Story:The Cognitive Capacity to Rule

Note to the editor: The following article has been blocked from publishing as pursuant to the Press Act of 105 TT and amended by the Press Liberalization Act of 19 PC, due to promoting societally harmful and anti-democratic ideas in published form. The newspaper publisher, the Bugle of Buglio, is asked to remove the piece prior to publication, or it will otherwise be liable to a fine of 512 argottos per piece printed. No fine will be given should the article be removed before publication, however, repeated attempts to publish the same article may incur review costs.

― The Press Commission of the Republic of La Rossa, 16-4 68 PC

The Cognitive Capacity to Rule

Dr. Piero Adrazzo, Psychologist

In this off-election year, we are given a brief reprieve from the near constant electoral cycles that have come to define this country. No issue is difficult to solve, for as long as one turns to the people for the answer. Dux Bartolomeo Marone has come to openly equate our democratic system with goodness and higher ideals that should be aspired to. The wisdom of the crowds is an appealing concept. Yet it is also wrong. If anything, the crowd seems to agree. In a poll last month taken by Giornale Economico, overall satisfaction in the nation's elected politicians has fallen to a meagre 34%. While the Dux holds higher approval, 56% is nothing to brag about, and implies that half of the population believes that someone else could do a better job. Divided between multiple options, each backed only with the credential of being charismatic enough to get people to cast a ballot on election day, it is no wonder the nation incoherently bounces between various conflicting ideologues that are unable to put this nation on a path of progress. Even if on accident a sensible law gets passed, it risks getting undone in two years by an opposition who holds no principle other than to perfectly mirror the party in power by calling for the opposite, threatening to plunge the nation back into the pit of despair.

The crowd is not wise. At least, this one is not. But it does not have to be so. Instead of taking a sample of the whole population, giving voice to people who will only serve to short-sightedly vote for whichever leader "inspires them" most, would it not be in the interest of everyone to find the people who have consistently stood in support of intelligent, evidence-based legislating to instead guide the way our nation is run? It is only ironic that our Republic is quite literally at war with the only nation that does so. How do they accomplish this? The T'vaqi political system rests on the foundation that is the Cognitive Capacity Scale, an objective measure of one's intelligence done by a test taken when a citizen reaches adulthood. Such a model, quite easily, manages to guide people into professions, and ensures that educational focus is given only to the nation's best and the brightest, giving them a pathway to one day becoming scientists, writers, and most importantly, government officials. Indeed, only the highest scorers are ever eligible to become executive officials, indicating they are capable in a wide span of cognitive areas such as mathematics and the sciences (the exact composition of the test is unknown).

To address the detractors right away, it is true that the T'vaqi system hasn't worked perfectly in practice. Decisions are made hastily and without much debate. But a Grand Magister is only a fool because he was selected by fools. The Grand Magisters are directly elected by the wider populace, completely negating the advantages of rule by the intelligent. A man who'd change who he'd vote for to be in charge of his country based on what he had for lunch has an equal say to a High Institute professor. But this is not a failure of the Cognitive Capacity Scale, rather, the issue that plagues T'vaqi is much of the same as the ones bringing restless headaches to La Rossa - democracy, rule not only by the many but rule by everyone.

The Congitive Capacity Scale is not perfect. Every system will of course have some failures that will slip through. But those failures shouldn't then be selected for in popularity contests. Any one individual, even one who happens to pass such a test, legitimately or otherwise, is susceptible to personal failings. Individual rulers elected by the masses are often greedy, hungry for power, and driven by ideological positions that may have little to no basis in actual reality. As much as we try, it is impossible to remove all of those biases on the personal level, nor should we expect our leaders to. The Cognitive Capacity Scale gives the opportunity to determine a group of people capable of high function and long-term decision-making. For the sake of the greater good, it is not only three of them who should be given power, but rather the intelligent community should rule by consensus, determining through rigorous research what ought to be done rather than through personal ego. My gripe is not with the idea of ruling by consensus, as democracy often proclaims its goals to be. It is rather the group which makes the consensus, and the system that it revolves around. Society should not be governed by the leaders it wants. Society ought to be governed by what is true. Otherwise, we will forever be doomed to be ruled by fools.

― Dr. Piero Adrazzo is a practicing psychologist in the city-province of Mineria. He has graduated from the University in Mineria cum laude in 48 PC.