toc·ra·cy > ˌmerəˈtäkrəsē/ > noun > noun: meritocracy > government or the holding of power by people selected on the **basis of their ability.** > > ``` > > [meritocracy - Google Search](https://www.google.com/search?q=meritocracy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=fs&trackid=sp-006&gws_rd=ssl)] Intellectualism is an “ability”? ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/143 "2015-03-09T22:37:10Z")
> [@Grim\_Render](#): > > Your idea seems based on some faulty assumptions: > > One, that the point of democracy is to make good decisions. That was the purpose of my idea. I never assumed that was the intended purpose of a democracy. I do think utilitarianism **should** be the purpose of any government, however, and I rate them according to that standard. > [@](#): > > Two, that making good decisions would lead to the meeting utilitarian goals better than keeping people enfranchised and engaged in the governing of society. I’m fairly sure experience shows that societies with enfranchised populations meet utilitarian goals far better than societies governed by an elite. They do, but they are not historical precedents to my idea. I’m not arguing for a small, unrepresentative elite. > [@](#): > > Three, that the people you describe make better decisions. I am dubious, I remember too many wild-eyed young men, the nations brightest youth, explaining how Albania was the light of the world and the nation everyone should emulate. Or Pol Pot. Is that the norm? What types of people tend to perform better in abstract reasoning (whether it be academia or otherwise). Government and world issues require mostly abstract reasoning to assess. > [@](#): > > The people you are describing as better able to make decisions are the ones more like sociopaths. Just saying. I have read that rational personalities (according to MBTI) do tend to test higher on the sociopathic scale. I could try and find a link if you want it, but it’s conceding your point. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Logical reasoning is superior when it is unemotional and unempathetic. This is why we have fallacies like appealing to emotion. The only problem is when emotion has little effect on your values or goals. This is what happens when a sociopathic dictator takes over; He cares little else above his own power. There is a difference between leaning a little harder towards sociopathy than others, and being a complete sociopath. ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/144 "2015-03-09T22:40:52Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Intellectualism is an “ability”? intellectual adjective in·tel·lec·tu·al \ˌin-tə-ˈlek-chə-wəl, -chəl, -shwəl, -chü(-ə)l\ : of or relating to the **ability** to think in a logical way > **[Definition of INTELLECTUAL](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intellectual)** > > of or relating to the intellect or its use; developed or chiefly guided by the intellect rather than by emotion or experience : rational; requiring use of the intellect… See the full definition ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/145 "2015-03-09T22:45:54Z")
> [@Contemporary\_Logic](#): > > intellectual > adjective in·tel·lec·tu·al \ˌin-tə-ˈlek-chə-wəl, -chəl, -shwəl, -chü(-ə)l\ > > : of or relating to the **ability** to think in a logical way Yes, we all know how dictionaries work. This is a perfect example of how logical thinking doesn’t help in all circumstances. 🙂 Now explain to us why the group of people who think in a logical way would govern any better than the people who win elections? Don’t hand wave and dismiss all the concerns people have raised in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/146 "2015-03-09T23:20:33Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Now explain to us why the group of people who think in a logical way would govern any better than the people who win elections? Maybe you can explain to us why people like Ted Cruz, Joni Ernst, and James Inhofe are in Congress instead of in a mental hospital. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2015, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/147 "2015-03-09T23:27:02Z")
> [@Ruby\_Slippers](#): > > . . . would you expect the disenfranchised to continue to pay taxes . . . ? The OP answer seems to be that there could be a cultural change so that the non-intellectuals would allow themselves to be led by the elite. But human nature isn’t infinitely malleable. So in a nation ruled by an elite that understands history, the leadership is not going to be dumb enough to make the unfairness so obvious. This is why no good examples can be found of the OP scheme. P.S. Contemporary Logic might want to study Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew, a good example of a country run by a meritocracy. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/148 "2015-03-10T00:36:15Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Yes, we all know how dictionaries work. This is a perfect example of how logical thinking doesn’t help in all circumstances. 