????透過寢室的窗戶，我能看到抗議的人群。約翰?哈佛雕像前的帳篷上掛著這樣的標語：“大學校門應向99%的人敞開！”、“占領哈佛”抗議活動是為聲援更大規模的“占領運動”而舉行的，目的是將學生從政治派別中分離出來。一位自稱屬于“自由派”的朋友說：“真是可笑。哈佛大學（Harvard）之所以特殊可不是因為隨便一個傻瓜都能來這里上學?！?/p>

????克里斯托弗?海耶斯在《精英的沒落：后精英體制時代的美國》（Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy）一書中對這種說法進行了批判，同時強調，精英體制把社會優質資源分配給最優秀、最聰明、最勤奮的人，我們對這種體制的信任毫無根據。

????海耶斯在書的開頭寫道：“美國似乎已經四分五裂。”他寫道，這個國家正在經歷一場“權威危機”，美國國會山（Capitol Hill）、華爾街（Wall Street），乃至棒球場和天主教會（Catholic Church）的一系列丑聞就是例證。這本書寫得確實很好，事例詳實，明顯經過充分的調查，語言簡單，易于閱讀，證據充足，充分證明精英們讓我們失望了。

????雖然如此，但我還是確定自己可以接受這種觀點。美國社會確實存在精英腐敗和瀆職的現象，這一點我并不否認。但我認為精英無能是一個更靠譜的解釋。好吧，我承認自己有些多愁善感。愛因斯坦曾說過：“世界上只有兩種東西是無限的——宇宙和人類的愚蠢。對于宇宙的無限，我還不太確定?！保慨斢腥藢@句話與我辯論的時候，我都會推薦他看看互聯網上任何一則消息下面的評論內容。）

????既然人類的愚蠢是無限的，那么，無論什么時代、什么地方的精英們也都難免會犯傻。海耶斯認為我們現在正處在一個特殊的夕陽期，也就是他所謂的“衰退十年”。這種說法略顯蒼白，因為從歷史上來看，不稱職的精英人物一直都存在，比如古羅馬暴君尼祿、卡迪甘勛爵、內維爾?張伯倫，還有吹噓泰坦尼克號（Titanic）永不沉沒的那些人。

????而且，如果說愚蠢是無限的，那么任何職位、任何收入水平和任何威望級別的人都有可能犯錯。確實，著名的人物經常在自己的崗位上瀆職。但那些不是那么著名或者非精英階層的人也會犯同樣的錯誤。正如達蒙?魯尼恩所說：“腿腳快的不一定跑得過，實力強的不一定打得贏－－但是打賭的話，只能這么選。”

????I could see them from my dorm room window. The signs on the tents in front of the John Harvard statue read: "We want a university for the 99%!" With this slogan, Occupy Harvard -- a student protest expressing solidarity with the larger Occupy movement -- managed to alienate students from across the political spectrum. "That's ludicrous," said one self-described liberal friend. "Harvard's specialbecause not just any idiot can get in."

????In Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy, Christopher Hayes indicts this sort of thinking, arguing that our faith in meritocracy -- the notion that society's rewards accrue to the best, brightest, and most diligent among us -- is unfounded.

????"America feels broken," Hayes opens. He argues that the country is experiencing a "crisis of authority," illustrated by the scandals on Capitol Hill and Wall Street, in baseball and the Catholic Church, among others. Well written, thoroughly researched, and easy to read, the book delivers ample evidence that our elites are failing us.

????That being said, I'm not sure I buy it. I don't doubt the existence of elite corruption and malfeasance, but I find elite incompetence a much more probable explanation. Call me sentimental. As Einstein allegedly said, "Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not yet sure about the universe." (I refer anyone who takes issue with this to the comments section of anything on the Internet, ever.)

????If stupidity is infinite then it must extend to elites at all times and in all places. Hayes argues, unpersuasively, that we're in a special, sunset period of history -- what he calls the "Fail Decade." Yet history is replete with examples of elite incompetence -- think Nero, Lord Cardigan, Neville Chamberlain, and whoever called the Titanic unsinkable.

????And if stupidity is infinite, people of all titles, incomes, and prestige levels are susceptible. It's true that distinguished individuals often mess up their responsibilities. But so do their less distinguished, non-elite brethren. As Damon Runyon said, "The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet."