This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Why Intellectual Leadership Can Get Us All Killed
One can’t help when watching the latest news stories and shake one’s head in both amazement, as well as disgust. Whether it’s the latest political blunder or snafu, all the way through to some of the worlds largest corporations. One thing becomes crystal clear: Most “Intellectuals” can only remain looking smart if the world is calm, or a current business cycle is booming.
For once the tide turns and decisive action is needed during the turbulence: the dumbest choice of people to deal with an evolving crisis are “intellectuals.”
The problem with these people in key positions of power (both politically as well as business) is they know how to navigate internal office politics, they understand the how, when, and where of backstabbing. They can turn the hard work of others into their own as to curry favor as well as promotions. But what they can’t do is the actual thing needed most: the actual doing.
Let’s not mince words or thoughts here, what I’m directly speaking to is the difference between someone who can both be and/or act ruthless vs one that “believes” they are the same.
The intellectual prowess of the so-called “smart crowd” can not only be dwarfed by the truly ruthless leader, but can put both themselves as well as their company or followers in grave peril. For intellectuals think out processes far too much. Then do nothing.
They’ll over think why someone would do X, Y, or Z. They put themselves into shoes that don’t fit, then spend more time contemplating if their opponents should be wearing leather vs rubber soles. All the while their opponent laughs running circles around them barefoot.
The fallacy of their though processes remains hidden most of the time only by the veil of normalized cycles. But when those cycles have more in common with hurricane season, they’re the first to stare doe eyed at the flashing warning signs about what to do next.
Currently we have a crisis that is rapidly changing day-to-day in the Ukraine. Vladimir Putin is showing the world exactly what he is, what he wants, and what he will do to bring it about. The rest of the world’s reaction? Endless blither and blather on why he shouldn’t.
The problem for the intellectuals is they believe because Putin is reported to hold some $40 Billion dollars in assets that appealing to his 1%’er side should be sufficient to entice him from acting badly. They believe since they themselves are of the same 1% that they share commonalities.
They’ll intellectualize why they know what a 1%’er thinks, wants, believes. Again they mistakenly believe they should because after all – only they know best how to talk or treat another 1%’er.
Here’s an alert for the intellectual set. Vladimir Putin is a 1%’er. Just not yours. Putin has more in common with the other 1% crowd collectively known as outlaw motorcycle gangs. (Yes I mean all those you see sporting patches on their backs)
The trouble for the 1% “smart-crowd” is they have no idea or frame of reference this other group works or plays in, let alone any understanding of what motivates or causes them to rethink conquest.
However, the outlaw 1% know exactly how to frighten, extort, and run ruff-shot over the intellectual. All while laughing and enjoying the process.
Let’s just put one of the latest arguments splattered across the media to make a point. The argument goes something like this: “If Putin cares what’s best for his people and doesn’t want them to feel the effects sanctions will bear: he should rethink his position.”
Well, that sounds really threatening, but here’s what’s wrong with that whole premise: If Putin or any other communist leader cared about what happened to his people – they wouldn’t be living under his thumb in a dictatorial environment where people routinely go without proper food, medicine, clothing, rule of law, etc.
One of the most feckless postures any leader can do is make threats (no matter how large or small) then not follow through. Real tough guy’s feed on this type of false bravado, regardless if you may have the storehouse of weapons to decimate them or not.
You can threaten to lock up their bank accounts, throw them in jail, what ever, but the problem is they’ll willingly and laughingly, burn your house down, break your legs, pee on your shoes, and more before you blink.
Words and threats are meaningless to this crowd. Actually, the more one threatens them, the more embolden they become. Why? They actually like the idea of the fight.
Intellectuals are looking for ways as to not be left with egg on their faces. Real tough guy’s don’t mind breaking eggs to accomplish their goals. All one has to do for evidence is look back at another famous tough guy: Mao Zedong.
