by Robert Weissberg
Another American election has come and gone, this one noteworthy for its complete absence of candidates from America’s richest, most famous family dynasties. As far as I can tell, names with an Old Money, Social Register flavor—Rockefellers, Mellons, Fords, Astors, Vanderbilts, Morgans, Amours, Stanfords, Carnegies, and the du Ponts—are a rarity in today’s political landscape. Yes, the last half-century has seen three Rockefellers (Winthrop, Nelson, and Jay) and two generations of Bushes plus a few Kennedys, but this stream is all but dry.
Another American election has come and gone, this one noteworthy for its complete absence of candidates from America’s richest, most famous family dynasties. As far as I can tell, names with an Old Money, Social Register flavor—Rockefellers, Mellons, Fords, Astors, Vanderbilts, Morgans, Amours, Stanfords, Carnegies, and the du Ponts—are a rarity in today’s political landscape. Yes, the last half-century has seen three Rockefellers (Winthrop, Nelson, and Jay) and two generations of Bushes plus a few Kennedys, but this stream is all but dry.
The absence of these names is hardly trivial. The Founders feared the
political consequences of powerful, rich families, even in the absence of
aristocratic titles. The Constitution recognized this possibility when it
authorized hoi polloi-dominated state
legislatures to choose Senators rather than direct election where only the
richest, most powerful could win an expensive statewide election. The Electoral
College centered on states, not the popular vote, likewise insulated the
Republic from influential dynastic families (e.g., the Adamses of
Massachusetts, the Livingstons and Van Rensselaers of New York) that might
dominate a particular state or region but not the entire nation.
The retreat of prominent families from civic life is a complicated story,
but let me suggest one critical but often neglected explanation: the salutary
role of bimbos (also known
as tarts, floozies, vamps, and more recently, Natashas). In a nutshell, as
these gorgeous and typically empty-headed women marry into rich families, the
family’s genetic stock declines. With this decline, public careers for
offspring slip beyond reach. Yes, the descendants of John Jacob Astor or
Commodore Vanderbilt still enjoy money and power, but this is not power over
the public realm. The Republic has been saved.
Understanding the bimbo’s contribution requires a quick biology lesson. The
founding males of the great financial empires were undoubtedly men of immense
intelligence, a large portion of which resided in their genes. Andrew Carnegie,
J. P. Morgan, and the like were “outliers,” probably three standard deviations
or more above the IQ mean.
These men passed both a financial and biological legacy to their children.
The financial portion was enormous. The biological portion was also
substantial, but their progeny undoubtedly slipped a bit when it came to
brains, since extreme traits such as extraordinary intelligence seldom persist across
generations. The familiar parallel is exceptionally tall parents having tall
children who are rarely as tall as their very tall parents.
This second generation was, nevertheless, sufficiently smart to sustain the
empire (think Lawrence Rockefeller, Henry Ford II). It is at this junction of
the genetic saga that bimboism appears and critically alters history. Unlike
the patriarch, the second-generation male lacks any incentive to marry for
brains since a smart wife is not an asset. The upshot is that these hyper-rich
men often became enamored of bimbos (i.e., the gold diggers, trophy wives),
marry them, and sire a rather ordinary third generation.
To understand how bimbos disrupt the family’s genetic legacy, consider the
likelihood of an exceptionally clever bimbo. If the odds of being smart are,
say, 1 in 5, and the odds of being sufficiently stunning to attract a wealthy
man to marriage are also 1 in 5, the odds of both exceptional brains and exceptional beauty are 1 in 25. In other
words, discerning a woman of great beauty before you, one’s best guess of
intelligence is “modest.”
Thus, when our scion sashays off to mate and settles on a magnificent piece
of ass, this glamour will be paid for with children of near normal mental
endowment though physically attractive thanks to mom’s genes. Call it the
“Kennedy model of human capital development.” The bimbo has destroyed dynastic
intellectual power at its source. It is hard to imagine life being otherwise.
Why should rich men of second-generation wealth settle for brainy Plain Janes
when stunners with spectacular bedroom skills are conveniently available? Who
could believe that the elite so readily destroy their cognitive advantage,
attempt to do it so often, and have so much pleasure doing it?
The gossip pages regularly tell this story. The physically nondescript
founder and his dowdy wife raise some “solid” children who continue the family
fortune. Junior’s wife is, however, far more valuable as a sexy knockout than
as breeding stock. Their children grow up in a world of catered indulgences
from attentive nannies and possess all the self-control of a lifelong welfare
recipient hitting the big jackpot lottery. These progeny are often plagued by
school problems, alcohol and drug abuse, legal scraps, and difficulties in
holding even no-show, no-work jobs. Their calamities support a well-paid army
of fixers and advisors euphemistically called “longtime friends of the family”
whose job it is to avert attention-getting disaster and shield the family’s
name.
For those worried about America becoming a plutocracy, bimbos are the
unsung heroes, our magnificent hidden resource. Thousands of bimbos have given
of themselves to rescue America from domination by a hereditary plutocracy.
This contribution is easy to overlook, especially given the lavish lifestyle of
these empty-headed sexpots, but it is real.
Still, like a clean environment and abundant energy, this resource is best
appreciated after its depletion. What if today’s high-tech billionaires
suddenly lusted after Harvard JDs and state-of-the-art MBAs? What if marrying a
buxom space cadet goes out of style among the Kennedys or Gettys? The
consequences are as clear as they are dangerous: a nation ruled by an elite
combining wealth and brains. We must not let this happen. We must insure that
no promising bright young men from leading families be denied the advantages of
gorgeous loose women. Let us celebrate the gift of bimbo genes to the
preservation of democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment