SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Meta Analysis - Clinton\Starr Discussions

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: INFO_DART who wrote ()10/18/1998 1:19:00 AM
From: Bilow   of 4
 
Hi INFO_DART; Great idea for a thread, hope it stays relatively quiet.

One observation I have made among my friends is that the more cynical they are regarding politicians, the less they feel that Clinton should be punished. The assumption I have heard from more than one person is that it is normal and natural for politicians to lie, cheat, and even kill to get elected and to stay in power.

Our schools have reduced the amount of time spent looking at the good things past heroes have done, and now spend more (than before) time looking at the bad side of even the best people. I suggest this change in education has caused the acceptance of behavior that would not have once been tolerated. (In fact, you can bet that I will get posts back to me suggesting that, in the past, this behavior was tolerated, and possibly practiced by Abraham Lincoln, myself, Mother Theresa, Socrates, etc. On the other hand, Slavery was tolerated once, and I don't see a lot of people arguing that it is natural and normal now.)

It's a lot easier to justify one's own indiscretions if one makes an assumption that everybody else does it too. So my worry is not with Bill Clinton, (single politicians, in our republic of balanced power have, much less of an effect on this country than they wish,) but with the condition of our own individual consciences. Individually, each of us is weak compared to our leaders, but collectively we are far more significant.

The scariest thing I have seen suggested recently is that moral leaders, like Jimmy Carter, may tend to be too weak to govern effectively. This thought scares me. We are perhaps going into hard economic times, traditionally the times when people look for the strong man to help and protect them. If they don't care what the ethics of that man are, who will they not allow to lead them?

Many are arguing that the ethics of a personal sexual life are distinct from the ethics of governing, thus compartmentalizing the ethical problem. I'll try and keep the thread on topic by not commenting on this, just noting it.

-- Carl
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext