They were NEVER smarter. At most at one time they had more leisure time and access to books and tutors when reading and books were rare. That made them more educated, and they want to go back to that desperately.
they don’t want to be more educated than they already are, they want to be more educated than us. they’re doing it by destroying the public school system, keeping tertiary education prohibitively expensive, eroding trust in experts through anti-intellectualism, and promoting the spread of misinformation
Exactly. They want to be perceived as smarter (basically look down on the unwashed masses.) They don’t want to do the work to be more educated. Hence the hurdles they can put in front of the poors while they get to pay for fastpass to skip the line directly into the ivy leagues.
Have you read the “analysis” on the 2024 election?
I think that “analyst” is just fancy talk for their relatives who dont have another job when its not an actual scientific field cause I have worked with real analysts.
Sure they are more literate but also the way they balk at expanding their knowledge makes me think they aren’t reading much worth it.
They have access to money and trial and error with more room to make more errors than the average person.
Remember during the French Revolution where, when told that her people were starving because they didn’t have any bread, Marie Antoinette wondered why they don’t just eat cake? Rich people have always been idiots who believe they’re smart. They live simple lives due to the luxury they enjoy, and wonder why poor people without such luxuries think life is so complicated.
On the one hand, I’m convinced Marie Antoinette didn’t say or think like that.
On the other hand, I think there’s a good case to make that if her brother had come to Versailles and explained to Louis XVI how to fuck his sister four or five years before he actually did, the French Revolution wouldn’t have happened.
The short version of this story as I, an American nearing the bottom of his third Mint Julep of the evening, understands it, is the French–of all people–came up with a king that didn’t know how to use his penis. Letters from nobles at the time explain how he would stick it in, soak without moving for two minutes or so, and then “bid goodnight.” I mean, to be fair, they were like 15 on their wedding day. So Marie Antoinette’s life consisted of hanging around Versailles, a palace designed specifically to be an expensive place to hang around. She basically partied the French economy empty, like any teenage girl in her shoes would have. Eventually her brother, Joseph II, visited Versailles and apparently had to awkwardly explain to the young king what orgasms are, and eight months later Marie was pregnant with her first child. She significantly toned down the lavish lifestyle by then, but not after spending the country into an actual crisis.
It is my understanding that, later in life, Marie would show some frugality, doing away with expensive gifts for her children during famines and such. This happened when she was an adult, I think I must point out. Again, I am an American and thus indoctrinated against the very idea of royalty, but a flaw in absolute monarchy is that absolute power over foreign and domestic policy may land in the hands of a teenager who can’t figure out his crotch by himself, and the only thing standing between the nation and an empty treasury is one very specific teen pregnancy.
not to defend french royalty, but she didnt say that, im certain she wouldnt have thought it either.
to think the rich are unknowingly oppressing their people is a stupid idea, they know where their cake comes from, and they want it because you can’t have it.
to think the rich are unknowingly oppressing their people is a stupid idea, they know where their cake comes from, and they want it because you can’t have it.
I don’t think it’s that far fetched to think that some of the people back then, who were born into aristocracy and have been separated from regular folks their entire lives, might not know that.
Yeah, at least like their grandparents had interesting and clever schemes about money that made you feel like they thought it through even if they were largely incapable of anything else.
Currently it feels difficult to assume they think about anything.
You’ve bought the image they’re selling. If you think they’re idiots, it just gives them another mechanism to manipulate you.
I’m no fan of Bush Jr, but go watch some of his speeches.
Sometimes he says “nuclear”, sometimes he says “nuke-u-lar”.
That’s someone putting on an act. No one says it both ways.
Go watch any politician’s speeches, look for the subtle variations in their behaviours.
They’re not morons, they’re Machiavellian. Appearing to be a moron is just another tool in the box.
(That said, some genuinely are morons, but I’m not dismissing any one of them so lightly - even morons can be Machiavellian).
And in the end, all politics is about manipulation (or said more positively, inducing groups of people toward a shared goal). And politics exists in every single group of humans, no matter how small.
I mean…
You know…
Like for a bit…
They were NEVER smarter. At most at one time they had more leisure time and access to books and tutors when reading and books were rare. That made them more educated, and they want to go back to that desperately.
