The silliest part of this worldview among political people is that they themselves are usually just mediocre to above-average in their own specialization. What technologist dreams of working for the FCC? What business owner dreams of working for the Department of Commerce? Of the few parts of government that attract excellence, most are in the security services and legal system where there is no real competition from the private sector for talent because of a government monopoly on force. Where government competes with the private sector, the latter wins the talent war.<p>If your metric of status or intelligence is doing the least amount of work for the most payoff, then government probably is the best deal around. So I don't think that government officials necessarily think of us as morons, but more like rubes who are easily seduced by idealistic rhetoric. If you are completely cynical and just want to "get yours", then working for government is indeed a smart choice.
I lived in DC for 15 years, some of that contracting for federal agencies. This attitude is evident in nearly every interaction with gov't people, on the clock or not.<p>You couldn't tell from my comment history here, but I used to be a believer in the power of gov't to solve problems. Up-close observation taught me the error of my ways.
It's tempting to define moron as the opposite of genius or domain expert. As very few people are geniuses or domain experts for any chosen domain, it may sometimes appear that everyone is a moron.<p>The reality is that the observer is just as limited as the 'fools' he is observing. He just doesn't realise that, or perhaps, cannot accept it.<p>It's especially hard for people to accept that when they feel their position and status in life depends on the grandiloquence and success of their visions, vs, say, high quality widgets made. As beltway bureaucrats rarely produce tangible things except laws, they are very susceptible to thinking that because they have a job in a position of power, they must ipso-facto be qualified to wield that power, and as they are rarely domain experts in anything technical or specific, that qualification must be their generally superior intellect.<p>It's not just America that has this problem. Recent events in the EU show the problem there may be dramatically worse.
I've read that when the general public is surveyed on various issues, they turn out to be generally ill-informed. For instance, they think that foreign aid is ten times higher than it is, or that the rich have a far lower proportion of the national wealth than they do.
How did <i>America</i> wind up with a "political ruling class" who "have no idea what Americans think and they don't care"? Wasn't America the place you went to leave that kind of arrogant nonsense behind?
If you saw the types of people that try to position themselves around politicians, you would think this about everyone too.<p>Rich donors are by and large not buying political favors, they're trying to buy social status. They idolize these politicians and want to impress their social circle by shaking their hands. It's truly pathetic. They are the kids who got picked last in gym class and are still insecure about it. They would probably take a bullet for the chance to host a fundraiser.<p>It's like how many cops deal with lawbreakers and miscreants all day, and develop a negative disposition towards the rest of the population, subconsciously thinking that their sample reflects the population at large.<p>Also, people are voting for Trump. In light of that, it takes extreme optimism and generosity to think that millions of voters are anything more than hopeless morons.
The study's authors hardly sound like disinterested academics. They sound a lot more like people trying to sell a book that capitalizes on a political trend.