Rule by the Best and the Brightest

George Will wrote a thought-provoking column a few months back on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Halberstam book "The Best and the Brightest". Will spends the whole column, up until the last paragraph, outlining the problems with academics trying to govern, which was the problem that got us into the quagmire of Vietnam. Some statements: "academia is an unsatisfactory incubator of statesmen", and "the perils of academic intelligence unleavened by wisdom acquired in the wider world", and "academic careers can make people susceptible to self-deception because they have been socialized in a world of theory in which their ideas have no consequences". But then comes his last paragraph, ending with "the best and the brightest can be tiresome, but the alternative even more so". Much food for thought here. I just finished a new biography of Andrew Jackson entitled "The First Populist", and his story certainly illustrates the dangers of the alternative to rule by the best and the brightest, which is a mindless populism fueled by a strong, charismatic leader. My son-in-law says that we have a kakistocracy, which is rule by the least competent. I can't argue with him.