Mao famously stated when millions of his own people were dying: “Well you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.” Getting egg on his face, shoes, or anywhere else was just a part of the process in his eyes. Putin is cut from this type of cloth. And he wears his own colors proudly as any 1%’er would.
But don’t worry, they’ve got a broken egg diplomacy mindset on their side – we’ve got #hashtags to be served on ours.
»
- 38354 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Thank you Kirk . . . Actually the article should have stopped with the following: ".... The problem with these people in key positions of power (both politically as well as business) is they know how to navigate internal office politics, they understand the how, when, and where of backstabbing. They can turn the hard work of others into their own as to curry favor as well as promotions. But what they can’t do is the actual thing needed most: the actual doing. . . ."
This really sums up the picture of the scum bags that work the system to their advantage while the people who make the system work are busy doing what they are getting paid to do.
To call these scumbags intellectuals is an insult to real intellectuals. In my long experience in the civilian side of the MIC what I witnessed was the scum bags usually self destructed. However the few that didn't usually wound up in powerful positions. In any event the dog eat dog fight at the top is just that a fight between the worst dogs (scumbags).
In the final analysis the ultimate merger of the scumbags in the business world with those in the political world is what it's all about. That IMHO sums up what our country has evolved into and where the entire world is at. In the post final analysis, it is what revolutions and wars are made from . . . .
Pithy.
I wouldn't call the leadership that we have intellectual. Pseudo-intellectual, yes.
You can learn more about international relationships in a back country bar on a Saturday night than you can in the Birkenstock trod halls of academia.
The big loud blowhard is never as dangerous as that quiet wirey guy minding his own business in the corner.
Watch out for his left fake because that lethal right cross is fast behind it before the fat boy gets his hands up.
It's not just intellectual leaders. A big majority of managers and CEOs and elected politicians are the same way. If they are lucky enough to be in charge during the 'good times', they do well. Same people in charge during 'bad times' fail miserably. Very few actually find success in bad times.
Well this is not my defenition of 'Intelectual'. In my defenition we get saved not killed.
Being a moron - as is this author - is probably not the answer.
Simpson's episode with Cheif Wiggum frustrated with scientists. "Ok, enough of your BORAX Poindexter! It's time for some action!" Where upon he fires his gun into a portal into another universe.
Yes, let's hire the dumb to fix our problems!
This is one of the most poorly written articles on ZH. Putin is communist? That must be the reason his country has low, flat taxes. Idiot.
How can they be thinking intellectuals,if they all think alike? What they have is a high priced credential obtained from government approved indoctrination facilities. Was Einstein properly credentialed, when he wrote of relativity? What were Socrates' credentials? They reached their high status, not by the result of their thoughts later proven by events, but by their repetition of the correct dogma.
Written by lose'her intellectual who just had his back stabbed?
"intellectual leadership"
"giant shrimp"
"military intelligence"
- Ned
{I'll add as necessry}
[ed. "NATO Forces"]
The idea the US is run by intellectuals is ridiculous. It is run by sociopaths who ignore the Constitution to impose overwhelming coercive government force on a society most of whose members are still trying to abide by the law even though the law has been totally corrupted.
It is run by bullies who lack personal physical courage but have got themselves into a position where they can command military and police to do their bidding against ordinary citizens and small states where there is a huge imbalance of power.
They know how to work in that context to pursue their own ends but when confronted by someone who can muster as much or more force and is quite comfortable doing so, and is not willing to play the game their way, they are stuffed.
Confusing this with intellectuals is nonsense.
You know this is right-wing propaganda because he's attempting to subvert the meanings of words. Just like labeling vast giveaways to the rich 'Keynesianism', he's labeling white collar workers 'intellectuals'. Back in college, my student newspaper editor-in-chief tried to label a brand new lesbian bar a 'liberal' bar.
Ideas, the stock in trade of intellectuals, are nothing but PR tokens for the white collar ruling class. It's true they hire as many writers, historians, social scientists and real scientists as they need, but that's just window dressing. They're cheap and you can always find one to say what you want.
