Question
In a war between the cognitive and socioeconomic elites, who would win?
Answer
First a suggestion: you MUST have "labor bosses/union leadership" in the definition of socioeconomic elites.even if they aren't in the top 1% financially. For all practical purposes, they are part of the elite. With that caveat...
John Phileas has it almost right. It isn't overlap. It is "cognitive capture."
The socioeconomic elites of an age invariably cognitively capture the cognitive elites (ironic huh?). I mean the phrase in the secondary sense of the word: buying into the views of a beneficent agent who is close in terms of social distance, but far in terms of power distance. This is a generalization of the Stockholm Syndrome.
http://smallprecautions.blogspot...
The mechanisms are simple: the cognitive elites so to speak, live off the beneficence of the socioeconomic elites, whether it is through direct patronage/support, employment relationships or the murky economy of speaking gigs at Davos, TED talks, etc.
So in case of war, what do you think will happen? 90% of the cognitive elite will immediately turn their talents to justifying the position of their "enemies" in the conflict.
The only time cognitive elites have any real power of leverage is when TWO factions of the socioeconomic elites are at war with each other with near perfect balance of power, and the cognitive elites cast the deciding vote. An example is 1900-1910 balance of power between management and labor. That fueled the rise of a new cognitive elite (the then "new media" of mass market newspapers, circulation wars, "yellow press" journalism and polemics like Ida Tarbell). Back then, the cognitive elites did not take sides as a bloc vote, so some went left, some went right.
John Phileas has it almost right. It isn't overlap. It is "cognitive capture."
The socioeconomic elites of an age invariably cognitively capture the cognitive elites (ironic huh?). I mean the phrase in the secondary sense of the word: buying into the views of a beneficent agent who is close in terms of social distance, but far in terms of power distance. This is a generalization of the Stockholm Syndrome.
http://smallprecautions.blogspot...
The mechanisms are simple: the cognitive elites so to speak, live off the beneficence of the socioeconomic elites, whether it is through direct patronage/support, employment relationships or the murky economy of speaking gigs at Davos, TED talks, etc.
So in case of war, what do you think will happen? 90% of the cognitive elite will immediately turn their talents to justifying the position of their "enemies" in the conflict.
The only time cognitive elites have any real power of leverage is when TWO factions of the socioeconomic elites are at war with each other with near perfect balance of power, and the cognitive elites cast the deciding vote. An example is 1900-1910 balance of power between management and labor. That fueled the rise of a new cognitive elite (the then "new media" of mass market newspapers, circulation wars, "yellow press" journalism and polemics like Ida Tarbell). Back then, the cognitive elites did not take sides as a bloc vote, so some went left, some went right.