while academic achievement is more important today than ever before, the primary attributes of a rhodes scholarship are still achivements in sport and community service. academic achievement is only used to distinguish and select between candidates already sorted, and is thus not the primary basis for a rhodes scholarship award. historically, the most discriminating factor was also what high school and university you went to; candidates generally hailed from the most prestigious schools, colleges, and universities of the empire. the importance of prestige has been somewhat diminished in recent times, considering that one of the 2012 Rhodes Scholars went to Griffith University.
the most ridiculous reason for arguing about the merits of a rhodes scholarship and making determinations between or of a politician's intelligence is that no one here works in HR or recruitment, and has no idea about the actual currency of a rhodes scholarship in industry. the rhodes scholarship is seen as an excellent opportunity both in terms of further studies and joining an old boys network, and is probably an excellent indicator for how self-driven or motivated a candidate is, but is for obvious reasons a poor indicator of a candidate's cognitive capacities.
a party leader, or a prime minister, is not required to be a supreme intellect. the reality is that the modern politician, though he may have his pet projects (e.g. bill shorten and the NDIS) is generally divorced from the policy development process. that is, after all, what a department and staffers are for. the real measure of a politician is and always will be his or her social competence: whether he is an excellent communicator and orator, negotiator and diplomat.
there is very little that distinguishes the cabinet and shadow cabinet. consider the respective educational achivements of each. as of today:
labor had 15 cabinet ministers, all of which had university degrees. between them, they sport: 2 bachelor of arts, 4 bachelor of economics, 8 bachelor of arts/bachelor of laws, 1 masters in IR, 1 masters in public policy, 1 MBA.
the liberals had 19 cabinet ministers, four of which had no university degrees. between them, they sport: 1 bachelor of economics/bachelor of laws, 9 bachelor of arts/bachelor of laws, 1 bachelor of commerce/bachelor of laws, 1 bachelor of commerce, 1 agricultural economics, 1 applied science (economics and geography), 1 bachelor of business, 1 masters in business leadership (lol), 2 master of arts, 2 bachelor of civil law. two rhodes scholars, one fulbright scholar, one commonwealth scholar.
there is minimal difference in educational achievement between labor and liberal. both are quite distinguished. while the liberals have 4 ministers that have received scholarships (and i've already established that these scholarships aren't necessarily representative of intelligence), they also have 4 ministers who have no university education at all. this lack of difference is quite odd considering that entry into labor party politics was generally gained through getting an undergraduate degree (typically ba or b economics, the proliferation of ba/llbs in the labor party is historically unique) and then engaging in union activities. the liberal party was generally distinguished by the number of lawyers among its ranks. indeed, as opposed to entry into labor politics, entry in to liberal politics generally consisted of working as a solicitor or even at the bar for a number of years, meanwhile accumulating industry goodwill, contacts, and favours, and then entering liberal politics.
lolsmith: law at university is very difficult, but for reasons unrelated to general intelligence. high entry ATARs are of course only a symptom of demand and supply and prestige effects. law is generally considered difficult both for the workload, which demands commitment and time sacrifice of students, and the often impenetrable mysteries of law assessment techniques. in fact, if you want to compare the difficulty of studying and understanding the law of the Roman Empire, you can study Roman Law at USYD (taught by justice of the federal court arthur emmett).