Hate radio is nothing but sabotaging society by destroying our ability to discuss realities.
Hate radio would be BBC Radio 1 I take it.
You still believe in the right/left-wing children's puppet-show? How old are you?
Maybe we should consult the tooth fairy for a philsophical primer on how Santa determines the moral constitution of each child on his list.
You know, for an expert, unbiased opinion.
Is there any way of rating this gibberish MINUS 100 ???
You just did.
;)
I know I'm repeating myself here, but this is very important material in this context. If we want to run a polis (i.e. a rationally organized society) correctly, we need to know both what a polis is and what conduces to its flourishing. Now first off, there are, broadly speaking, five truth-attaining rational faculties of the human soul.
1) Intellect (nous). This is what we might call thought per se. It refers to a sort of immediate grasp of the significance of something. This is the specifically human quality that allows ideas to be abstracted and formed from our mere animal-like sense perceptions. It is because of nous that we have language- and symbol-forming capabilities, and it allows for inductive reasoning. Now clearly nous is necessary for running a polis (or doing anything else, for that matter), but it cannot be sufficient to that end, since it is non-motivational. "Thought itself moves nothing."
2) Craft-knowledge (techne). This is the knowledge that is useful for producing things. It is often translated as simply "art." There is no need to make a distinction between what we call the fine arts (e.g. music, painting) and the practical arts (e.g. construction, manufacturing), for it is all simply production and involves the same kind of knowledge. It is the kind of knowledge one gains by doing things. The analogy is that of strength: A strong man is able to lift heavy weights, and one becomes a strong man by lifting heavy weights, i.e. you become strong by doing what strength does. You become a flute player by playing the flute; by playing the flute well you become a good flute player. Although techne seems like it might be capable of runing a polis, it is actually different in kind from the political rational quality for the following reasons. First, techne is concerned with the same objects as are fortune and chance, while politics is about ends. Second, the objects of production are not ends in themselves. For instance, in order to build a house one must know the art of construction, but the finished house is not the end that life aims at. The builder wants to sell the house, and the buyer wants to live in it, but the end that life aims at is eudaimonia (happiness, flourishing), which cannot quite be identified with building, selling, buying, or living in a house. All arts are subordinate to politics, which is concerned with the end; that is, with living happily.
3) Scientific knowledge (scientia). This is the kind of knowledge which is knowable by demonstration from first principles. It does not arrive at first principles (that would be the domain of nous), but it uses them to derive other truths. It is primarily concerned with dialectics, with how to reason according to the rules of logic and/or mathematics. This type of knowledge cannot be identified with politics because a) the end of poltics is happiness, but human happiness is not a first principle; and b) the practice of politics is not dialectic, i.e. it is not concerned with winning arguments but with making flourishing human beings.
4) Wisdom (sophia). Wisdom is a combination of nous and scientia applied to what is most divine. It is the scientific knowledge of the most exalted subjects, especially of God and His inexhaustable profundity. This is not political knowledge for the simple reason that man and his happiness are not among the most exalted subjects in the universe.
5) Prudence (phronesis). Having ruled out the other possibilities, we find that political knowledge belongs to a class of its own that is often dubbed "prudence." It is defined as being "the truth-attaining rational quality that is concerned with what is good for human beings." Like techne it is gained only through experience, but experience not with producing things but with the effects of policies on human wellbeing. Policies being rationally chosen ends selected to enable human beings to flourish, to live in a state of eudaimonia. The polis is the society organized by prudence which is supposed to conduce to eudaimonia. Prudence is considered a cardinal virtue and it has a place of distinction among the other virtues as being the one which is necessary for the exercise of all the others. Political science then, being concerned with happiness, is concerned primarily with the development of the virtues: temperence, fortitude, justice, munificence, friendship, etc., with making laws and enacting policies that strengthen the virtues and avoiding those that dissolve them. Actual life requires virtue in order to flourish, so experience is viewed as the great teacher of virtue. But left at the mercy of experience we will go wrong more often than not, which is why we require good laws and exemplars who embody those laws to act as teachers. The politician as the teacher of virtue: How long as it been since anyone in the West could say that with a straight face? And yet it is the only social model that works, the one decreed by God and nature itself, the only one worthy of men and demanding real men to fill it.
