Natural aristocracy--a contradiction in terms?

Who’s Best? Who’s Brightest? - The Conversation Blog - NYTimes.com: "these are the circumstances of men that form what I should call a natural aristocracy, without which there is no nation."

It was Edmund Burke, the father of conservatism, that laid down certain criteria for the ruling class of his time. However, there is nothing natural over an aristocracy. There are no Barack Obamas or Sonia Sotomayors in Burke's aristocracy. David Brooks points out that he is more comfortable with the current ruling class--a meritocracy of high SAT scores. It is interesting to compare this ruling class with the Swedish ones. We have not had SAT scores in Sweden. It is just recently when talented kids can get special attention in school. Will the realities of globalisation change this?

Brooks is bringing this topic up due to the death of Robert McNamara and the other Best and the Brightest of his time. The problem was they started the Vietnam war. However, President Obama's team is also a team of high achieving academics and lawyers. They are different from the crowd that came after World War II that according to Brooks were very successful.

The question is of course pressing due to the present situation in the world. I might be wrong, but the financial crisis and the oil prize of $150 per barrel a year ago really changed things with Obama entering the scene. For the US, and of course for the EU, it is very important that he will be successful in turning the economy around and that he solves the AfPak story satisfactorily. Some say he is trying to do too much at the same time. I guess he himself worries that he only have eight years for his project.

How does the Swedish government get along with its American counterpart when they are so differently constructed? Are the "siloviks" of Sweden differently recruited compared to their American counterparts? Do we have a clash of cultures? What makes SAT scores optimal for selection into the ruling class. I'm not sure I'm as confident as Brooks over its usefulness?