It’s hard to tell if you accept the premise of the article, that “neuropolitics” is any more informative than other identity politics. Under any system, those

It’s hard to tell if you accept the premise of the article, that “neuropolitics” is any more informative than other identity politics. Under any system, those attracted to power will reflect the means of attaining it. Considering gerontocracy, we can expect an industry to emerge based on shaping ideas to appeal to that age range. Ideas found too inaccessible by the very old fall outside the Overton window of what debate is allowed in the legislature. Abortion and adoption, long-term consequences of funding education, technology and as the decision makers age out of daily cultural contact, unfamiliar cultural trends like diet, recreational drugs, public transit. These need to be communicated via staff and lobbyists who pick which issues are most negotiable with favored stances of the very old. I think you’d agree that this could happen with any set of politicians as it approaches a monoculture. If it were agrarian slaveowners (Ancient Rome or parts of Colonial America), historians would watch as they picked which challenges to solve, and why. We get to watch as legislation is shaped to appeal to people whom it will never be relevant to.