An interview with Simon van Teutem about his book on elite talent, his Oxford background, and his broader political work on the rise of radical right politics in Europe and the Netherlands. The conversation also touches on consultancy, banks, public-sector efficiency, immigration politics, cordons sanitaires, and why ambitious young people often end up in high-status but socially ambiguous careers.
Watch on YouTube ›Get the market thesis, key claims, assets, contradictions, and follow-up questions from any financial video — then unlock a version personalized to your portfolio, watchlist, and favorite speakers.
Simon van Teutem presents himself as someone shaped by elite academic and professional pathways, but who ultimately rejected the expected route into consulting, banking, or corporate law. He says he studied at Oxford, became immersed in political writing, and later wrote *De Bermuda Driehoek van Talent*, a critique of how top students are funneled into high-paying but, in his view, often socially underwhelming careers. The core thesis of the book, as discussed here, is that the system rewards external validation, risk aversion, and prestige-seeking, while drawing talent away from more socially useful institutions. A major portion of the interview focuses on consultancy firms, especially McKinsey, and the tension between their polished public image and the projects they actually take on. …
Tactically, the immediate watchpoint is the Dutch asylum and anti-bureaucracy debate: rhetoric that dismisses voter anger risks feeding the same radical-right forces it is trying to contain. For now, the most actionable setup is political rather than market-based, centered on how the new cabinet and media handle migration, local burden-sharing, and FvD.
Over the next several months, the base case is continued support for radical-right actors unless mainstream parties address housing stress, migration capacity, and institutional credibility more convincingly. On the public-sector side, promised efficiency drives look hard to deliver without real staffing discipline and less reliance on external consultants.
Structurally, the transcript argues that elite institutions increasingly misallocate talent and hollow out public capability, while political systems normalize more extreme actors without resolving the underlying grievances. The longer-run implication is a less trustworthy state, a more fragmented political center, and a talent pipeline that rewards status over contribution.
Stigmatizing or cordon sanitaire approaches against radical right parties can backfire and increase support for those parties once the topics they raise have become normalized.
The speaker cites Vicente Valentim's research showing a backlash effect: when political topics are already normalized, calling people 'radical right' backfires and incentivizes voting for those parties rather than deterring it.
Consistent stigmatization of radical right parties can be effective at containing them if the social norms against them have not yet been broken.
The speaker argues that unlike with PVV or JA21 (where topics are already normalized), Forum voor Democratie is still at a stage where consistent stigmatization could prevent normalization.
Forum voor Democratie is the only party in the Netherlands that wants to do business with Putin and Russia.
The speaker states that Forum voor Democratie is the sole Dutch party actively seeking business ties with Putin and Russia, in the context of Navalny's poisoning.
Why did you want to study at Oxford?
He says he was a nerdy high-school student who enjoyed political and social discussion, reading The Economist, and learning from older debate-club friends who were smarter and read more than he did. That made him want to surround himself with people smarter than himself and aim to be the dumbest student in the class.
What reaction did you get from people in those industries after writing the book?
He says he expected criticism, but in practice he mostly received supportive messages from people who work in those sectors. He still gets LinkedIn messages and even drunken reactions in bars from people saying they liked the book or relate to it, though some partners may speak negatively about it behind the scenes.
What made you decide not to go into consulting or a big law firm?
He says the consulting world often seemed to validate what CEOs already wanted to hear, which made him question whether he was really adding value. A major additional factor was reading reporting on McKinsey’s role in harmful real-world outcomes, especially the opioid crisis.
Unlock the full claims, asset map, scores, related transcripts, follow-up questions, and AI chat — shaped around your portfolio, watchlist, favorite speakers, and risks.
