Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm honestly not convinced that good and wise men or women can effectively rule.

I'm not sure how to get around the necessity to occasionally make decisions that will cause suffering and death, either through violence or neglect. Occasionally, the most well-intended of decisions will cause death or suffering by accident. And the reality of the situation is that we need leaders who while trying to minimize the harm of their decisions, keeps making clear decisions even after their decisions cause enormous harm. Ordering a missile strike that kills 100 people, even if they are evil to the last, requires a certain kind of callousness, a certain amount of seeing the bad people as bad first, and people last. I think a lot of folks in the military square that spiritual cost as their obligation and find strength in being the one to make that sacrifice. To win elections, you have to want to be that kind of person from the jump.




I'd argue that someone unwilling to choose the lesser of two evils is either not good, not wise, or not good and not wise. Sure, if you believe that your goodness, wisdom, and competence are less than that of your likely successor, even after you recruit advisors who can help you be more competent, surrender that mantle... but that's an unlikely level of humility to find in someone who needs to win a popularity contest.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: