Politics also require quite a bit of emotional intelligence and charisma and ability to get diverse people to come to the table for compromises. Academic achievements are orthogonal to all these.

Best case would be multi-talented persons who have both IQ and EQ and good character. Just IQ is not enough.

▲

inertiatic 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You think you navigate a career in academia without working through different opinions, collaboration etc.?

▲

iorrus 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Definitely not my experience in academia, mostly small mini czardoms who can't stand and won't speak to their competitors. Often engaged in ancient blood feuds with the person two doors down. Add a dash of corruption in publishing and citing each others works while excluding those they disagree with etc.

	▲	vanderZwan 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		IMO that's applied Sayre's Law though. And my explanation for that is that the more niche (and therefore fragile) an academic topic gets, the more defensive people are. I've heard stories of friends working in (say) such a niche part of fluid dynamics that there's two professors and a few dozen PhDs in the entire world who get it, and the professors refuse to work with anyone who ever cited the other in one of their papers. On the other hand, I've worked as a programmer for molecular neurobiologists who were working on multi-million dollar research projects mapping out all cell types of the brain using single-cell RNA sequencing, and collaboration seemed much more common there. The stakes don't get much higher than running the country you're from. EDIT: Also, the city of Groningen elected a city council of young students and put a 24 year old in charge of the city’s traffic and urban development policy. We still brag about being one of he most bike-friendly cities in the country that was the result. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayre's_law [1] https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jul/29/how-groningen...
	▲	brabel 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yep that’s a great summary of what my wife, a professor, tells me about every day.

▲

sparkie 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well, you can have certain differences of opinion as long as they're "acceptable" opinions. Academia ousts those who don't fit into its culture. Tenure is the only way you can express your real opinion without reprisal, though you may still be socially outcast for having the "wrong" opinion - and those who make it this far are predominantly products of that same culture - their opinions align with their peers on what is deemed acceptable. The anointed.

▲

palata 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Academia actually involves a lot of politics... just not the kind that says it's all the immigrants' fault.

▲

sparkie 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's more the kind of deciding how to spend other people's money.

Both government and academia know how to navigate this well - by avoiding accountability.

	▲	psychoslave an hour ago \| parent [-]
		And in business the first move is to create a juridical fiction to endorse accountability instead of the people driving it. Apart bare nude citizen and end of chain operator, there are not much people not playing such a dodge game it seems.

▲

inglor_cz an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It is still quite tribal, with whole mutually hostile clans that stem from a particular professor or workplace. Plus the economy of academy tends to be quite zero-sum.

Also, the US academy specifically cares about your race a lot.

▲

ACCount39 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The two are strongly correlated.

Intelligence is a tool - one that can be put to use against any problem. "Get diverse people to come to the table for compromises" is no exception.

▲

michaelt 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Some character traits that are useful to academics are useful to politicians; others are kinda the opposite of what politicians need.

Intelligence? Problem solving? Understanding statistics? Speaking in front of rooms full of people? Communicating complex ideas clearly? Useful for both jobs.

But an academic can be bookish, shy or haughty. Pursuing your own ideas is actively encouraged. There are arguments - but the main audience for the debates are other academics. They needn't collaborate on research with anyone they don't want to, and when they do collaborate everyone has the same destination in mind even if they disagree about the route to get there. When dealing with students, they've all chosen to be there, passed exams and paid money. The work is mostly low-medium stakes, with time to get important things right. And of course they have excellent job security.

Politicians, though? Gotta love campaigning and talking to voters. Gotta all get together behind the party's national platform. Even colleagues in your party are rivals because everyone wants the top job. 'Debates' all about playing to the audience and getting 3-second soundbites for social media, not engaging with the substance of arguments. No choice in who you collaborate with, including people with deep-seated disagreements about things like tax, debt, spending. Gotta represent voters many of whom hate you. Do well at the job and high stakes things you didn't even do get blamed on you, like train crashes and oil markets getting expensive. Oh, and every 4-5 years you're fired and get to re-apply for your job.

▲

ninalanyon 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> academic can be bookish, shy or haughty.

There's no shortage of haughty politicians either.

	▲	michaelt 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Maybe so, but most politicians need to get votes. Not all of them go as far as GWB-style "the kind of guy you could have a beer with" but they all know there's no benefit to being contemptuous of any popular entertainment. An academic can be an ivory tower type who thinks sports matches, superhero movies, social media and star musicians are a waste of time. But politicians who think the Superbowl is a waste of time, that star wars is for children, and that Taylor Swift's music sucks pretty quickly figures out sharing those opinions loses far more votes than it gains.

▲

ivell 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think we have people who are highly intelligent and still unable to navigate social situations. Neurodivergents are not uncommon in academics.