[quote=“games”][quote=“mofangongren”]1) A fundamental lack of accountability –
2) A fundamental lack of due diligence –
3) Denial, denial, denial –
4) Lack of trust of their people --[/quote]
What I just wonder is … where is the news? Ain’t all governments or administrations more or less like this? In my perception, they are and I mean independent of nation, political leaning or period of history.
I must admit, I also heard these stories of those ‘noble leaders with only the common good on their mind’. But I never really took what Disney or the Grimm brothers told for real.[/quote]
Well said, games.
Reminds me of a discussion MFGR and I had a while back along similar lines.
[quote=“Hobbes, in an earlier discussion with MFGR”]If the proof exists? Well then, okay: There are people in the government who are willing to lie and cheat to maintain/increase their power. Of course there are. What else is new?
The only way this argument would really make a difference is if one buys into the fairy tale “Good Guys vs. Bad Guys” view of politics, in which the other side is evil and selfish and motivated by a desire for power, where as your side is motivated by pure-hearted altruism and a desire to do good in the world. In this worldview, the Good Guys are not corrupted by power. In this worldview, the Good Guys would not lie or deceive, and thus it is significant to try and prove that the Bad Guys do. There is nothing logically inconsistent in this. It’s just that we Hobbesians just find this worldview difficult to reconcile with our observations of the effects of power on human nature.
So who spreads the Disney/fairy tale version of politics as a battle of good and evil? I believe that there are three main groups:
color=blue Those so slow, uneducated, or naive that they really believe that this is how things work;
(2) Those who know that things don’t work that way, but are optimistic things could work that way (i.e. we could have heroic, Prince in Shining Armor government officials who are honest and selfless) – we just need to have faith and work hard to achieve this; and
(3) Those who know that things don’t work that way, and who know that human nature fundamentally prevents such a government from ever coming to be, but who exploit the myth when it is convenient (i.e. when their party is not in power) and ignore it when it is not (i.e. when it’s their own people abusing power).[/color]
I am inclined toward a charitable view of Category 2 people. I disagree with them, and I think that such optimism leads to worse government and more suffering than a more realist/cynical perspective, but I can still appreciate motivations that come from a good place. Category 1 and Category 3 however, are more difficult to defend.
My impression is that MFGR is, at heart, a Category 2 person, even if one can be forgiven for hearing hints of Category 3 sounding arguments from time to time. Then again, when one engages in vigorous political debate, I suspect that most of us are sometimes guilty of such opportunistic dishonesty. I know I sometimes am. Ah well… something to work on.