I truly doubt than the people who graduated from the ivies and then went on to academic or public service careers are truly the best and brightest the human race has to offer. They’re smart, to be sure, but to be one of the best and brightest of a race of over $6 billion takes more than being able to compete at an Ivy-league school.

The problem with these types, like I mentioned earlier, is “Whiz Kid” syndrome, where *they* believe they are the best and brightest and therefore assume they have all the information they need. It’s happened before, and it cost soldiers’ lives. I’d hate to see it happen again.

In the interest of full disclosure — I admit I’ve got an axe to grind here. I was accepted to an Ivy but decided to go elsewhere because I had a full-ride 4 year scholarship. So instead of having my parents lay out the Ivy League bucks or going into hock up to my neck, I went to the other “good” school, got a great education and graduated debt-free. Does it make me less intelligent?

Also folks need to remember that in the late 70′s (when many of these folks attended) the Ivies also were looking for a population that was diverse (before it was a buzzword) As a result since there were less applicants to Columbia from say kids from Hawaii than from kids from Westchester, it was easier for the Hawaiian to get in than the Westchester kid. So given two kids of equal ability the Hawaiian might get in while the Westchester kid didn’t. They were both smart — but the Hawaiian had the luck of the remote location.

The same thing exists today in our state university system here in NC — it’s easier for a kid from a more remote county to get into UNC than for a kid from Chapel Hill.

They pissed away the “end of cold war” dividend, set up the mortgage crisis (and spent the next 8 years defending the bomb that they’d set), and didn’t see the rise of Islamic militance.

That’s quite a trifecta.

Richard

As far as the ‘best and brightest’ idea goes with the incoming administration, for the most part Hopey McChange (with thanks to the estimable Christopher Hitchens) has appointed Clinton administration retreads.

I can’t wait…

Bill

Of course not. Obama’s best and brightest are obviously so because they graduated from the right schools *and* picked the right political party.

Would David Brooks include these gentlemen in his “best and brightest” label?

The classic (and tragic) case of this was the whiz kids at DoD during the debate over the adoption of the M16 rifle. They were locking horns with the Army Ordinance group over the type of rifle needed to equip the troops. The Army wanted a more traditional, longer range weapon with a heavier bullet, while the DoD favored Armalite’s AR15 (which, with modifications, would become the M16). The decision was made to adopt the AR15, and Army Ordinance presented a list of modifications to make the weapon acceptible for Army service.

One of the requested changes was chrome plating of the barrel and chamber. The Army realized that this would prevent jamming and malfunctions since it presented residue from the burnt propellant from building up. The other change was that a cleaning kit be developed for deployment with the weapon. Both changes were vetoed by the whiz kids at the DoD because they thought the Army was playing politics.

The whiz kids thought they knew better, and they got people killed because of it. Soldiers were given an inadequate weapon and sent out to fight, and some of them died when their weapon jammed in the middle of a firefight.

In general, trying to pick the best and brightest is a good thing, but I hope Obama has been looking out for people who have the wisdom to realize that, even though they’re highly intelligent, other, less intelligent people might have more information than they do.