I am still amazed anyone thinks she sounds posh. She barely enunciates her words and her vocabulary is hilariously limited. Her stunning witicism to put put Price down during the letters task was 'she's thick'.

Right. Thanks for your contribution.

She is educated, but not very bright. Her scheming is transparent.

I just wish her face was.

This is bang on.

If she is intelligent then all dictionaries need to be rewritten with some haste.......................

Yep I agree. I heard a statistic once that about one in a hundred people trend high on the sociopathic scale and have trouble with the concept of empathy. I thought it was overstated, but reading this forum really makes you wonder.

What makes me laugh is the density of her minions if they can't see through her manipulations. If Katie isn't as intelligent as she thinks, I dread to think what their IQ's are...

Intelligent? Possibly in some ways. Highly intelligent? Not even close.

She has a degree in Economics from Exeter University. Given her Sandhurst entry she must have got at least a 2:1. I dare say those who dislike her views will continue to assert she is 'thick' but by any objective standards she has performed in the top 2% academically (and I would venture to suggest better than many who are labelling her as stupid on here). She is quite clearly brighter than most of those in the House - whether she uses that IQ to good effect is another matter.

Katie H's education has taught her to feel confident, superior and authoritative. It seems to have also helped her to make money via doing nothing much at all. I'm amazed that she's not a politician yet, particularly a Tory one.
If she's convinced any of the public that she is, superior and should be listened to, I'm not surprised. They'd probably vote for her, as well. How intelligent or thick she actually is is perhaps irrelevant when there are people who respond to her accent, attitudes and behaviour in a servile way.
It's a great trick, pretending to be that superior. People can feel inferior and even admiring. It's a bit masochistic to accept being a lowly peasant but that's what a lot of people do, unfortunately.
Some celebrities have no talent but they cast an illusion of superiority, perhaps via looks, outrageous behaviour or just being in the media a lot. Katie Hopkins has a lot in common with that. It's all, an illusion, eg intelligence, importance, relevance and abilities. The public, not only allows it but pays for it.

That would be disgusting. And another Channel 5 programme entirely.

I have known people with masters degrees and probably some with P.H.D.'s that many would not really describe as intelligent by most parameters. Academia and intelligence are not necessarily synominous. To hold some of the views she does either means she actually is not the brightest of sparks and incapable of proper analysis or is pretending that that is the case. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on your point of view all her time in the house leads me to believe that it is the former. She has yet not been able to reasonably qualify anything she has said.
I would also contest that she is brightest in the house by most standards

She's certainly not unintelligent. However, she's not particularly quick-witted.

If she's not unintelligent then how can she not analyse issues so as to defend her 'beliefs'

She doesn't want to. She's arrogantly secure in her opinions so sees no reason to listen to (let alone dissect) opposing viewpoints. It's the stance of the tyrant.

arrogantly secure doesn't sound like not unintelligent to me

I couldn't agree more, although I tend to believe the latter.


I think she might just be following the path of least resistance. She has a set of 'skills', such that they are, that she exercises in her working life. Like the proverbial (wo)man with a hammer, she sees every problem as a nail and, strange as it may seem, it works! As a newspaper columnist her brand of vitriol is positively encouraged. She's often paid to appear on TV to spout bile. And within the BB house when arguments spiral out of control and the HMs land like a swarm of bees on somebody else she doesn't have to justify her 'beliefs' any more.

Why would she need to defend her beliefs? They're right.

There have been plenty of people over the course of history that have imperiously proclaimed their opinions as fact and sought to shut down (rather than discuss) any opposing views. And most of them have been far more intelligent than the "not unintelligent" Katie Hopkins.

Egotistical intransigence does not automatically mean unintelligence.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree about what intelligence is then because egoistical intransigence is a sign of unintelligence to me. I can see that an ethically improper belief can be well thought through if unpalatable. I just don't get the sense that that's the case in her case

She's intelligent enough to have made a decent living out of making (not particularly witty) controversial comments very publicly. She's managed to remain in the public eye (which, it seems, was her intention from a fairly young age) despite having no real discernible talent and managed to be paid for doing so. There is intelligence there. Far less than she would like us to think but some nonetheless. I'd love to believe that she was as thick as mince but I actually don't think she is.

She told Keith that he wanted to 'own sadness' . Whatever that means. I've never heard that one before

She wanted him to own his nomination of Cami. She thought that because he nominated her, he couldn't/shouldn't feel sadness at the nature of her exit.

Probably that Keith was trying to steal her limelight because she was 'so sad' about Cami leaving.

All Keith was trying to say was that even though he nominated Cami he didnt like that she left without getting a proper eviction with the audience and everything else and he would have liked for her to have that. Hopkins isnt terribly bright or emotionally in tune with other people's feelings if she can't understand something so simple.

Some have been in an argument with her, and she wavered and buckled.

To blindly accept beliefs doesn't sound like a good sign of intelligence.
An intelligent person would have the type of thought process to fully understand their beliefs and occasionally re-examine them.

You don't accept a belief and think "Right, I believe that now. No need to think about it again". if you believe in something you should be able to think about it now and again and revisit that belief.

I think that when people accept their beliefs as fact and don't consider new information and reconsider their beliefs, it's a sign of a lack of intelligence.

She hasn't blindly accepted them. She's looked at them with her particular brand of blinkers on, used her reasonable brain-power to assess them and decided they work for her. She's incredibly limited but she's not unintelligent. I also think she's mentally lazy.