James F. Welles Ph.D. or lack of effective, credible criticism in the slaphappy world of the media, p ower d oes indeed tend to corrupt (as Lord John Acton noted 1 ) because stupidity is a corruption of learning. For some reason, the power to command frequently causes a failure to learn--with power being a substitute for wisdom. Worse yet, the errors of leaders are less likely to be corrected then those made followers l ower on the power-ladder, so, as often noted, failure comes from the top down. Ideally, the responsibility of those in power is to govern as reasonably as possible to the mutual advantage of all. To accomplish this end , a leader has best be well informed, heed available information, be open-minded without being empty-headed 2 and judge all effects of policies objectively. However, it is unusual for someone transfixed by his own power to be openminded enough to perceive that a pet policy is having unintended, negative effects, responsible enough to admit it and wise enough to replace it with a better one. 3 The principle of cognitive dissonance applied to politics would show that there is a constant push from way below and outside the powergrid to reform the system and force those in power above to live up to the ideals they routinely esp ouse but rarely honor and apply. Usually, such pushes are blunted by mid-level, career-minded, promotion-seeking mi smanagers. Generally, mismanagement is promoted when creeds and rituals of government become so rigid as to inhibit adaptive responses. Reduced to essence, politics is a battle between the "Ins" and "Outs" over loaves and fishes 4 -a civil war by peaceful means, with reform coming from below and revolution induced when the power-system fails bybeing too rigid to adjust to necessity. In such holy wars of politics, priests crusade and campaign, thrive and perish, 5 but even when victorious over political opponents, officials may find their reforms and policies lost to bureaucratic inertia. It often appears that the machine of government is designed to produce friction, constructed to break down and operated for those who service it. Society is there for the governmentnot the other way around to feed it and clean up after it, to nurse it through illness and to support it when it goes out to cut its teeth on its equally corrupt, problematic neighbors. The sad fact of political life is that misgovernment may strengthen a regime temporarily. 6 Gaining and retaining power is what government is all about, so the "Ins" tend to make decisi ons which they perceive to be to their own short-term advantage albe them perhaps to the long-term detriment of all. The idea that F power is not an end in itsel f but a means to help people is a myth political priests use to mask their short-term, sel fserving machinations from the long suffering public, or, as Spinoza almost said, authority is based on stupidity: 7 e.g., Congress as g overnment by deadlock. 8 We have carried the Constitutional principle of "Checks and Balances" to the excess of gridlock 9 because officials lack theoretically possible if oxymoronic "Political virtue", which places the national good above individual gain of self-serving pol s. This happened in the Gilded Age of the late 19 th century and is happening again in the early 21 st . 10 When the g overnment takes c ontrol of a society, it may be building itself up, but it also builds up a lot of aggravation and resentment. As agencies expand in size, productivity is reduced to the point that one might think waste has become an incentive. This is the point at which bureaucracies a cease to solve problems and become problems themselves. While there is nothing quite so stupid and aggravating in public life as officials perversely persistent in pursuing a p olicy clearly in everyone else's worst interest, b the commitment of politicians to their favorite projects is a motivating force unto itself and makes government immune to reason and restraint. The short-term gain of power through corruption makes a mismanaged agency less ruly and more an end in itself. Thi s may make the "Ins" temporarilystronger, but it also intensifies long-term resentment against them on the part ofthe "Outs". The craftier politicians have found that, while stupidity may lead to unpopularity, popularity may lead to stupidity and that this is the most effective way to succeed in politics. If a politician really wants to be stupid, as so many seem to, he need not be too circumspect-all he has to do i s find a popular cause. The more popular the cause, the less critical people will be about policies directed toward achieving the end: the more people want something, the less they will be concerned about how they get it. This gives stupidity full rein to flourish in the absence of skeptical criticism. Only after officials have persisted for a long time in contrived foolishness to the point that their actions become unpopular and finally unacceptable will a government be forced to do something intelligent/right. This i s basically what happened with d. Justice is simply the matter of punishing the guilty and freeing the innocent (Plutarch. Pompey. 10) but judges and lawyers then get clever about "Guilt" and "Innocence". e. A rul i ng by the Supreme Court i n 2010 agai nst Ci tizens Uni ted was denounced by former President Ji mmy Carter as "....one of the stupidest rul i ng ever..." for roll i ng back restri ctions on corporate spendi ng i n federal el ecti on campai gns. (Carter, Former Pres. J. Sept. 14, 2011.) American involvement in Vietnam and to Soviet dominated puppet states in eastern Europe. In addition, politicians are liars. They have to be, as lying is a way to get support from others. Thi s is not to say they lie all the time. Sometimes events fall into place so a p ol can actually tell the truth, but (s)he has to be ready to lie at a moments notice and be good at it. c For others, the trick is not to find whom to believe but to be able to spot the better liar from the others. Why anyone heeds campaign promises is beyond the comprehensi on even of an expert in stupidity. Generally in political organizations, the leader is a popular headman-the first among unequals. Aside from the fact that the wrong people often win office because anyone with self-respect cannot conduct a winning campaign, 11 as a central reference point, 12 an elected leader may play a largely symbolic role in that, most of the time, people know what to do anyway. 