Thought experiment: what if the masses really were too dumb & vicious for democracy?
> "Third, Flynn may be overestimating the average population intelligence in past centuries and the amount of g needed to function in an agricultural society. Humans have much genetic programming for normal everyday life tasks (such as propensities to quickly learn a language and social skills) and drawbacks of low g may only become evident with arbitrary, unnatural tasks, such as school learning. The phenomenon of "six hour retardation" mentioned earlier suggests that people diagnosed as retarded by IQ tests may have trouble with school work but function adequately even in a technological society. After school, they "disappear into the population". Indeed, rightly or wrongly, rulers and political writers in past centuries have expressed contempt for the abilities of the masses. When cars were invented, some stated that few people had the intellectual capacity to learn to drive them. Such comments are rare today."
--Howard 2001 "Searching the Real World for Signs of Rising Population Intelligence"; recalling that the average American IQ hovers around 100, and that iodine deficiency cuts ~13 points, and iron deficiency is estimated at cutting 5-10 points...
(Is that not a dangerous enough thought? Then consider my previous post: women are universally considered to benefit considerably more than men from iodine supplementation which only began in the 1920s, likely are not as well-nourished as male children would be, suffer from greater iron deficiency/anemia, and one should remember how a bell curve - like IQ is - reacts in its extremes to shifts in the mean...)