I do believe I hear about everyone in the old Parthenon applauding you, Goose. Kindly forward that to all the capitols as required reading. +989,043,567
-1 for being blatantly copied from some philosophy text and another -1 is deserved for such 1-dimensional thinking.
Once one visualizes, comprehends in more than 4 dimensions how many alternate 'machinery' assemblies can exist, but the parts are events themselves in competing time-lines, everything changes.
That which is future, past, plans, memories, machines, skills, politics, lies, everything fits a much larger pattern where the pieces are much more uniform in their basic 'description' yet much more varied than what the average mind ever contemplates.
If only I could give 2, and even 3 -1's to you, another deserved for crediting anything to a god that has never been proven to exist.
Hahaha, hahahahaha...
Is that how St. Cyr believes the 1% on both sides are thinking? He may be right on the one, the elitist but not so intellectual side, which needs constant 'oh, you're so smart'-comments to feel worthy, but he fails miserably with everything else.
Enough time lost on this vulgar display of dumbness.
The problem is the difference between intellectuals and "intellectuals". All this ranting is about the ones in quotes, and the problem is they are NOT really intellectuals, just glib fools. You're already caught in the trap when you start criticizing based on the label rather than on the actions. Frauds, fakers, fakirs, con artists, community organizers, choom-headed Kenyan Muslim Indonesian Hawaiian mommy-jean wearing associate lecturers with sealed academic records, are not intellectuals.
There has been a disturbance in The Force.
O tempora! Someone calling for a Fuehrer again..
This is exactly why the old mantra applies: keep you Ph.d's on tap but NEVER on top.
With a grimace on my face...
what disturbs me most is that while the author recognizes there is a problem,
the author doesn't have a clue what the problem is.
That is important, because it reflects where we are (flailing around), and the challenges to get anything resolved.
Once again, emotional intelligence rears its head as being a fundamental issue...
iz MANIPERLATED by tha N-DUBYA-OH!
I think this analysis is pretty accurate, based on my own experience in the government.
It was Wiliam F Buckley that said he would rather be governed by the 1st 2000 names of the Boston phone book than by the facuty at Harvard
It was Wiliam F Buckley that said he would rather be governed by the 1st 2000 names of the Boston phone book than by the facuty at Harvard
That's cuz he went to Yale....
When you look up "insufferable snobby intellectual twat" in the dictionairy, they have Buckley's picture there.
Oh to the confident and suave television and news commentators, politicians, and the experts that speak with such authority, I include the pundits and so called specialist, to you I say, I'm skeptical and dubious. Even when you mask your bias and your agenda is hidden, I must often remind myself that, you don't know that! More on why you should not believe a word these clowns say is the subject of the article below.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2012/03/you-dont-know-that.html
What the fuck is this ruff-shot?
It must be for shooting FEMA-camp guard-dogs.
"Ruff! Ruff!"
<bang>
Sir John Glubb writes:
XX The inadequacy of intellect
Perhaps the most dangerous by-product of the Age of Intellect is the unconscious growth of the idea that the human brain can solve the problems of the world. Even on the low level of practical affairs this is patently untrue. Any small human activity, the local bowls club or the ladies’ luncheon club, requires for its survival a measure of self-sacrifice and service on the part of the members. In a wider national sphere, the survival of the nation depends basically on the loyalty and self-sacrifice of the citizens. The impression that the situation can be saved by mental cleverness, without unselfishness or human self-dedication, can only lead to collapse.
Read the whole thing at http://www.rexresearch.com/glubb/glubb-empire.pdf It's 26 pages of pure wisdom, and it's free.
