Knight: My understanding is that GW decided he’d get more pages in the history books if he declined the crown. George III agreed: “if he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”
Yes, this is also the history I learned. But if we aren’t to forgive tyrants for their good intentions, shouldn’t we only judge GW by his results?
Shulman: Silicon Valley seems to allocate power to a systematically different group of people than would acquire it through democratic elections or the internal politics of the PRC.
I’ve yet to hear that all Silicon Valley CEOs are wise and benevolent tyrants who never abuse their subordinates or their companies. And if a larger fraction of them do manage to do better, then I never said the temptation of power was invincible.
Hanson: Once people are aware than many people often succumb to a certain temptation, they like to collect stories of times when they resisted the temptation. Those new tribal leaders may have done this dozens of times before and while actually being the new power-abusing leader.
Shall we not praise that behavior which we wish to encourage?
Human society has not been designed to operate entirely without nodes of power. We would like people to refuse to abuse power on specific occasions, so it makes sense to praise stories of people who refused to abuse their power on specific occasions. But we should praise, far more highly than benevolent rulers, those who find ways to check power or avert it entirely; the framer of a functioning constitution above the wisest king.
And if someone comes to us with a handful of anecdotes of times they refused power, but without much of a systematic record recommended by neutral third parties, let us perhaps agree that each specific occasion was worthy of praise, but not trust them to be a good tyrant in the future.
@Julian: Excellent point.
Yes, this is also the history I learned. But if we aren’t to forgive tyrants for their good intentions, shouldn’t we only judge GW by his results?
I’ve yet to hear that all Silicon Valley CEOs are wise and benevolent tyrants who never abuse their subordinates or their companies. And if a larger fraction of them do manage to do better, then I never said the temptation of power was invincible.
Shall we not praise that behavior which we wish to encourage?
Human society has not been designed to operate entirely without nodes of power. We would like people to refuse to abuse power on specific occasions, so it makes sense to praise stories of people who refused to abuse their power on specific occasions. But we should praise, far more highly than benevolent rulers, those who find ways to check power or avert it entirely; the framer of a functioning constitution above the wisest king.
And if someone comes to us with a handful of anecdotes of times they refused power, but without much of a systematic record recommended by neutral third parties, let us perhaps agree that each specific occasion was worthy of praise, but not trust them to be a good tyrant in the future.