very perceptive analysis. I didn't know there is actually data around the intelligence of Chinese civil servants vs. western. Regardless, if you have a chance to interact with Chinese government employees, even at junior clerk level, the cognitive ability and articulateness comes across easily. Basically， it's not a system for slackers.
In comparison, I still remember going to DMV some 30 years ago in the US to get my driver license when I was living there. The ability of the people working there is basically only fit for janitorial services. The diligence and attitude is worse.
Oh, if only we had meritocracy here in the west. Just think of how different things would be in our countries if we had caring and intelligent leaders.
Intelligence does not guarantee an honest government or one that serves the people. Unregulated capitalism rewards predatory behavior. The corrupt and the cunning are rewarded with success. The generous and honest are weeded out. The worst rise and promote those like themselves. Clinton and Obama were extremely high IQ. It had no impact on their morality or ethics. IQ serves the system it finds itself in. The key is structural. Build a system that rewards those who strive to serve the general public, not one that rewards those who serve a coterie of oligarchs. The contrast between the ethics of capitalism, built on the accumulation of personal wealth, and communism, built on the accumulation of social wealth, is instructive.
In the West, the best and brightest are incited to work for private entities to maximize profit and other selfish motives. Furthermore, while sycophancy and corruption are present everywhere, it is most prevalent in the west, and particularly in the highest sphere of western society, because those go hand in hand with how an oligarchic plutocracy functions — meritocracy and fair competition would threaten to dislodge the ruling elite from their dominant position.
I’ve lived in the west long enough to notice this. In fact, most people in the west are aware of it too. It’s such an expected and common thing that this situation is seen as normal, simply as an accepted fact of life. “It is what it is.” Let’s vote the incompetent corrupt government out in the next election! And then, vote again, and again. That’s how brainwashed the average western citizen is about “democracy”.
You should provide more citations. IQ is a flawed measure in some ways, but useful in others: but where do you derive the numbers for the guokao, the IQs of American civil servants and Chinese civil servants (or are these extrapolated from another IQ study). I also ask this as I want to cite some of these findings / this post in a policy brief I’m doing for an MPhil at Cambridge gut you barely have any follow up possible due to having 2 citations only.
Thanks for the tip. The guokao numbers are pretty self-evident, I think. We know the population's IQ so we know the IQ of the top 2% of Chinese graduates who take the test and the tiny fraction of test-takers who succeed must, a fortiori, those with the highest IQ. Imperfect, but perfectly adequate for a working hypothesis.
very perceptive analysis. I didn't know there is actually data around the intelligence of Chinese civil servants vs. western. Regardless, if you have a chance to interact with Chinese government employees, even at junior clerk level, the cognitive ability and articulateness comes across easily. Basically， it's not a system for slackers.
In comparison, I still remember going to DMV some 30 years ago in the US to get my driver license when I was living there. The ability of the people working there is basically only fit for janitorial services. The diligence and attitude is worse.
Agreed. This also applies to our Western politicians. Cunning and sneaky but but clever.
I think most westerners know this - we aren't all that stupid.
But many of us have a special talent in ignoring the facts that will defeat our objectives.
You can call it optimism or stupidity or both. But if continents could win the darwin award then North America and Europe are comptetng for it now.
Agree 100%.
Oh, if only we had meritocracy here in the west. Just think of how different things would be in our countries if we had caring and intelligent leaders.
100% agree!
Intelligence does not guarantee an honest government or one that serves the people. Unregulated capitalism rewards predatory behavior. The corrupt and the cunning are rewarded with success. The generous and honest are weeded out. The worst rise and promote those like themselves. Clinton and Obama were extremely high IQ. It had no impact on their morality or ethics. IQ serves the system it finds itself in. The key is structural. Build a system that rewards those who strive to serve the general public, not one that rewards those who serve a coterie of oligarchs. The contrast between the ethics of capitalism, built on the accumulation of personal wealth, and communism, built on the accumulation of social wealth, is instructive.
Agree 100%.
In the West, the best and brightest are incited to work for private entities to maximize profit and other selfish motives. Furthermore, while sycophancy and corruption are present everywhere, it is most prevalent in the west, and particularly in the highest sphere of western society, because those go hand in hand with how an oligarchic plutocracy functions — meritocracy and fair competition would threaten to dislodge the ruling elite from their dominant position.
I’ve lived in the west long enough to notice this. In fact, most people in the west are aware of it too. It’s such an expected and common thing that this situation is seen as normal, simply as an accepted fact of life. “It is what it is.” Let’s vote the incompetent corrupt government out in the next election! And then, vote again, and again. That’s how brainwashed the average western citizen is about “democracy”.
You should provide more citations. IQ is a flawed measure in some ways, but useful in others: but where do you derive the numbers for the guokao, the IQs of American civil servants and Chinese civil servants (or are these extrapolated from another IQ study). I also ask this as I want to cite some of these findings / this post in a policy brief I’m doing for an MPhil at Cambridge gut you barely have any follow up possible due to having 2 citations only.
Thanks for the tip. The guokao numbers are pretty self-evident, I think. We know the population's IQ so we know the IQ of the top 2% of Chinese graduates who take the test and the tiny fraction of test-takers who succeed must, a fortiori, those with the highest IQ. Imperfect, but perfectly adequate for a working hypothesis.