🙂 > > Now explain to us why the group of people who think in a logical way would govern any better than the people who win elections? Don’t hand wave and dismiss all the concerns people have raised in this thread. I can give a good example of why intellect is not the only ability a good leader needs. I used to have a supervisor who worked for me. He was a pretty smart and he had a really good knowledge of our policies. But he had almost no leadership ability. He regularly had difficulties getting people to do what he told them. And his real problem was that he didn’t see this as a problem. His attitude was that he had told people what they were supposed to do. If they then failed to do it, it was on them and not him. I told him he was wrong. He was a supervisor. His job was not only to know what should be done but to see that it was done. You don’t get any points for having the right answer; you only get points for the final results. (And I’m aware of the irony of the situation. My inability to straighten this guy out was my failure as his supervisor.) So to bring it back on topic, it’s not enough to have a political leadership full of people who have the right answers. You also need people who will get things done. And oftentimes, logic and reason have nothing to do with getting something done. ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/149 "2015-03-10T01:21:49Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > You have yet to demonstrate that anything about about the folks you deemed worthy gives them the ability to govern well. You’ve hypothesized that they would, but it’s based on pretty poor evidence and has ignored all the counter examples where an elite has governed to their own benefit. I’ve explained how their decisions are likely to produce better outcomes based on their thinking preferences, and the abstract nature of government. I agree it has been based on poor evidence. There is no historical precedence that can serve as a comparison for my idea that has been brought to my attention. > [@](#): > > IMO, governing well isn’t just about intelligence or rationality. If you believe that it is the only factor that matters, you don’t understand people very well, and coincidentally you’d make an awful leader. I think that would hold true for the people you’ve singled out as well. This is a strawman and a non-sequitur. I never said, or implied, that leadership was only about those two factors, and my own leadership abilities have nothing to do with the argument. ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/150 "2015-03-10T01:38:58Z")
> [@Ruby\_Slippers](#): > > I totally agree with this. Just to take the first two on Boyo Jim’s list, would you expect the disenfranchised to continue to pay taxes or sit on juries? And both of those questions include many levels. We have federal income taxes as well as state and municipal taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and other taxes; we also have federal juries, state juries, local juries, both grand juries and trial juries. Do you expect people to be willing to continue to shoulder these burdens in support of a government in which they have no voice? Sure, if they reaped the benefits of a more utilitarian society; I would expect them to pay taxes. The problem is their lack of consent in the system in the first place due to their preconceived notions of freedom and democracy, and reasonable distrust in an untried system. That’s what makes the idea apparently unfeasible. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/151 "2015-03-10T01:47:21Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Maybe you can explain to us why people like Ted Cruz, Joni Ernst, and James Inhofe are in Congress instead of in a mental hospital. 😛 Budget cuts? Anyway, if the OP thinks better governance is attainable by only letting smart people vote, the solution isn’t to disenfranchise dumb people, it’s to improve education to turn dumb people into smart people. First thing, dump all that creationist bullshit. In fact, dump religion altogether. This will probably have a similar effect to reducing the amount of lead in the environment. ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/152 "2015-03-10T01:59:21Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I can give a good example of why intellect is not the only ability a good leader needs. > > I used to have a supervisor who worked for me. He was a pretty smart and he had a really good knowledge of our policies. But he had almost no leadership ability. He regularly had difficulties getting people to do what he told them. > > And his real problem was that he didn’t see this as a problem. His attitude was that he had told people what they were supposed to do. If they then failed to do it, it was on them and not him. > > I told him he was wrong. He was a supervisor. His job was not only to know what should be done but to see that it was done. You don’t get any points for having the right answer; you only get points for the final results. (And I’m aware of the irony of the situation. My inability to straighten this guy out was my failure as his supervisor.) > > So to bring it back on topic, it’s not enough to have a political leadership full of people who have the right answers. You also need people who will get things done. And oftentimes, logic and reason have nothing to do with getting something done. There are rational minds who make good leaders, and rational minds who make bad leaders, but a rational leader is always better than an irrational leader. The idea is that the leaders will make it to the top and get elected; Just like they do now, and I can absolutely promise you the system wouldn’t be perfect. ---
