I
came across a real gem recently; an old essay from historian Carlo M.
Cipolla (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_M._Cipolla ) called the “The
Basic Laws of
Human Stupidity” (http://harmful.cat-v.org/people/basic-laws-of-human-stupidity/).
I’m not necessarily accepting the essay as the definitive truth on the subject, but
I do find most of it rather compelling and worth pondering. The laws of
stupidity he outlines are as follows:
First Law
We always underestimate the number of stupid people.
Not as obvious as it sounds, because:
1.people we had thought to be rational and intelligent suddenly turn out to be unquestionably stupid;
2.day after day we are hampered in whatever we do by stupid people who invariably turn up in the least appropriate places, and
3.the underestimation is after the first law itself is already accounted for.
Second Law
The probability of a person being stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.
Third (and Golden) Law
A
stupid person is someone who causes damage to another person, or a
group of people, without any advantage accruing to himself (or herself) —
or even with
some resultant self-damage.
Fourth Law
Non-stupid
people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid people. They
constantly forget that at any moment, and in any circumstance,
associating
with stupid people invariably constitutes an expensive mistake.
Fifth Law
A stupid person is the most dangerous person in existence.
The
essay also breaks people into 4 general categories (to help define the
differences, he gives the case where one person conducts a transaction
with another
person):
1) the ‘helpless’ – a person who ends up suffering a loss while producing the gain to the other.
2) the ‘intelligent’ - a person who can make a gain at the same time while yielding a gain to the other.
3) the ‘bandits’ – a person who makes a gain while causing a loss to the other.
4)
the ‘stupid’ - a person who, like the third law states, causes losses
to others while deriving no gain and sometimes even incurring losses
himself.
It
further breaks the helpless and the bandits each into two
subcategories: those that tend towards intelligence, and those that tend
towards stupidity. For
example, the ‘bandits’ who tend towards stupidity tend to realize gains
less than the losses they incur on the others (i.e. the thug who
smashes your car window and ruins your dash to steal your car stereo),
whereas the ‘bandits’ who tend towards intelligence
tend to realize gains greater than the losses they incur on another
(i.e. an embezzler whose day-to-day job performance still manages to
provide some benefit to the company). The ‘helpless’ who tend towards
intelligence would be those who tend to incur some
minor losses, though still do well enough that they manage to get by
throughout life without too much discomfort (i.e. the average joe that
obediently accepts what his government, political party, mainstream
media, etc., tells him while they manipulate and
steal from him in myriad small ways). Lastly, the ‘helpless’ who tend
towards stupidity would be best classified as useful idiots, those who
get fleeced and manipulated on a regular basis by everyone from
salespeople to their elected officials. Like the
fast food worker who gets a subprime auto loan to buy an expensive new
truck at an absurd interest rate (or, on the flip side, the clueless
investor who blindly invests in securitized products based on said
subprime loans).
He
goes on to say that the fraction of stupid people remains constant
despite the culture, race, class, or time period, and that prospering
societies have
the same proportion of stupid people as declining societies. But he
does state that the balance of the ‘helpless’ and ‘bandits’ towards
intelligence or stupidity IS variable, and that a society’s fortunes are
determined in part by which way the balance leans.
He further goes on to state that poorly functioning societies also tend
to be those where the ‘stupid’ are allowed by others to be more active
in society. Supporting this is Mr. Cippola’s assumption that the
‘intelligent’ and the intelligent end of the ‘helpless’
and ‘bandits’ are net contributors to society, whereas the ‘stupid’ and
the stupid end of the ‘helpless’ and ‘bandits’ are net takers or drags
on society.
So
then…. let us indulge ourselves with a thought experiment and for the
moment assume this is all true. How does American society fit into this
scheme?
Well
I would certainly classify America as it exists today as a declining
society. The economic, political, and cultural spheres of the US all
show varying
signs of distress or dysfunction. One of the few bright spots left is
that we are still progressing technologically, though I’d argue the rate
of this progress is slowing and the effective returns of the new
technology are shrinking.
Economically
and financially, I’d say there would have to be relatively few ‘stupid’
and ‘helpless’ people of any stripe amongst the power players and
people
of influence in that sphere (plenty of ‘helpless’ types in the
rank-and-file though… after all SOMEBODY has to be the ‘dumb money’ as
some might put it). I would expect the majority to be in the
‘intelligent’ and ‘bandit’ categories, as those would be the
types most likely to flourish in that area. What I think has changed
in the past 20-30 years is that the proportion of ‘stupid bandits’ to
‘intelligent bandits’ has increased steadily, with more and more of the
decision-makers, policy-makers, and business
leaders focused more on accumulating wealth with hardly any thought of
long-term economic and financial stability. The increase in
collaterized debt obligations, subprime and NINJA loans, quantitative
easing, and co-opted regulatory bodies are just some of
the signs of this trend. This growing percentage of ‘stupid bandits’
are like locusts, eating up everything in sight without no thought to
the long-term other than their intent to move to greener pastures once
they’ve exhausted everything here.