13 Oddly enough, in our modern societies, traditional patterns of political behavior have been strengthened by the emphasis of the role of the "Leading man" as a symb ol to worship rather than as a doer to emulate. The American public, for example, forms lasting impressions from a President's incidental gestures as representative of the people but pays relatively little attention to what he does as chief of state. 14 M ore and more, when demagogic leaders are chosen, they attain office because of their popular appeal rather than the validity or value of their publically stated policies. 15 As Harrison Otis noted before the 1800 presidential election, Jefferson's approach was "A very sweet smelling incense which flattery offers to vanity and folly at the shrine of falsehood". 16 Now, this trend has reached the point that administrators now govern as if in a perpetual campaign 17 in which their actions are secondary to their slick, buttoneddown images, which in turn were by 1960 spot marketed commercially as perfectly wrapped products like so much toothpaste or soap. 18 The Madison Avenue mantra for a synthetic image was that any p olitical personalty could be packaged without reference to any serious issues. 19 Richard Nixon at one point explained how much preparation was required to be spontaneous and, in addition, seem sincere. 20 Sincerity aside, hairy head s seem to be the decisive factor in winning Presidential elections: Voters go for good heads of hair. 21 All this is rendered irrelevant because votes are tabulated by the National ElectionPool-a secretive private organization accountable only to the four unnamed corporations which run it. 22 If we skip relevance for effectiveness, we note-as did the Romans 23 -that negative ads and personal attacks on opponent s work in terms of winning if not informing the public who is the best candidate. Actually, the leader really does not lead anymore. He is just there, like an elected monarch, giving a general tone to society and providing a focal point for the reverence of those who for some reason believe in the system. He also provides the media with an object of attention so that hundreds of photographers have someone to focus on and scores of reporters have someone to quote off the record. If any leading must be done while governing by image, 24 there is least friction if the people lead the headman where they want to go while the most effective leaders are those who can make people want to do what is necessary and make that appear to be right. Of course, stupidity thrives at best in the gray area between the appearance and actuality of necessity posing as desirable. d Beyond appearance, hard work and ambition trump (pun) a sense of justice and altruism as means to political success, 25 but even more important are perspicacity, intuition and will power. 26 In terms of political organization, republics are particularly stupid, due to the temptation of representatives to give people what they want rather than what they need. All leaders are in danger of being told by their underlings what they want to hear rather than what they need to know, 27 and then they turn around do the same to the electorate, the truth usuallygetting mushed up in a campaign 28 culture of corruption. 29 Further, once elected, "Public servants" are seldom in a position even to consider what ought to be done 30 except in the context of getting re-elected. The inherent danger of gratifying the people in general is usually somewhat offset by the influence of special interest groups, 31 whose campaign contributions are a principle source of c orruption e among elected officials and make many of their acts, if and when they are not revealed, appear to be as stupid to their constituents in the short run as they may prove to be embarrassing to the legislators in the long-run if they are. Not only does power tend to corrupt, but it tends to be eminently corruptible. Franklin Roosevelt warned us of the deleterious influence of the special interest groups of his day 32 (presumably the securities and stock market gamblers) and spent millions bailing us out of the Depression. Eisenhower did likewise when he fingered the militaryindustrial complex in his farewell address 33 but to no practical effect: the "Bombs-R-Us" boys still got their nice little war in the '60's to the tune of billions. In the 1970's, it was the oil companies which shocked us with the price of gas. In the '80's, it was the savings and loan debacle; in the '90's, the internet bubble burst. Earlyin the 21 st century, it was greedybankers who led the country into a trillion dollar dumper through the unregulated Renewal Sale and Repurchase (RE-PO) market which brought the country to ruin if not 34 rack-another financial disaster Who will do it next is anyone's guess but the government will presumably go through the motions of regulating the financial industry via the FDIC, SEC, OCC, CFPB, FSOC and CFTC-lumpable together as the FUCUscrabble around after the fact and then spend quadrillions saving the country without upsetting-indeed, while bailing out-those responsible for creating the mess. To put this back into a general context, in 2013, 11,000 lobbyists spent $3.2 billion in Washington 35 all to get the best government money can buy. It seems superfluous to add that the big, rich interests are organized, and poor, uneducated marginalized people are not. 36 All they can do is vote according to their perceptions and reactions to the slickest ad campaign. Government s not only administer stupid laws ineffectively to address problems which may or may not exist 37 but also provide a professional judiciary to apply them unjustly. There was a time when people were judged by trials of c ombat, fire and water f . 