I’ve noticed a very specific narrative pattern that continues to recur. It shows up not only in fiction, but in real life as well.
In the movie Braveheart, there is a shocking moment when the king murders the lover of his son the prince by hurling him out of a window. Up until this scene, the film makes it very clear that the prince’s lover is strong, intelligent, highly competent, and has excellent judgement.
It is therefore understood that with his lover by his side, the prince would have been able to rule as a wise and effective king. By removing his partner, the king has rendered his own son ineffective.
The prince’s lover was killed precisely because he was the smartest person in the room. In the king’s mind, by definition, a natural leader who is homosexual cannot be allowed to exist.
Quite similarly, there is a shocking moment in Schindler’s List when Jews in a concentration camp are being put to work on a construction project. One of the Jews, a young woman, informs their Nazi overseers that they are planning the project all wrong.
Before being sent to the concentration camp, she explains, she had been a civil engineer. She tells them how they would need to proceed to do the project effectively.
The Nazi commandant immediately takes out his gun and shoots her dead. Then he informs his underlings to do the project the way she had instructed.
The young engineer was killed precisely because she was the smartest person in the room. In the commandant’s mind, by definition, a natural leader who is Jewish cannot be allowed to exist.
We have recently seen this pattern repeated, with remarkable fidelity, in real life. General Brown was fired as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff precisely because he was the smartest person in the room. In the mind of the person who fired him, by definition, a natural leader who is black cannot be allowed to exist.
In all three of these cases, the discerning observer understands that things will end very badly for the fool who has removed the smartest person from the room.