It's a good thought experiment to make. Unfortunately it's already been done!
Okay, perhaps it hasn't been done under the conditions you've specified. But that's okay -- it's similar nonetheless.
One of the things we value as humans is our diversity. Of course, it's a constant source of strife, but it's also our greatest strength, I think. We are adaptable as situations demand, we can learn from our mistakes, and those of others.
To create a homogeneous group of laborers and another of leaders would be to strip us of our diversity. For example, one logical step after this would be to strip people of their racial identities and distinctiveness. This was portrayed in the book
The Giver, for instance, when the main character (Jonas) was given all of the memories of the world and began to see that sameness was not all it was cracked up to be.
Similarly-themed, the movie
Equilibrium takes place in a future in which everyone has been stripped of human emotion, allowing (as the main antagnist says) "everyone to lead
identical lives." There is no strife, save for those who refuse to take the drug eliminating human emotion; consequently, only one law-enforcement agency exists -- the one designed to wipe out any last vestige of human emotion. The protagonist, First Cleric John Preston, discovers the dizzying highs of human emotion *and* individuality when he accidentally (so it seems) drops his daily dose of Prozium (the emotion-removing drug) after killing his partner for being a "sense offender," and begins to understand what the people he has made a career of destroying are yearning for.
Finally, I can't seem to stop praising
Demolition Man for the great social criticism movie that it is. It pretty much depicts the same scenario you do, Ron, and you can see from watching about 10 minutes of the movie exactly what's wrong with that situation.
All told, besides literature, there is logical reason to *not* do this too. For one, who's to say what the "perfect" leader would be? Nobody is perfect (well, except me, but that goes without saying), but who isn't going to say that I'm *not* the perfect leader to increase his kid's chances of staying in power? Plus, we'll lose the differing viewpoints that diversity offers.
That's precisely why things like racism are bad for our society -- they discount (as your example does) the contributions of a particular subset of people.