Relevance of education and intelligence for the political development of nations: Democracy, rule of law and political liberty (Rindermann 2008)
Two relevant effects of education and cognitive
ability on politics could be distinguished: a cognitive
effect (competence to make rational choices, better
information processing etc.) and an ethical effect
(support of democratic values, freedom, human rights
etc.), which itself depends on cognitive ability (cogni-
tive development being a prerequisite for moral
development) and probably the other way round (a
willingness to think and learn furthers cognitive
competences).
A similar position is held by the OECD (2000),
which postulates an influence of education on the qu-
ality of voting decisions and intensity of political
participation: “People with more schooling are likely
to make more informed choices when voting and to
participate more actively in their communities.” (p. 81)
Simpson (1997) stressed not only the relevance of
education, but pointed to cognitive abilities as the cen-
tral mechanism (“information-processing-capacity” or
“cognitive capacity”; p. 157): “Democracy depends on a
public who can process complex information and
actively participate in politics” (similarly, see Friedman,
1962).
-
At the individual level, Milligan, Moretti and
Oreopoulos (2004) support the education-and-ability-
further-political-participation-thesis: The findings show
that education supports democracy both by increasing
the quantity of citizens' involvement in the electoral
process (increased probability of voting) as well as the
quality of that involvement (increased information on
politics). In the US, education increases registration and
by this voting. In the US and in the UK educated people
follow more politics on TV and in newspapers, attend
political meetings, discuss political matters and try to
persuade others, in the US, they even trust more the
federal government and people in general and do not
believe that “federal officials are crooked”. Similar
results for the US but with different data sets are found
by Dee (2004).Educatedpeoplehaveahigher
probability of voting, of reading newspapers and
support free speech (e.g. for communists, anti-religio-
nists, homosexuals, militarists, and racists).
Interesting correlation altho not surprising at all with free speech and intelligence.
-
Intelligence is important for politics not only at the
individual level, but also at the macro-social level:
intelligence is required for institutionalized political
decision-making, effective administration, the legal
system, bureaucracy, and economic institutions (“gov-
ernment effectiveness”; Kaufmann, 2003). The func-
tioning of public institutions per se is a condition for the
rule of law. These all are rational institutions that
depend on an intelligent culture. And political leader-
ship is a cognitively highly demanding task (Suedfeld,
Guttieri, & Tetlock, 2003, p. 255). It is therefore not
surprising that McDaniel (2006) found a positive cor-
relation of r=.34 between cognitive ability and “govern-
ment effectiveness” at the state level in the USA.
Last but not least, the intelligence of people and voters
on the one hand and the intelligence of leaders and their
political success and moral standards in government on
the other hand are correlated (Simonton, 1985, 2006a,b).
People prefer to elect persons as leaders who are about 20
IQ points more intelligent than themselves, but not more
(Gibb, 1969), and the intelligence of leaders is correlated
with their political success and moral standards. Gener-
ally, people prefer persons as leaders who are similar to
them (Rushton, 2005).
-
The rule of law produces a predictable social world in
which problems can be solved and aims be reached by
effort, by the use of intelligence and good formal
qualifications, rather than by coercion, personal con-
nections and bribery. By favoring meritocracy through-
out society, and this includes the educational system, the
rule of law tends to support the development of
cognitive abilities. Under such circumstances learning
is a good investment of time and effort. This is
demonstrated by two negative examples: in Georgia
(Caucasus) students could get in the 1990s a place at
university by bribery (Flitner, 2006); and in Brazil about
50% of all university theses are said to be plagiarized,
either by individual students or with the help of
specialized companies that sell the theses to students
(Hart, 2006). Such means to success undermine the
normative basis of education and cognitive ability and
they further other efforts than learning and thinking.
Wtf Brazil?!
-
Democracy in this view and as confirmed by the
empirical results is a phenomenon attributable to factors
given within a country and depending on its citizens. If
these internal conditions are not given, it would be
impossible or at least very difficult to import democracy
from the outside with the help of armed forces (see
experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq and the history of
Liberia, which was planned as an institutional copy of
the USA). Social and political institutions are not
irrelevant, but they depend in their development in the
past and in their functionality in the present on the
characteristics of the people. Democracy is more a way
of living and thinking (see Dewey, 1997/1916) than a
specific attribute of institutions. If institutions in an
independent country are missing or faulty, people and
their leaders, using their education and abilities, will and
can develop them. One important test case of the
education-intelligence-furthers-democracy-thesis will
be the political development of China during the 21st
century. If the positive influence of high cognitive
ability on democratization is a general phenomenon,
China will become democratic.
Let's see about that prediction. Perhaps China is too big to get easy reforms, similarly to the US.