General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDoes public office corrupt or does public office attract the corrupt?
Or is it a bit of both? There always seems to be this weird divide between the political leaders and the politically lead.
The historical philosophers always claim that those who should lead never want to lead. Is this a truism?
Deep13
(39,154 posts)leftstreet
(36,109 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)diabeticman
(3,121 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,321 posts)This is true in many, if not most, Western career choices.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)It's also true that those who can not be bought by big money are those who will NOT be elected to public office, or if they are elected, they will be destroyed, career-wise.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)At this point in time, it's difficult to elect someone without corrupting them in the process, and once in office they often have to BE corrupt to stay there.
marsis
(301 posts)become a thief. The "every one does it mentality" prevails, especially when people literally throw money at you, but of course they aren't buying votes.....uh....nope.
It takes a very special person to overcome the paradigm in DC.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)But, once elected, they find out they're not going to be able to be implement their idealism because system inertia resists massive change.
randome
(34,845 posts)But politics also attracts those with entirely noble intentions who manage to keep their ethics yet cannot get much of anything done.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)the nature of the beast. Machiavelli spelled out the way it works pretty well. Leaders are busier maintaining their own power than with looking outfor the common good.