Thursday, August 27, 2009

Great Post on our Servant Overlords

I often hear the argument that people like Edward Kennedy (who died Wednesday, brother of John F Kennedy), born to wealth and privilege, are to be praised for working for the poor, becoming 'public servants' (see Blogging Heads below). My ideal servant would not spend all his time trying to boss me around, statistically speaking.

Don Boudreaux over at Cafe Hayek nails it:
While Kennedy didn’t choose a life of ease, he did something much worse: he chose a life of power. That choice satisfied an appetite that is far grosser, baser, and more anti-social than are any of the more private appetites that many rich people often choose to satisfy.

A true altruist gives his money or time to others, via friendship or charity. They don't write laws that force me to serve their ends.

15 comments:

Aaron said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aaron said...

well said!

Anonymous said...

To characterize as base using the power one has to protect the weak from predation is, frankly, sick.

Eric Falkenstein said...

'protecting the weak' is a good thing. Intentions, declarations, and realities, are not highly correlated. As the grand leftist (Marx) said, we should not judge policies on intentions.

J said...

My impression may be superficial, but Terence has a luminous head.

Anonymous said...

Eric: I assume your criticism of rich men who go into politics to lord it over us includes Republicans, like George W. Bush, "Duck" Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld.

Anonymous said...

It's great you don't even have the ethics to not speak ill of the dead Or to give it some time for some criticism.

but you are a small and petty man.

Hell I hated Jacko, and gave that a week, and I'm still cautious... Cause it's in poor taste.

but I guess again... there are better men out there than you. You don't make yourself large by taking on people who you are a Fly on Shit compared to...

I guess it's all that time you spend at the homeless shelters that makes you so good.... You are clueless about the amount of time Ted Kennedy spent on Friendship and Charity And I guarantee it was more than your narcissistic ass does.

There is something seriously wrong with you. I have no doubt you will not be missed when you die.

I can't stand rush Limbaugh, and wouldn't dare to speak ill of him within days of his death.

This one just takes the cake! Spend some time and Figure out what the fuck is wrong with you!

Get HELP!... You are really this small a person.

Eric Falkenstein said...

Welcome to Falkenblog!

Anonymous said...

I agree with Anon 12:45pm...the world would be a considerably better place had George W. chosen a life of ease rather than a life of power; although i agree no one mistakes him for an altruist.

Anonymous said...

Yes, it was very selfish for Ted Kennedy to work to establish Civil Rights, to work for universal healthcare, and to work on creating a "living" minimum wage.

He was a selfish selfish man.

Kennedy was a traitor. A truly great man, born to wealth, would work to benefit other wealthy people. Instead he worked to tax them more. The truly great men are people like Forbes and Cheney, welathy men that work to lower marginal rates on the wealthy.

Anonymous said...

You really shouldn't waste your time, Anonymous @ 3:29. You and the author of this blog have nothing in common. No frame of reference. The author believes in wealth creation while you believe in redistributing the wealth that's been created. Having you two engaging in a debate would be like watching William F Buckley arguing the merits of Catholicism with a really dumb atheist.

J Mann said...

I don't think there's anything morally wrong about being a senator, but I agree that it's way overblown to characterize sitting in a senate chare as morally laudable "public service." US Senator is one of the highest status, most powerful jobs in the world, and it is appealing for exactly that reason.

Now, Senators may do morally good or bad things *as senators*, just as they might do as CEOs or whatever, but merely running for and serving as a senator doesn't make you a public servant.

Anonymous said...

His character and reputation of the Great Man are chiseled in stone. http://tr.im/xFwD

Paul W said...

Posts like this are why I keep coming back to this blog.

gINNYms said...

What is the the myth and what is the reality? The media would have you think that they and we really know who a person is. We don't. In an era of moral relativism, how do we define a great man (or woman.)Are they lead in their personal and professional lives by a set of values that they consistently demonstrate privately and publically? Or do we measure their greatness becaue they produce what we think we need? Can you be technically proficient, say a great legislator, but morally corrupt, which leads to great harm in a private life, and still be a great man? I don't know.