I think there is a misconception when we say somebody is not intelligent. It does not always mean that their points are terrible or even wrong, but that they forget that many normative issues is a weighing of many equally valid arguments.
I have just read Krugman’s latest article, Bernanke and the Shibboleths, and as usual there are some angry, angry commenters who are saying that we need price stability so that our savings will not get eroded! Every high school student knows that! The problem is that while they do have the right idea, they also have the reasoning capabilities of a particularly thick high school student who spends way too much time snogging in the bike sheds. Instead of assuming everybody is trying to KEEL you, think it through.
Committees of Correspondence writes:
‘Now, PK knows this. Why does he try to deceive his acolytes? Only one answer. Because he thinks that you are stupid in the extreme.’
Really? That’s all you can think of?
It’s possible to think of Krugman as some sort of Machiavellian figure who delights in seeing HIS PUPPETS DANCE, it is also possible that the advantages of abandoning price stability for a while outweighs the disadvantages. [Insert other parts of high school economics.]
There is a precious difference between being a bit slow and being stupid. The world can do with a couple of people without the mental agility to do metaphorical flips but it sure can do without people with just a bit of brains to be loud and angry.