| | Good article, Professor Machan.
One tiny bit of nit-picking re this assertion: "while yet others have managed to keep their sanity and focus without fail"
I would say that this last category of humanity is absent. Some people are close to perfection in their views, such as Ayn Rand, but we are all fallible human beings, as the ruthless way she brooked no opposition to any of her many views, some of them peculiar, about smoking, pollution, et. al. led to her booting out virtually everyone in her inner circle.
And yet, recognizing that essential fallibility is a feature, not a bug, for individuals to overcome their statist views that for most of us were an unquestioned part of the indoctrination one gets growing up. I became an Objectivist and a libertarian in part from observing politicians at very close range for eight years and having the epiphany that even ordinary people can't be trusted with power over others, much less the megalomaniacs and sociopaths who seem to predominate in a political environment (at least in the Hawaii state legislature).
People aren't angels. Politicians can't be trusted to act in your best interest, and according to Public Choice theory it requires one to assume altruism on their part to think they will act to benefit you rather than advancing their political careers, an irony that should hopefully not escape Objectivist minarchists.
Getting back to Rep. Weiner: I don't care who he wants to boink, or e-boink, or send naughty pictures to. I don't care about that in a politician. I would gladly take a libertine in their personal life who advanced liberty in their public life, than someone with a squeaky clean personal life but statist in their public life. I care about how their views affect my liberty, not about the problems in their personal life. For example, if someone thinks a non-smoking, non-drinking vegetarian who exhibits perfect marital fidelity would be the ideal candidate for any political office, I would suggest they read Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" for a counterexample.
So, the problem with Rep. Weiner's conduct in my mind is not the sordid details of his personal life, but rather his lying to us when first confronted with it. Rather than saying something like, "My personal life, and the personal life of any politician, is none of the public's business" or even "On the advice of counsel, I will make no comments about these allegations", Rep. Weiner showed that he was willing to deceive the public in a desperate attempt to salvage his political career -- and that he wasn't even very good at lying, though I suppose that ineptness in lying is a virtue rather than a vice in a politician. Better to know you're dealing with a liar so you can take countermeasure.
Personally, I think Weiner should stay in office, because he is so discredited that the longer he stays in the public eye, the more thoroughly unwarranted confidence in politicians will be eroded. And, it's not like any replacement from that congressional district is likely to be anything but a hardcore statist Democrat, given the demographics.
I wish we had a scandal a week like this, so people would have the epiphany that one's fortunes shouldn't be entrusted to people megalomaniacal enough to do what it takes to seize power -- to people who have the audacity to think they are better at ruling other individuals they don't know anything about, than those individuals are at ruling themselves.
|
|