Intellectual leadership? No, Imbeciles.
20% off official Kim Jong-un haircut and 'tough-guy' T-shirt on production of this article at participating gulags.
An "intellectual" without practical experience is a pompous and ignorant buffoon.
Leadership? Of any kind. Ummm? Its a nice thought. Looks to me like a pack of feral dogs doing what the feral do.
The author of this article has swallowed the American MSM lies about who is culpable for the Ukrainian situation HOOK, LINE, and SINKER!!!
Let's not look to him when TSHTF!!!
Having W as president proved America doesn't need an intellectual in the White House...... He gave us 8 years of peace, prosperity for the middle class, and transparent, accountable governance......ummm...wait.....
This article courtesy of the Khmer Rouge.
Intellectuals is undefined. Having academic degrees and wisdom are not the same. Many of the crisis are the work of intellectuals like obama. Regular working people do not fashion national disasters.
Obama is not an intellectual. He's a planted puppet. He's a trained monkey.
He reads a script on a teleprompter then he goes to play golf. That's not intellectual.
We would be sooooo better off when things get bad with a glandular driven idiot right??????
You can always tell the rotten stench of populism by its anti-intellectual ethos. Don't think, just stay manly and shoot somebody. Assholes.
Lenin was sent into Russia by the Germans in the same way that you might send a phial containing a culture of typhoid or cholera to be poured into the water supply of a great city, and it worked with amazing accuracy. On Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, in the House of Commons, November 5, 1919 as cited in Churchill by Himself (2008), Ed. Langworth, PublicAffairs, p. 355 ISBN 1586486381
[The] truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it, ignorance may deride it, malice may distort it, but there it is.
An intellectual is a fucking wanker that takes pointless concepts and spins them in to never ending fairy stories and attempts to justify the results as been somehow connected to the real world.
Like when you tell someone to shut the fuck up.
and so he starts blathering on about why you should listen to him because he explain everything.
Then wonders what happened a millisecond before the bullet blew his fucking brains out.
They never understand the simple concepts, like shut the fuck up
Seems to me that "intellectual" has been judiciously swapped in for "pseudo-intellectual" (fraud, liar, wanker) in this article.
Only intellectuals believe in vaccinnes, economic theory and science. Yes we are all better off being controlled by the lsw of the jungle and superstition.
http://thinkingaboot.blogspot.ca/2014/04/game-of-thrones-and-great-illit...
The author, Mark St.Cyr, states, " If Putin or any other communist leader cared about what happened to his people – they wouldn’t be living under his thumb in a dictatorial environment where people routinely go without proper food, medicine, clothing, rule of law, etc."
As an American, I would re-write this sentence to state, " If OBAMA or any other western leader cared about what happened to his people – they wouldn’t be living under his thumb in a dictatorial environment where people routinely go without proper food, medicine, clothing, rule of law, etc."
It is in America (prior to my leaving) that I encountered internal Border Patrol checkpoints (in New Hampshire, of all places!!!), DUI checkpoints, TSA sexual abuse and rampant police brutality -- NONE of which now exist in Ukraine or Russia! In Ukraine and Russia, the homeless are RARE, people get the food and medicine they need (at REASONABLE prices!!!) and the rule of law exists. And in Odessa (where I now live), the police are actually VERY DEFERENTIAL and POLITE !!!
The reason I left the U.S. was because it had become a POLICE STATE where people are treated like garbage by their "leaders" and "public servants"; and the rule of law long ago ceased to exist! My God! The cops will launch a SWAT-team raid on someone's home for unpaid parking tickets, while the Wall Street bankster CEOs has even been indicted, much less sent to prison!!!
I would like to remind Mark St.Cyr that ONLY in the U.S. under Pres. Obama has the leader of a major nation claimed the legal authority to IMPRISON or KILL one of its own citizens without any due process! (see the "NDAA" or National Defense Authorization Act.)
Even Adolph Hitler never claimed such legal authority!!!