Junior Ganymede
We endeavor to give satisfaction

Statesmen, not Policies

July 09th, 2014 by Man SL

This is one of the most intelligent analyses of politics I’ve read in a while. Excerpt:

So the question isn’t (or at least isn’t exclusively), “How do we produce more effective policies?” It’s, “How do we produce men of judgment who will be wise stewards of those policies?” It’s, “How do we produce good statesmen?” The first question is the central preoccupation of the centrally managed state that we live under. The second two are versions of quandaries about the future of the polis that stretch all the way back to ancient Greece, all but forgotten

Comments (6)
Filed under: Deseret Review | Tags:
July 09th, 2014 15:33:45

Ugly Mahana
July 9, 2014

So, you are saying that the future rests, not in Congress, but in the cradle and the classroom?

I think I agree, so long as the emphasis is clear. I think that policy matters, inasmuch as any political junta should only give to government those powers that it would trust to its opposition. Now, however, it seems that enacted policies require wisdom that previous generations of rulers abjured, but we are told that everything will work out if we only elect the right (wo)man. Meanwhile, cultivating virtue in the young is ignored.

As near as I can tell, the organizing principle of the current ruling class (note that I am NOT distinguishing between parties) is that power may be safely conferred upon the government, so long as control by party is secure.

Thus, in a corrupt sense, I think that the terms of your second two questions are met. That is, while little thought is put into the policies, and great effort is expended in selecting the figureheads, the devoloping true virtue among youth is utterly neglected. Children and youth are valued as commodities, as a voting bloc, not as a resource more precious than any mineral, if as natural. And the happiness of future generations is offered up on an altar to modern sanctimony, i.e., political correctness.

Thank God there is another way for me and my house.

July 9, 2014

I have long fostered the heresy that more people voting is automatically better than anything else. The insane, and the corrupt, and the ignorant are not going to give you a better vote by participating.

July 10, 2014

Zen, your two sentences appear at odds with each other. I think you meant to word the first differently.

Did you mean: “I have long advocated that it is heresy to think that more people voting is automatically better than anything else”?

Or perhaps: “I have long fostered the heresy that more people voting is not automatically better than anything else”?

July 10, 2014

Actually, it only appears they are at odds. If you properly understand Zen…. Ok, I meant to put a ‘not’ in there. More isn’t automatically better.

I recall having read, that during the Great Depression and WWII years, the best jobs were in Government, and so it attracted the most intelligent people. Thus, we had the cream of the national crop as national and state policymakers. That is why we were still organized well enough to both fight WWII and to later, get to the Moon. We do not have this now.

Now we have both the incompetent and the corrupt.
Interesting times!

July 10, 2014

Part of it was that Jews and women with advanced educations could find positions few other places than government. So there was a leavening of extremely competent Jews and women. But, yeah, it was pretty attractive to a lot of highly educated people of all backgrounds.

Things changed as our attitude towards college education as well as government changed.

I could write a whole post on this. Maybe I will.

Bruce Charlton
July 12, 2014

I don’t think good leaders can emerge until there is a context which recognizes good as good – whereas the present context regards good as evil; and nonsensical irrelevancies – or even a history of idleness, shallowness, incompetence, corruption, self-worship, mischief and parasitism, and dishonesty – as good.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.