Rigorus technical interests, education or experience does not prepare one for positions of political leadership. in fact, I believe they disqualify you.

As for the Heinlein matter, I believe the quote is in Starship Troopers, where there is an attempt to determine the qualifications for the franchise. One of Rico's teachers asserts that scientists are motivcated by personal curiosity, a selfish motive that benefits the community, but is not a marker for leadership. nor an urge to serve the community. He concludes only a demonstrated willigness to risk ones' welfare for the commonwealth should be considered as qualification for the right to vote. (Hmmm...that sounds vaguely leftist to me...).

The quote made an impression on me because when I read the book as a naive adolescent, I assumed scientists, with their superior intellect and relative disdain for wealth and power, would make the ideal rulers. Heinlein convinced me I was mistaken.

You claim no desire for political power, and you may well be sincere, but you also refuse to accept that ownership of the means of production and communication is the ultimate form of political power, he who controls economics, controls politics. Economic power is power, pure and simple. There is no getting away from that. Political power flows from economic wealth, not the other way round.

That's an authority box you can't even see, so I guess its too much to ask you think outside of it. When a man, or a class of men, can hire you, fire you, pay you what they want, sell you everything you need at the prices they choose, and when they own or otherwise control the infrastructure of society and the flow of information, they own you, totally. The fact that they compete with each other (as well as collude in your exploitation due to coincident class interests) offers us no guarantee of choice. Street gangs and feudal barons go to war with each other, too.

They may be benign despots, perhaps even enlightened ones, but when push comes to shove, you are the one who's expendable. Not them.

Tom, the basic difference between you and me is that you admire businessmen, and trust their motives. I fear them. And (with a few notable exceptions) I don't particularly like them.

As for the "libertarian dictator"...well, Tom, you insist on guiding the conversation on this blog to this one topic, and you won't take no for an answer, or tolerate any opposing position. That's as good an indicator of central authority as I can think of. You are determined to alter the way I think because it cannot be reconciled with your view of reality.

The fact you might be mistaken has never entered your mind. Neither has the fact we might both be mistaken