**Author:** ![Contemporary\_Logic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b38774/32.png) [@Contemporary\_Logic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contemporary_Logic)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/153 "2015-03-10T02:08:16Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Budget cuts? > > Anyway, if the OP thinks better governance is attainable by only letting smart people vote, the solution isn’t to disenfranchise dumb people, it’s to improve education to turn dumb people into smart people. > > First thing, dump all that creationist bullshit. In fact, dump religion altogether. This will probably have a similar effect to reducing the amount of lead in the environment. And I thought my idea was impossible. Also, “smart people” isn’t exactly what I’m arguing for. Education could definitely use some improving, though. Our school system in America is dreadful. Our drop-out rate is improving, though. > **[Fast Facts: Dropout rates (16)](https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16)** > > The NCES Fast Facts Tool provides quick answers to many education questions (National Center for Education Statistics). Get answers on Early Childhood Education, Elementary and Secondary Education and Higher Education here. > **[U.S. high school dropout rate reaches record low, driven by improvements...](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2014/10/02/u-s-high-school-dropout-rate-reaches-record-low-driven-by-improvements-among-hispanics-blacks/)** > > Just 7% of the nation's 18-to-24 year olds had dropped out of high school in 2013, continuing a steady decline in the nation's dropout rate since 2000, when 12% of youth were dropouts. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/154 "2015-03-10T02:36:50Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > … the solution isn’t to disenfranchise dumb people, it’s to improve education to turn dumb people into smart people … I agree. But I think it’s important that “education” be interpreted in a very broad sense that means more than just formal schooling. Political discourse and the general flow of information informing popular views on major issues have been deeply poisoned by an extreme bias manufactured by those who control the messages. If Exxon want to drill on certain lands regardless of environmental consequences, or BP wants to drill offshore without adequate safeguards, or the coal industry wants to promote more coal burning for power plants, or someone else wants to do more fracking, and a small group of scientists think these are all very, very bad ideas, whose message is the public overwhelmingly going to hear? Or how about tax policy? Never mind recent tax cuts for the rich – top executive salaries have skyrocketed to the moon in the many decades since maximum marginal tax rates were drastically cut. Is there anything to show for it in terms of productivity? The middle class is hurting more than ever, yet enough of the middle class thinks all these things are terrific that they keep electing lunatics who espouse all those policies. Why is that? The meritocracy thing is an interesting academic discussion, though. It just ain’t gonna happen. Public education – in the sense of the public being not just smarter but more generally informed – is what has to happen. Then hopefully they’ll elect politicians who have more than two brain cells to rub together and who demonstrate at least some consideration for the public interest instead of being total corporate sellouts. ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/155 "2015-03-10T03:19:49Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You could come up with some sort of fig leaf like equating money with free speech, and thereby maximize the influence of the wealthy - which will naturally include a greater proportion of the intelligentsia. If there were ever a perfect link between screen name and post . . . ---
**Author:** ![Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Call_Me.Tim)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/156 "2015-03-10T03:37:02Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > You could come up with some sort of fig leaf like equating money with free speech, and thereby maximize the influence of the wealthy - which will naturally include a greater proportion of the intelligentsia. Nah, we can do better. Once it becomes legal to [prove how you voted in an election](http://wgbhnews.org/post/ballot-selfies-clash-sanctity-secret-polling) it will become possible to literally buy and sell individual votes. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/157 "2015-03-10T09:22:48Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > You appear to be making the perplexing argument that bad decisions meet utilitarian goals better than good decisions. No…I am advancing the hypothesis that the cumulative effects of everyone having a stake in society and its decisions outstrip the effects of the difference between good and less good decisions. I think history in general supports this. > [@wolfpup](#): > > Is it your belief that academics and intellectuals were all supporters of Pol Pot? Many were. That anecdote is intended to illustrate that intelligence and common sense is not the same thing, and they are not necessarily linked. > [@Contemporary\_Logic](#): > > That was the purpose of my idea. I never assumed that was the intended purpose of a democracy. I do think utilitarianism **should** be the purpose of any government, however, and I rate them according to that standard. My point is that I think letting everyone have a say in matters that affect, sometimes very heavily affect, their lives has cumulative effects through the entire society that seems to yield far more utilitarian results than