sooner or later, power always corrupts and always seeks to entrench itself....
I'm having a bit of a philosophical crisis lately. As a longtime socialist I've always believed in the ability of a benevolent state to improve the lives of its citizens and rejected the conservative model of limited government that can be drowned in a bathtub, which is ultimately rooted in what I consider one of humankind's worst vices: selfishness. Instead, I look to northern European social democracies for inspiration, and find plenty to like.
But the recent struggles in the middle east and elsewhere have reminded me that even benevolent power ultimately corrupts those who possess it-- and their fall from grace often comes quickly and unexpectedly. Power over others, power to make decisions for others, power to speak for others, the power of the state-- it ALWAYS turns rancid sooner or later. It corrupts those who hold it, making them self serving, separating their interests from the people they serve, making them rulers, then despots, and ultimately tyrants in all but the most unusual circumstances. That is the nature of state power. Once consolidated, it resists any attempts to dilute it, making our surrender of power to the state a one-way trip from citizenship, to tenantship, to victimhood.
We're seeing it happen in the U.S. right now. The corrosion of public service and institutions by accumulated power is the undiscussed subtext of many discussions here on DU. It's the reason for our national polarization, our economic woes, and our political gridlock. Our public institutions are turning from serving the public interest to serving the vicious self interest of increasingly entrenched and self-defensive power.
Small government with few resources can do little good, but it can also do only limited harm. Lately, I'm torn about which is more important.
= new reply since forum marked as read