Intelligence as a method of control?

This is another thread that most probably requires too much of an open mind and an ability to think freely for this place, but I thought I’d post it anyway lol :lol:

Consider first the ideal world for POLITICIANS

A note, for the extent of this the terms academic and scientist are pretty much interchangeable as both require funding and each influences different aspects of our everyday life as a result of their research and “discoveries”

This would be one where the ordinary people dont bother thinking, where they feel that they arent “intelligent” and therefore wouldnt and couldnt have anything valid to say as they dont properly comprehend the problems

In THAT world, the thinking would all be done by “scientists”, but as scientists rely quite heavily on funding both from government and private business the funding would be given to the “scientists” that have or are trying to “prove” the conclusions that a particular business or political agenda wants to be able to claim

So where that outcome is innacurate and another one is actually right but doesnt give the answers wanted the incorrect research would be funded and the correct one wouldnt be

The population then for the most part would pretty much without question just blindly accept the claims of the scientists because they ARE scientists and are therefore more “intellectual” so they know better

The process to achieve this political nirvana would most probably be quite subtle, involving things such as directing what people should think in response to most topics, even where possible forcing them through legislation to accept a stance that goes outside the bounds of common sense, fair play and equality

Because once you can start making people throw away basic tools for free thought you can make them think whatever you tell them to think thereafter

it would also rely on making the already won over majority ridicule, demonise and criticise any resilient pockets of free thought until people who do see through the BS are badgered into stiffling any voicing of what they can see or dont believe as was the case with heretics in religious times

Which in itself creates a sense of futility even where doubt exists, a sense that no matter how wrong something is it just cant be changed which in turn over time leads to blind acceptance via different route

Theres also the human need to “evolve”, in a world where the illusion that intellect and “knowing” are in some way linked to education and certificates a sense that the less educated you are the less “intelligent” you would be, as gaining that “intellect” isn’t always available a half way house of absorbing and regurgitating what the accepted “intellects” claim would give some at least a feeling of being “in the know” without ACTUALLY knowing. This in turn would create a form of second hand snobbery and the belief that those who didn’t absorb what they were told weren’t “in the know” and were therefore less “intelligent”

Sounds a bit like a sci fi story really I admit

But consider modern times, most people, even those who buy into the overall concepts on things like racism, sexism and the like can or could see that “equality” wasnt what was being pushed at all. When such a basic preconceptual building block is allowed to be redefined its a step backwards in the realms of free thinking and open minded reasoning

Intellect itself. what of that?

people do seem nowadays much mroe ready to believe a scientific train of thought on most things whether social, economic or global. But academic intelligence isnt really too much to do with free thought, its a taught thing for the most part and relies on the ability to remember and regurgitate whats already been concluded without question rather than create new thoughts

Many very highly honoured academics have never ever created anything new in their lifetime, they have built their status on the bones of what has been claimed before

And yet some of the most ground breaking alterations in what we think, see and use have come from comparatively uneducated folks too, not JUST scientists

yet despite that and the financial pressure science is under to acquire funding there still seems to be a mass swing away from self thought towards a blind acceptance of not only what the media tells us, but also towards a sense that we, as an individual cant alter anything

Which is infact true, an individual CANT change much at all

But over time and throughout history massive social change has been brought about by a single uneducated person who didnt stop doubting, didnt believe change cant happen and over time gained the support of many other “individuals” until that snowball was big enough to crush anything in its path

The last example of that I can think of in this country tho was the objection to the pole tax, even with the far more reaching pay per mile scheme it only seemed to get any furrore because ALL people had to do was log onto a web page to object

So as far fetched as the first part of this thread was or seemed, in reality just how far away from it are we?