4 ms·

I don't think you're being fair to the person you're replying to. We should want to be led by people more intelligent than most. And not just more intelligent,

I don't think you're being fair to the person you're replying to. We should want to be led by people more intelligent than most. And not just more intelligent, but more honest, honorable, and courageous than most. That shouldn't be controversial. I don't agree with the OP's paternalism, but I do think that men need to be led to achieve the greatest that each is individually capable of. And to be a great leader requires one to be extraordinary. There is not a Napolean or Alexander sleeping inside each of us. And that's just fine. We are nonetheless equal before God, or for secular ears: equal in dignity and moral worth.

lossolo 9y ago
> but I do think that men need to be led to achieve the greatest that each is individually capable of. And to be a great leader requires one to be extraordinary. There is not a Napolean or Alexander sleeping inside each of us. And that's just fine. We are nonetheless equal before God, or for secular ears: equal in dignity and moral worth. I fully agree but this doesn't make what I wrote less true. > We should want to be led by people more intelligent than most. And not just more intelligent, but more honest, honorable, and courageous than most. That shouldn't be controversial. I don't deny that. But we (most of western civilization) live in democracy, Sarah Palin is democratically elected official and by many she is not seen as the brightest person. Donald Trump is the most powerful man in the world, is he "not just more intelligent, but more honest, honorable, and courageous than most." ? In my opinion he is not, but I didn't vote for him, I am not even an us citizen, but this was people choice. Writing that we should not allow someone to be part of government because we perceive them as dumb ourselves is dangerous, let the people decide, say your opinion in that matter, show candidate faults, but let the people decide.
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  >Writing that we should not allow someone to be part of government because we perceive them as dumb ourselves is dangerous, let the people decide, say your opinion in that matter, show candidate faults, but let the people decide. I don't think I follow. You, I, and everyone else in this conversation are part of "the public" as much as the next guy. And insofar as our political system forces us to vote for less than ideal people in order to advance or protect important principles--and I think lots of people of all political persuasions felt like this in 2016--it is unfortunate. For Trump in particular, you may argue that he lacks in intelligence, and I would disagree but see where you're coming from, but he certainly has plenty of courage. That's what Republican primary voters saw in him.
  - lossolo 9y ago
    > You, I, and everyone else in this conversation are part of "the public" as much as the next guy. I don't really know how should I interpret what you wrote in context of my answer, can you elaborate what you mean by that? Especially how you think this connects to what I wrote? Because analogy to this would be saying that sun shines while discussing about weather without more context. Which doesn't bring anything new to this discussion. > And insofar as our political system forces us to vote for less than ideal people in order to advance or protect important principles--and I think lots of people of all political persuasions felt like this in 2016--it is unfortunate. We could say that "If only people were more knowledgeable, they’d have better politics." Everyone has a different view of “better politics,” but this is a fairly common sentiment. If dumb people vote for dumb people it's not their fault, it's our fault, elites, because we didn't convince them not to, we knew better didn't we? After all they are just dumb people, what do they know? Is that what you are arguing? So what did you do to stop dumb people from voting on other dumb people? What did OP do? It's our responsibility. Ask yourself why people voted for Trump and not those smart, liberal elites? They voted for them before, what changed? Those are all important questions. Political perturbations across western world in last year had their reasons. Why suddenly everyone on world economic forum in Davos say that costs from globalization are higher than benefits for western world? That they have political and social costs. Why most "free trade" advocates suddenly say that they were maybe wrong ? Why Larry Summers says that "the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good" now ? Maybe those "dumb" people were right after all and maybe we were wrong? Did you consider that for a second?
    - marcoperaza 9y ago
      I voted for Trump actually.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      > Why suddenly everyone on world economic forum in Davos say that costs from globalization are higher than benefits for western world? That they have political and social costs. Why most "free trade" advocates suddenly say that they were maybe wrong ? Why Larry Summers says that "the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good" now ? Where are you reading this, I haven't heard anything like this at all? As far as I know, it's business as usual is it not?

lossolo 9y ago

> but I do think that men need to be led to achieve the greatest that each is individually capable of. And to be a great leader requires one to be extraordinary. There is not a Napolean or Alexander sleeping inside each of us. And that's just fine. We are nonetheless equal before God, or for secular ears: equal in dignity and moral worth. I fully agree but this doesn't make what I wrote less true. > We should want to be led by people more intelligent than most. And not just more intelligent, but more honest, honorable, and courageous than most. That shouldn't be controversial. I don't deny that. But we (most of western civilization) live in democracy, Sarah Palin is democratically elected official and by many she is not seen as the brightest person. Donald Trump is the most powerful man in the world, is he "not just more intelligent, but more honest, honorable, and courageous than most." ? In my opinion he is not, but I didn't vote for him, I am not even an us citizen, but this was people choice. Writing that we should not allow someone to be part of government because we perceive them as dumb ourselves is dangerous, let the people decide, say your opinion in that matter, show candidate faults, but let the people decide.

marcoperaza 9y ago
>Writing that we should not allow someone to be part of government because we perceive them as dumb ourselves is dangerous, let the people decide, say your opinion in that matter, show candidate faults, but let the people decide. I don't think I follow. You, I, and everyone else in this conversation are part of "the public" as much as the next guy. And insofar as our political system forces us to vote for less than ideal people in order to advance or protect important principles--and I think lots of people of all political persuasions felt like this in 2016--it is unfortunate. For Trump in particular, you may argue that he lacks in intelligence, and I would disagree but see where you're coming from, but he certainly has plenty of courage. That's what Republican primary voters saw in him.
- lossolo 9y ago
  > You, I, and everyone else in this conversation are part of "the public" as much as the next guy. I don't really know how should I interpret what you wrote in context of my answer, can you elaborate what you mean by that? Especially how you think this connects to what I wrote? Because analogy to this would be saying that sun shines while discussing about weather without more context. Which doesn't bring anything new to this discussion. > And insofar as our political system forces us to vote for less than ideal people in order to advance or protect important principles--and I think lots of people of all political persuasions felt like this in 2016--it is unfortunate. We could say that "If only people were more knowledgeable, they’d have better politics." Everyone has a different view of “better politics,” but this is a fairly common sentiment. If dumb people vote for dumb people it's not their fault, it's our fault, elites, because we didn't convince them not to, we knew better didn't we? After all they are just dumb people, what do they know? Is that what you are arguing? So what did you do to stop dumb people from voting on other dumb people? What did OP do? It's our responsibility. Ask yourself why people voted for Trump and not those smart, liberal elites? They voted for them before, what changed? Those are all important questions. Political perturbations across western world in last year had their reasons. Why suddenly everyone on world economic forum in Davos say that costs from globalization are higher than benefits for western world? That they have political and social costs. Why most "free trade" advocates suddenly say that they were maybe wrong ? Why Larry Summers says that "the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good" now ? Maybe those "dumb" people were right after all and maybe we were wrong? Did you consider that for a second?
  - marcoperaza 9y ago
    I voted for Trump actually.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    > Why suddenly everyone on world economic forum in Davos say that costs from globalization are higher than benefits for western world? That they have political and social costs. Why most "free trade" advocates suddenly say that they were maybe wrong ? Why Larry Summers says that "the basic responsibility of government is to maximise the welfare of citizens, not to pursue some abstract concept of the global good" now ? Where are you reading this, I haven't heard anything like this at all? As far as I know, it's business as usual is it not?