changes in the people at the top. > [@Contemporary\_Logic](#): > > I have read that rational personalities (according to MBTI) do tend to test higher on the sociopathic scale. I could try and find a link if you want it, but it’s conceding your point. > > This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Logical reasoning is superior when it is unemotional and unempathetic. This is why we have fallacies like appealing to emotion. The only problem is when emotion has little effect on your values or goals. This is what happens when a sociopathic dictator takes over; He cares little else above his own power. > > There is a difference between leaning a little harder towards sociopathy than others, and being a complete sociopath. Indeed. I was very careful to say “more like” a sociopath, than someone sociopathic 😃 When dealing with large numbers though, you’d probably be increasing the number of actual sociopaths in government. Although I’ve read a sociopath argue that being the leaders and the ones who makes the hard, calculated decisions is the sociopaths role in society. However, intelligence does include the ability to override what seems intuitive conclusions on reflection. This ability however, comes with a bug: It also lets one short-circuit common sense when the reasoning is erroneous. Emotional thinking does provide a certain compassionate auxiliary circuit-breaker on these things. Meaning that if the intellectual reasoning does go wrong, it could go far more wrong than the more emphatic reasoning, which comes with more safeties. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/158 "2015-03-10T11:30:35Z")
> [@Contemporary\_Logic](#): > > The idea is that the leaders will make it to the top and get elected; Just like they do now, and I can absolutely promise you the system wouldn’t be perfect. So are you arguing that we should restrict the people who can run for office or the people who can vote? It’s not clear that you’re making a distinction. Leaders who make it to the top, whether you’re dealing with the intelligentsia or the hoi polloi, are going to be people who can appeal to emotion. Every voting base can be motivated by emotion no matter how rational they appear on the surface. I don’t believe it will be possible to eliminate that from the equation, and all you will have done is replace one set of invested citizens with a much smaller, much less diverse one. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/159 "2015-03-10T11:53:47Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > How would this be different than what is already happening? Because with an aristocracy, there’s no accountability (except to other aristocrats, e.g. the Cultural Revolution or various civil wars between illiberal factions). That’s a recipe for kleptocracy - not lobbying, not Super PACs, not top tax rates being lower than you’d prefer, but straight-up Ferdinand Marcos-style looting of a country. > [@wolfpup](#): > > It might indeed be different – and better – because in the present situation that small elite is entirely self-serving and doesn’t even pretend to be a meritocracy – they are a self-selected oligarchy that controls the political process because, well, because they can. I’m looking around, and I’m seeing government services that function, business-unfriendly [reform](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_CARD_Act) [laws](http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/bcreg/20091112a.htm) being passed, and Congressional seats changing hands. Sure, big business has a disproportionate influence on our system, but they aren’t running things…no one is, frankly. > [@wolfpup](#): > > Of course the _hoi polloi_ are secure in the belief that they make all the decisions democratically based on facts – facts which are helpfully and reassuringly provided by the Koch brothers, Exxon Mobil and the entire industrial sector, and Fox News. At least a hypothetical architected meritocracy really could be merit-based, and could have appropriate accountability and checks and balances. What accountability could there be, when no one else is permitted to participate in government? Other than being set upon by angry mobs of revolutionaries, I suppose, which is a sort of accountability. > [@wolfpup](#): > > Who is the oligarchy accountable to when their puppets screw up like GWB did so spectacularly, or when a Republican Congress with consummate lunatics like Ted Cruz, Joni Ernst, or James Inhofe are doing so even as we speak? How the f\*ck do people like this manage to get even _ **one** _ vote, let alone win an election? Is this “the wisdom of the common people” at work? “The oligarchy” didn’t vote those gents into power, so they have nothing to be accountable for. As for how they get votes, I don’t know what to tell you, other than talk more with people who hold right-wing views and try to understand where they’re coming from. For the most part, they just have a different value system than you, they aren’t morons and they aren’t lunatics. ---
**Author:** ![OffByOne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/45deac/32.png) [@OffByOne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OffByOne)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2015, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331/160 "2015-03-10T13:10:25Z")
I’ve met some unintelligent intellectuals. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/would-a-country-work-better-if-only-intellectuals-participated-in-government/714331.md?page=9)