Geniocracy – the Theory and Practice of Intelligent Governance

Imagine a world without violence, hunger, and suffering in which human purpose is not found in work, but fulfillment. It sounds excellent, doesn’t it? Well, it’s also a vision of the world conveyed by Raël, the founder of Raëlism, who proposed a new kind of world governance called Geniocracy. 

Not to be confused with gerontocracy (rule by elders), Geniocracy is a framework for a theoretical government system that favors creative intelligence, problem-solving, and compassion as necessary principles of governance. And while it does appear to be an impeccable system, are there certain downsides to the utopian theory? 

Intelligence as Criteria for Governance

Is democracy a “mediocracy”? Well, according to Geniocracy, the primary flaw of today’s democratic system is the majority rule, which puts people of average intelligence – the majority – in charge of decision-making and electing officials in charge.

To avoid this and secure better governance, Raël suggests that unbiased, state-of-the-art tests should be designed for measuring raw intelligence. All people should be subjected to this test, which is to be developed and perfected by appropriate experts – psychologists, ethnologists, neurologists, etc.

Nomination Rules and Political Franchise

Then, the electors and electoral candidates would have to meet a certain threshold of criteria. The electoral right would be granted to individuals having intelligence that’s ten percent above average, while electoral candidates could only be individuals who ranked fifty percent above average.

The electorate would then consist of above-average intelligent people of all ages, races, social classes, and genders. The exceptional body of voters would be qualified to vote in even more intelligent political candidates, making the process a truly democratic one, right? Well, a lot of critics of this thought-provoking system strongly disagree. 

Potential Intelligence vs. Practical Intelligence

One of chief concerns is that the proposed system of Geniocracy favors potential intelligence over practical intelligence, which is thought to be more desirable when it comes to political leaders. 

While potential intelligence describes the learning potential and comprehension capacity, practical intelligence refers to the exceptional ability to comprehend separate parts of information about a task, interpret them as a whole, and anticipate expected outcomes.  

Misconceptions about Intelligence

Geniocracy criticizes the democratic system because it enables morally corrupt and unfit individuals. However, it is misleading to assume that higher intelligence pertains to competence and straight morals, as multiple studies point to the non-existing correlation between intelligence and morality.

Moreover, the idea of measuring a concept as vaguely defined and subjective as intelligence is hugely flawed. Mostly because there are multiple facets of intelligence, and intelligence tests are often misleading, culturally biased, and arbitrary.

Therefore, the idea behind Geniocracy about ending world hunger, inequality, and suffering is good in theory. However, it misses the mark with quite a few other things, discriminating in ways that promote elitism and making dangerous assumptions about intelligence, and those who are fit to be leaders.

(1) Raël , et al. Geniocracy: Government of the People, for the People, by the Geniuses. Nova Distribution, 2008.