Brains versus Brawn
How should we choose our leaders?
With the dawn of the 20th century and more in particular the age of post World War II Western society, something unique happened in global politics. War became something that wasn’t just a fact of life. Anyone who knows biblical and Roman history knows that wars were common. Kings and Sultans would war for territory and the cycle would repeat. This all stopped with the atomic age. Now war is not “just” a common exercise. It is an aspect of mutual assured destruction and a caveat for any military action.
This meant that battlefield heroism wasn’t particularly required to become a leader. In the sixties this was called in popular culture the “age of Aquarius”. An age where the smartest ruled as civilians and where military service wasn’t required particularly in the United States to find a seat of leadership. The Vietnam War was unpopular and many dreamed of a post war society.
Unfortunately there are some issues with this. The fact that those who serve and those who work hardest are no longer seen as the pentacle of society. We’ve had presidents that have never served in the military. The same military where the President is commander in chief. There is also no draft. The security of the United States is coordinated by a select group of volunteers.
The problem with this is that we now live in the age of terrorism and renewed warfare. The wars fought, however you feel about their validity, is by a small amount of volunteers and not a common burden. This has some advantages. For one those who serve are usually better soldiers than what would come from a lottery system. Those volunteers also probably want to serve their country and are therefore motivated to serve.
However, there is one large issue with this. Soldiers return home with maybe some medals. There are industries which cater to veterans but overall the requirements for the contemporary labor market don’t necessarily involve something like sonar on a submarine or operating a drone. The economy works largely out of IT technology and the office. These are jobs that require degrees and scholarship. Therefore, those who have returned from battle often aren’t given anything but a thank you. Some veterans even end up homeless.
This is an improvement over the Vietnam experience for veterans. For those who served in the jungles of East Asia, there was a huge bias against them by some segments of society. Also, the notion that there was truly a fair system of choosing draftees is somewhat erroneous given the burden usually fell on those who didn’t have the means to get out of the draft. This is the turning point away from a military led society that came out of World War II if not much earlier in America. Serving was no longer admirable by many of the young during those years.
There are still effects of this to this day. There is a strong resistance to authority and the split between authorities and those who no longer trust them. This is evident among many Trump supporters who are often seemingly on the side of hard work as the best method of choosing leadership. Trump often attends sporting events to show his bona fides with this philosophy of hard work. The danger is also real when it comes to the deeper politics.
Many MAGA supporters are following suit with the leftist disillusionment with authority. For those in positions that often require a heavy work load this is a dangerous mixture. In the era of Reagan and patriotism, many Republicans were patriotic. Now those same voters are becoming extremely disillusioned by American leadership and see Trump as a savior. This is a volatile mix. Now the “elites” are seen as the “intelligenca” that are destroying society in some segments of the far right. This is the new frontier that American politics is resting on in our current election cycle.
Having described the larger politics of this split on a macro level with the politics of war in larger American society, we now have a system in education that follows these lines. Hard work is seen as a good example. It is also seen as unnecessary for the reasons listed above among other reasons for work in coveted fields. Now we live in an age of intelligence outstripping work load in most of the coveted positions of hierarchy.
There is a larger question here as well. There is a split early on in modern American schooling currently is where you have basically two options. You can either be a sports star or a scholar. In other words, there are jocks and nerds. The separation in the life paths of many young people starts at this point. What you choose to study or as a life path begins after this. If you are lucky enough to get into college, your choice of degree also depends on these same factors.
The ultimate question from this nuance is that many paths are only available for those who can pass a test that judges natural intelligence. There is really no prep for a law degree or a graduate degree for the most part. The test is an IQ test where you are expected to use logic. This has its advantages. There is a long history of proven science that those who can perform on these tests better make better lawyers, experts, ect. Unfortunately there is another side to this.
As said before there is a deference from the military with this epoch of intelligence requirements. In general, it also leaves behind those who don’t school well or have less inclination to use logic. Usually, these individuals are also hard workers. There are many middle class individuals who work two jobs and can’t seem to get ahead. Life can be a difficult struggle that is dimmed down upon by the “intelligent” who work less in the common imagination and seem to have better living standards.
Therefore you have a dichotomy. There is a fact that for the demands of a workforce the ruling class often chooses those best fit for a job. In a knowledge economy that is usually the most intelligent. Is this fair? Probably not. Those who work the hardest to earn something must also be considered. Hard work for a chosen field is also more equitable because it seems to be a more just system. Just because you have a certain genetic makeup doesn’t seem fair to judge whether someone should lead. Leadership should be an opportunity for everyone.
As an exercise in making this the true measure of success, let’s suppose hard work is the prerequisite for all leadership as a universal law as a thought experiment. Therefore, imagine that every place in society was a product of hard work. What would that do in society universally? Everyone would be a workaholic. This would probably not be a welcome outcome. Life should be a mix of work and pleasure. The idea that we all needed to work at the highest level across society is therefore somewhat untenable.
The same could probably also be said of making intelligence the most appropriate factor across all of society. If I were to go into battle or needed an emergency medic, I would probably not care what Socrates thought as a prerequisite to their aid. Instead, you would probably want someone who worked hard or had a certain acumen to place in those vital services. This is the other end. Neither intelligence nor hard work can become a universal law given different requirements.
Universality is a trap when it comes to this debate. Certain fields each have their own requirements. An engineer should probably have a good background in physics. A college professor should be an expert in their field. In other words, you need to find who is the best person for each job. Requirements are requirements and some people have them and some people don’t. That is probably the best answer.
The attainment of success in the end is also somewhat of a misnomer in life goals. To put it mildly, the idea that success is the only true measure of life is a proposition that remains an American value and virtue. It also ignores the fact that joy and happiness can be found in things other than success and a career. The fact that you never got your shot because you weren’t smart enough or good enough at sports will eat away a person’s humanity if not understood to make other measures of worth in one’s life.
There is more than being on top that matters in life. Therefore in my opinion the debate could also be seen as a aspect that shouldn’t overwhelm the human soul. The Nietzsche notion of the only human endeavor that is of value is the seeking of power shouldn’t consume one’s life. This is probably falling to the wayside when we all talk about success and what it takes to get there. There are better ways of living other than regrets and placement. Whether smart, hard working, or average, we all have worth in the end. That is always the most important lesson life will usually teach you.