RE: Where now?21 Dec 2018 13:43
I agree with the first part of your post Senator but not the last bit.
"Politicians are to be avoided at all costs by the markets. They prove themselves over and over again to be of low intellect".
Leaving aside that the " intellects" of the "Markets", left to more or less get on with it were the cause of the 2008 crash.
Politicians are democratically elected by their peers which means you get a mix of the mad head the balls to some that are actually smart. It's a lot fairer that going into the top universities in the world and choosing the leaders from the top intellects in there. David Cameron was educated in Eton and Oxford and was considered by his peers as extremely smart and capable.
Here's an academic review of Cameron by Kevin Theakston , Professor of British Government at the School of Politics and International Studies at the University of Leeds and Head of School.
"David Cameron, in contrast, can be seen to perform well and to have strengths under several of these key headings.
He is a strong communicator; he has made some intelligent decisions about the organization of advice and decision-making in government; he is a formidable political operator; he has shown flexibility and pragmatism; he seems to be able to handle the intellectual and personal challenges of the premiership, and he shows emotional intelligence.
He faces, to be sure, huge political and economic challenges. But it cannot be said of him – as it was said of Brown – that he is not up to the job of being prime minister."
Yet Cameron has led the UK into what could arguably be described as the brink of economic suicide.
Rees Mogs has the same highbrow education and was successful outside politics. Would he make a good PM? Intelligence, while very desirable does not guarantee better leadership.