Politically,
I’d say that while there are some people I’d classify as ‘stupid’ in
Congress and perhaps a (very?) small handful that may qualify as being
in
the ‘intelligent’ category, I think most of them (at least 50%) fit in
the ‘bandit’ category. And few of those are in the ‘intelligent bandit’
category either. If you think about it, has Congress (or the
President) produced more (in the form of effective
laws or effective policies) than they take and consume? Most of them,
the President included, or more interested in keeping and adding to
their positions of power than doing good things for the country, and
this dynamic of taking more than their giving fits
the ‘bandit’ profile perfectly. Furthermore, the benefits they receive
tend to be less significant than the losses or damage they incur on
others (via idiotic tax, business, military, international trade, and
social policies), which would square with the
‘stupid bandit’ category. I suppose there are some in the ‘intelligent
bandit’ category in Congress and the Executive Branch that know there
need to be some changes or the gravy train comes to an end for
everybody, but they’re hampered by an inherently flawed
political system and outnumbered by the ‘stupid bandit’ majority that
is much more short-sighted in their systemic thievery and graft.
Culturally?....
heck, I don’t even know where to begin. There is no shortage of
examples of stupidity here, and it is the easiest to see given the
24-hour
news cycle and the plethora of shows catering to the lowest common
denominator. Ultimately since our culture is largely (though not
entirely) representative of the state of the American public, this is
basically an assessment of Americans themselves. Since
we’re taking the essay’s assumptions at face value here for this
thought exercise, we will assume the proportion of stupid people is
still the same. They might be getting a disproportionate amount of TV
airtime and media coverage than they used to, but the
percentage in the population is unchanged. So that leaves the
possibility that the percentage of the ‘intelligent’ is shrinking, or
the proportion of the stupid range of the ‘helpless’ and/or ‘bandits’
are increasing. I expect it’d be a combination of these,
though in my opinion it’d be more heavily weighted towards the
‘helpless’ and the ‘bandits’ moving to the stupid end of their
respective groups. For one, the growing realization that the system is
rigged and that much of the leadership (in politics and business)
is just as greedy and corrupt as any low-rent criminal tends to
influence the public towards acceptance of and participation in the
‘bandit’ philosophy. And if we couple that with society’s excessive
focus on short-term gain and instant gratification, the
stupid end of the ‘bandit’ category is likely to see the largest
increase. Second, we look at the government and mainstream media and
how they constantly are pushing fear our way. This is by its nature
designed to instill feelings of helplessness and a dependency
on whoever claims to protect you (the politicians and the government)
or whoever tells you what you supposedly need to hear (the media). Such
an environment actively discourages intelligent, independent thinking
and favors emotional triggers & responses,
so it’s reasonable to conclude it would push some of the ‘intelligent’
into the intelligent-leaning ‘helpless’ category, and some of the
smarter ‘helpless’ types into the stupid-leaning ‘helpless’ group.
Now
bringing this thought exercise to its conclusion, how can these trends
be reversed? Well I don’t think they can, at least not right away. As
long as
life is (relatively) cushy for most Americans, they will remain asleep
and not have sufficient incentive to change their ways. I think the
only thing that would force a reversal in this trend would be if a
majority of us experienced substantial hardship that
forces us to improve ourselves out of necessity. And I don’t think
we’ll have too long before that happens, within this decade I expect.
While I rather enjoyed the film Idiocracy and find it sometimes hits a
little too close to our current situation, I never
worry that we’ll ever get close to that level because the system as it
is just can’t sustain itself that long. This positive feedback loop of
increasing stupidity has a short lifespan simply due to the systemic
instability of our debt-based economies and the over-reliance
of our infrastructure on declining reserves of fossil fuels. I’d much
rather we collectively
choose to change now and build our economies, cultures, and
societies in a wiser fashion, but even if we don’t, one way or the other
the universe WILL force change on us and give us the massive bitch-slap
needed to shake out the excess stupidity. For
many it might be really painful or even lethal, but there’s no avoiding
it. Eventually, ignorance will truly become painful. But until then….
No comments:
Post a Comment