How do you know your elitist society wouldn't abuse their powers? You're assuming that these super intelligent leaders will be benevolent when looking out for humanity as a whole, when in reality that wouldn't be the case. All people, no matter how intelligent, are prone to bias. How would you act once put in a high place of power? I think you'd be assertive with your ideals, but there's so much more that you could be.. Including being blatantly abusive and having complete disregard for individual needs. And all because you don't believe in them or think they hold humanity back. 
My point is that you rationale is similar to that of blood thirsty dictators, facist and monarchs. It took us a while to be rid of those tyrants and to come to the conclusion of democracy. Now people like you are itching because you're unhappy with the current scheme of things. Listen, it's not so bad. I'm assuming you live in the states and have acess to a lot of luxury, as well as basic needs.
A place like africa is a shithole. But there's brightspots in the globe in places other then the states or western europe.. Many asian countries have embraced democracy and free market economics and are growing as a result. More people are literate now than at any point in time. More people now have acess to food and education than at any point in time. It's not so bad.
You are not seeing the entire picture.
To put it into simple terms: In a country, you have some kind of organ that has the power to decide. Why? Because this is necessary to provide a pooling of resources towards a single goal that a small minority is unable to provide (like infrastructure and so on....)
Without central leadership, chaos will prevail.
Do you think America would be a great place to live if it each neighborhood controlled itself? If this was the case, we'd still be in the stone age or something. NASA did not send a man to the moon without the entire US scientific community helping out.
Right now, we face problems that must be solved by UNITING the global society, to provide a CENTRAL leadership. You can not solve this when each nation basically does as it pleases, and when small stupid things are being prioritized, thereby maintaining a status quo with persistent problems.
The "ultra intelligent world council" basically means that we put the most intelligent and skilled minds within each field to make general goals and objectives for humanity. They will have no "ultimate power", and all their work will be tested for rationality.
Humans with normal intelligence can generally not see the solutions to problems, thus, we use the people with the highest intelligence and the most developed skill.
We already do this to a certain extent today, (UN), but it is disorganized, and as long as NO action = being taken, nothing will happen.
You seem to disregard all the arguments being written, because you automatically imply that "the superintelligent world council
" would have ultimate power to do what they pleased, just like a dictator or a king. Debussey = not saying this, but Debussey = saying that the world council will have the authority and the right to make solid decisions that might step on certain individual needs in order to serve the greater good.
Conclusion: Debussey never wrote anything about "blood thirsty dictators" or having a complete disregard for individual needs. The only one saying this is you, because you fail to comprehend the ideas, and instead fill them in with your own assumptions.
The point = simple: Most of the problems today are not being solved because the current system does not work, because it serves human tendencies that by their own nature will avoid any attempt to solve the problems before it is to late. Only by making real commitments, can we solve these problems, and this can not be done by the current state of affairs.
One more thing: How on earth do you conclude that Debusseys thoughts (if put into action) would mean the end of free market economics?
The only way you can make such a foolish assumption -> that you use dictatorships from 3rd world countries as an analogous example to prove a point about a superior way for all of humanity. You can not use a blueprint for a woodshed to help build a rocket.
Any free market economy MUST be regulated in some way, or else we would have a shitload of problems, like pollution (do you think any company in a free market economy would give a shit about pollution if no restrictions existed?
).
The Superintelligent world councils main role would be to make plans and strategies for humanity in total, and this means that everybody must share the responsibility by accepting certain limitations. (ergo, delayed gratification).
In other words, Debussey = saying that we need a global government with decision power to battle the problems we face today (which can not be solved by todays system), and we need the best suitable people in this government. If you had problems understanding this, go back to class. This does not imply that free markets will seize to exist and this does not mean any kind of classical dictatorship. This means creating a long term solution before it is to late.
(-> Debussey agrees that there will be a lot of implementation problems and stuff like that, as allready stated)
