Bandits are nothing more than pre-Stupid
Carlo Cipolla, in his insightful yet deceptively simple essay on stupidity, categorises people as Intelligent, Helpless, Bandit, and Stupid. In my musing for the day, I shall venture to emend Cipolla’s treatise and posit that Bandits are nothing more than pre-Stupid.
Who can the Bandit rob?
Who can the Bandit rob or steal from? The Intelligent? Helpless? Stupid? Or weaker Bandits? The obvious and easy victim is surely the Helpless; your proverbial low hanging fruit. They give up what they have for the benefit of others. However, the Helpless are helpless to create value; once they are plundered of what they have, the Bandit needs to seek out new victims because there is no more gain to be had. Given that the Helpless are finite in number, the Bandit will eventually run out of easy preys. They then have to try to loot the Intelligent or Stupid or other Bandits. Who would you choose if you are a Bandit?
Like the Helpless, the Bandit is incapable of creating value. In the previous article, I did highlight that there are some Helpless and Bandits that are closer to the Intelligent and on such occasions, gains outweigh losses thus indicating the creation of some value. However, to simplify today’s discussion, we’ll consider the perfect Helpless and perfect Bandit whose actions cause mere transfer of value and the gain is equals to the loss.
Stick 'em up Stupid!
Given that the Stupid are value destruction extraordinaire, the Bandit will be foolhardy to even contemplate eyeing them as potential victims. Not only is there no value to be had, the Stupid will destroy the Bandit; that’s their superpower. Cipolla describes this in no uncertain in the Fourth Basic Law:
Non-stupid people always underestimate the damaging power of stupid individuals. In particular non-stupid people constantly forget that at all times and places and under any circumstances to deal and/or associate with stupid people always turns out to be a costly mistake. - Carlo M. Cipolla
Although the Bandit’s act of robbing the Stupid may result in losses to the Stupid, he is not walking away with any gains because the Stupid’s reaction to the Bandit’s act is utterly destructive.
The fact that the activity and movements of a stupid creature are absolutely erratic and irrational not only makes defense problematic but it also makes any counter-attack extremely difficult - like trying to shoot at an object which is capable of the most improbable and unimaginable movements. - Carlo M. Cipolla
In the final reckoning, the Bandit becomes Stupid because by robbing the Stupid both he and the Stupid suffer losses.
“Somebody messes with me, I’m gonna mess with him.” – Al Capone
How about robbing other Bandits then? This is possibly a net-zero and borderline Stupid endeavour. Robbing other Bandits is an open invitation to getting pillaged in return. The efforts expended robbing, then trying to prevent getting robbed, but eventually robbed nevertheless, then doubling down on the next robbery to regain the losses… You get the picture. The picture is not unfamiliar. With no permanent gains and definitely losses in time and energy, this looks pretty Stupid to me.
The Intelligent choice?
That leaves us with the Intelligent. Should the Bandit rob the Intelligent? Yes, if he is judicious and leave enough meat on the bone. Perhaps this is where it makes sense to differentiate between the Intelligent Bandit and Stupid Bandit. The Intelligent are the only ones capable of creating value where their acts result in gains for themselves and others. The Intelligent Bandit may rob the Intelligent somewhat and leave sufficient gains for the Intelligent so that they have the resources to continue creating value. The Intelligent might not like it but since they are capable of generating new gains to make up for the losses, they may reason that their efforts are still worth it.
Most critically, their means of value creation must not be stripped from them. The Intelligent Bandit will leave the Intelligent’s tools of the trade alone. Conversely, the Stupid Bandit will rob the Intelligent of even their tools thereby causing two scenarios to eventually play out. One, the Intelligent decides that it is futile to remain in the territory and they leave. When this happens, there is an immediate and massive destruction of value because the only people capable of creating value are there no more. Two, the Stupid Bandit strips the Intelligent of the tools with which they create value because they erroneously believe that it is not intelligence that created value but the mere possession of those tools. The Stupid Bandit takes forceful possession of the tools but is subsequently incapable of producing the same level of value. Worse, through sheer incompetence, begin to break the tools thereby destroying any possibility of future value creation. The Stupid Bandit is now just Stupid. Does this also sound familiar? Have you lived through examples of these in your workplace or country?
Who are you?
Are you Intelligent, Helpless, Bandit, or Stupid? Are you benevolent or malevolent?
Benevolence is benefiting others, the green quadrants of the gain-loss chart above. This is the only viable way of preventing rapid and massive destruction of value. The Intelligent and the Helpless are benevolent. Granted that the Helpless is likely to be limited by competence and/or resources, they can be helped. Through developing their capabilities and availing them with the necessary tools, they can become Intelligent. That is the promise of education in its truest form. If you find yourself in a culture, workplace, or country that is unable to celebrate competence and success, where both are instead being actively torn down, bad things are going to happen very soon.
Malevolence is causing others to suffer losses, the orange quadrants. The Stupid and the Bandit are malevolent. Even though it may seem as if the Bandit is able to rip benefits from others for their own gains, such gains are temporary. Give the Bandit enough time and he will become Stupid. History is littered with evidence of such.