I dont think much of our ruling class wants to go back to reading, looking at the way they… are.
they don’t want to be more educated than they already are, they want to be more educated than us. they’re doing it by destroying the public school system, keeping tertiary education prohibitively expensive, eroding trust in experts through anti-intellectualism, and promoting the spread of misinformation
Exactly. They want to be perceived as smarter (basically look down on the unwashed masses.) They don’t want to do the work to be more educated. Hence the hurdles they can put in front of the poors while they get to pay for fastpass to skip the line directly into the ivy leagues.
They read, a lot more than you probably realize, and probably a lot more than the average person.
They also have access to teams of analysts.
Have you read the “analysis” on the 2024 election?
I think that “analyst” is just fancy talk for their relatives who dont have another job when its not an actual scientific field cause I have worked with real analysts.
Sure they are more literate but also the way they balk at expanding their knowledge makes me think they aren’t reading much worth it.
They have access to money and trial and error with more room to make more errors than the average person.
Remember during the French Revolution where, when told that her people were starving because they didn’t have any bread, Marie Antoinette wondered why they don’t just eat cake? Rich people have always been idiots who believe they’re smart. They live simple lives due to the luxury they enjoy, and wonder why poor people without such luxuries think life is so complicated.
On the one hand, I’m convinced Marie Antoinette didn’t say or think like that.
On the other hand, I think there’s a good case to make that if her brother had come to Versailles and explained to Louis XVI how to fuck his sister four or five years before he actually did, the French Revolution wouldn’t have happened.
The short version of this story as I, an American nearing the bottom of his third Mint Julep of the evening, understands it, is the French–of all people–came up with a king that didn’t know how to use his penis. Letters from nobles at the time explain how he would stick it in, soak without moving for two minutes or so, and then “bid goodnight.” I mean, to be fair, they were like 15 on their wedding day. So Marie Antoinette’s life consisted of hanging around Versailles, a palace designed specifically to be an expensive place to hang around. She basically partied the French economy empty, like any teenage girl in her shoes would have. Eventually her brother, Joseph II, visited Versailles and apparently had to awkwardly explain to the young king what orgasms are, and eight months later Marie was pregnant with her first child. She significantly toned down the lavish lifestyle by then, but not after spending the country into an actual crisis.
It is my understanding that, later in life, Marie would show some frugality, doing away with expensive gifts for her children during famines and such. This happened when she was an adult, I think I must point out. Again, I am an American and thus indoctrinated against the very idea of royalty, but a flaw in absolute monarchy is that absolute power over foreign and domestic policy may land in the hands of a teenager who can’t figure out his crotch by himself, and the only thing standing between the nation and an empty treasury is one very specific teen pregnancy.
This story should be in the first chapter of every sex ed book. Why is sex ed important? Lack of sex ed literally ended a thousand year monarchy.
not to defend french royalty, but she didnt say that, im certain she wouldnt have thought it either.
to think the rich are unknowingly oppressing their people is a stupid idea, they know where their cake comes from, and they want it because you can’t have it.
I don’t think it’s that far fetched to think that some of the people back then, who were born into aristocracy and have been separated from regular folks their entire lives, might not know that.
They’ve always been morons about something. Just seems now that they are morons about damn near everything.
Yeah, at least like their grandparents had interesting and clever schemes about money that made you feel like they thought it through even if they were largely incapable of anything else.
Currently it feels difficult to assume they think about anything.
You’ve bought the image they’re selling. If you think they’re idiots, it just gives them another mechanism to manipulate you.
I’m no fan of Bush Jr, but go watch some of his speeches.
Sometimes he says “nuclear”, sometimes he says “nuke-u-lar”.
That’s someone putting on an act. No one says it both ways.
Go watch any politician’s speeches, look for the subtle variations in their behaviours.
They’re not morons, they’re Machiavellian. Appearing to be a moron is just another tool in the box.
(That said, some genuinely are morons, but I’m not dismissing any one of them so lightly - even morons can be Machiavellian).
And in the end, all politics is about manipulation (or said more positively, inducing groups of people toward a shared goal). And politics exists in every single group of humans, no matter how small.
We occasionally get lucid leadership. As a whole group though, our leadership class has always had some glaring idiocy going on.