In your ideal world, do more intelligent people wield more political influence? Or is political power dispersed more equally among everyone?

[Anonymous]

More intelligent people should have more political influence

Political power should be equally dispersed!

[patois]

Politicians in general are of moderate to low intelligence. They are agents of people that direct them. They aren't the leaders... By default, they need to be easily influenced and controlled. This means they are impulsive, they have obvious moral shortcomings, and they are about as dumb as a box of rocks. They are easily controlled with money, vice, and more often blackmail... If they were smart, they wouldn't get stuck in the spider's web...

Should people of higher IQ pursue leadership positions? I guess that all depends on their aspirations. While I agree, intelligence can lend itself well to good decision making, with the amount of corruption that is nested in current political systems, it would be hard to argue in favor of subjecting yourself to that lifestyle. You are, after all just one person and political systems are dependent on the collective. Thus if you go against the corruption, they will fight to maintain the status quo. You will be significantly outnumbered if you come without an army.

[Kaneki05]

I am a firm thinker of democracy, I think if 50 votes come in and it's 30/20 the 30 win no matter whom they are.
Mostly the average person isn't informed or smart so you could say that's going to led to us doing the wrong thing. Shrugs let it be what it is.
Society is not like this though sadly, you think your voting but you aren't really. Your voting based on manipulation from news, speeches and media not from facts, and from whom is even placed in front of you. Many people want be a leader but how many do you see when it comes to voting?

So in my ideal world voting would be very different anyway. My ideal world would also be much smaller. Society's don't need to be as big as they are. You think millions of people voting on one cause is a good idea? No.

[sage2021]

Unfortunately there are a lot of people that aren't interested and can't comprehend seeing bad politicians like the president and vote for them.
They don't take the time to find out what is really happening in America and all of the injustice that is taking place.

Also, people listen to what social media says, which is a pack of lies! Even TV programs like The View say Trump is a dictator and if you're not a follower of his, you would believe that lie. But because it's on a TV program they believe it must be true. Then they say to themselves "I don't want no dictator for president, I'm voting for the other guy, when the other guy is really the liar, untrustworthy, a destroyer, and to be honest he's stupid!
Trump is the good guy no matter what else you've heard. He will get America 🇺🇸 back on her feet again and we will be able to afford things like groceries again.
Do it right this time. Please! Because everyone got screwed with who is in office now.

[DishLady]

You mean like a “philosopher king” situation or a “manifesto” situation? Both historically have led to very odd, destructive times. Leaders should be balanced — the crowd with book smarts and hands-on experience of the world, a genuine love for their people and for humanity. It shouldn’t go to power-mongering fools or to overly intellectual folks trapped in their own little bubble.

[Asker]

Not necessarily a philosopher-king. What is your vote?

[DishLady]

I couldn’t click to see the options! The app is glitching.

[NaultD]

Or should we hold intelligent people accountable to people needs politically?

That's the point of elections. We Don't want any dumb fuck elected or ass hat smart-ass without expectations or responsibility.

Elected official of public service is a job worth a career and retirement. There wage could be a percentage of the average x10. We do need smart people who also respect and are our representative of any given area. So a pension after retirement with no ability to get a job after office. That is only way for the people of the people going into political careers

[jennifer_bloom]

I don't believe influence is determined by intelligence, I believe it's determined by cultural relevance and social knowledge.

I asked somebody why Obama won when he never shows off how smart he is and pretends to be average intelligence in public and my friend said he won because people can relate to him.

[handsomelad70]

I'd say the former, who still as fallible humans, can be veval, but should be more able to try to solve the most pressing issues. (We've had rooghly two generations of C students attempting to run things, with predictable results. Imagine someone with my good looks and 160+ IQ as U. S. President?)

[Bagerl]

People are smart in different ways, but even if someone was dumb in every single possible way, they still have to live under the same policies. They should get a say too.

[b_lova]

Sadly in the real world politics is marketing. So politics is more manipulation than intelligence.

[Dargil]

More intelligent people wield more political influence by donating money to campaigns. That should be regulated far more than it its. There is too much corporate donations.

[strateguy632]

need equal or else some will say all maga are morons... to prevent voting which they do write!

[FreyaRed]

Being successful politician means being ruthless and amoral, intelligence and empathy aren't beneficial for this task.

[RavVid]

I think intelligent people do better in politics as they will generally be quicker in response.

[exitseven]

It shoudl be distributed evenly. Who gets to say what intelligence is?

[DrPepper12]

As much as I do not have a very high opinion of half of USA Americans I respect their human rights. Power for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Intelligence is no guarantee you will wield power responsibly

[Asker]

Definitely true. But does it generally mean you will yield power more responsibly than a less intelligent person?

[OtterMan68]

If we had more intelligent voters, we'd not have to choose between Trump and Biden.

[Anonymous]

Not Joe Biden