38 These were all based on a belief that trials were moral confrontations. If a person was judged favorably, it was because he was right relative to another individual or neutral nature. Those who deride such judicial mechanisms might take a good look at our modern jousting list-the court of law and where hired wits do battle 39 to determine the morality (guilt or innocence) of the person or system on trial. The hired guns-the lawyers-use all the tricks in and out of the book to win "Their" case. The jury determines who has the best lawyer, 40 and at best, judges preside to see that the game is played fairly while occasionally obstructing any real quest for the truth. 41 At worst , judges may 42 intervene to interpret formal rules according to the principle that the game should be fair but not too fair. Only slightly better is the fact that many cases are settled to the advantage of the reigning powers, which, put the other way, means were are condemned to injustice. 43 In all seats of political power, be they administrative, legislative or judicial, ceremony shapes the ways in which personalities interact to solve and create real and imaginary problems. The preoccupation with most political officials is with the rituals of government. As long as these assure the likelihood that those in p ower will retain their positions, the rituals are honored as sacred. The impact of decisions reached under such circumstances is usually secondary to the desirabilityof main-taining decorum and giving speakers a chance to pronounce a few slogans for public consumption. Stability depends not on the validity of pronouncements but whether or not they satisfy the people. The regulation of societyis considered sec ondary f. The idea here was that a bound up guilty person would be rejected by water and float. This was challenged, in 1662, in Connecticut by a skeptic who opined that anyone in such a condition would float and offered himself as a test. Unfortunately for his cause and himself he sank. (Tomlinson. 34.) and is indirectly affected only when conservatives become convinced the status quo must be further preserved and protected or reformers can convince political hacks it really is in their own best interests to apply some common ideal to reality. As many have noted, if you are not a liberal in your twenties, you have no heart; if you are a liberal in your forties, you have no head. 44 As always, the biggest threat to the state is the man who thinks for himsel f 45 and, ironically, lives up to the rules because-cognitive dissonance aside-at the first sign of intellectual integrity, the state totters because then everyone else is shown up as a shallow faker. In this context, the Puritans never tired of denouncing the "Civil" man-one who was a good citizen, obeyed the laws, discharges his social obligations and never injures others. Such a paragon of virtue was continually reminded by the preacher that he was on his way to hell. 46 To put it another way, there is no one so infuriating as one who lives up to the rules. Don't we all cheat a bit? Isn't everyone a bit dirty? And if someone does not or is not, how is he treated? Well, I know of one case like that, and he was crucified. Of course, there are always call s for civic reform. When, on Dec. 27, 2007, Senat or Barack Obama hyped America's call for "A new politics", he was refreshingly stale. It was precisely what Fred Eissler, (who?) local director of the Santa Barbara Sierra Club thirty-eight years earlier offered after an offshore oil spill. 47 Fred did not get his new politics, and we got partisanship as usual and scandals at the VA and IRS. I suppose every forty years or so we will get a call for if not the actuality of a new politics, so expect another circa 2050. Meanwhile, we will suffer along with the hypocrisy, cynicism and egotism of self-serving elites espousing the rhetoric of democrac y 48 or slamming it as being as stupid, uneducated and selfish as the democratic people are. 49 However p olitics are practiced in America, we have two unsolvable problems which d oom us to failure while defining who we are: 1.) Special interest groupse.g., corp orations, the NRA and Zionists; 2.) our debilitating if not suicidal commitment to prolonged deficit spending. There is no way any American government can deal intelligently with these problems any more than Catholic Mexico can curb its rampant overpopulation. * Letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton LordActon WWillkie The New York Times Apr. 5, 1887. June 30. 1940 * Undated quotation on page 697 of P. McWilliams's Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do MForbes Prelude Press * The March of Folly. Knopf BTuchman NY. 32 1984 * The Papers of James Madi son Tammany Presidential Series 2 Apr. 18, 1810 * The Folklore of Capitalism TArnold 1937 Yale University Press New Haven, CT. 21 * Tuchman Op cit. 33 * 45. (For what it is worth, Will Durant regarded Spinoza as the best of all philosophers despite his nutty, Leibnizesque conclusion that this is the best of all possible worlds-disasters included. Or, as Voltaire observed BSpinoza Ca 1675. 1963 A Public Appeal New York Jewish House-holders) in The Rise of Reform Judaism: A Sourcebook of Its European Origins by G. Plaut. World Union for Progressive Judai sm. If this is the best of all possible worlds, what then, are the others?" Candide. 1759. Chap. 6. * The Deadlock of Democracy JBurns Prentice-Hall * 2. An aspect of the federal government to mentioned in The Federalist NJEnglewood Cliffs 1963 * Your Government Failed You. HarperCollins; New York RClarke 2008. 352 * The Gilded A ge. Sterling; New York AAxelrod 2017. 215 * BTuchman S. News and World Report June 30. 1980 * Group emotion and leadership FRedl 1942 * An Introduction to Cultural and Social Anthropology PHammond 1978 Macmillan 275 New York 2nd ed * In a memorandum entitled The Politics of 1948 allegedly prepared by Clark Clifford for President Truman. Cited in The Best Years: 1945-1950 by JRowe J. Goulden 1947. 1976 Atheneum New York * The Assault on Reason. Penguin AGore 2007 New York. 7 * HOtis JrLetter To John Rutledge Aug. 25, 1800 * The Permanent Campaign and Its Future NOrnstein TMann 2000 AEI Press * If you vote for Goldwater, we will bomb North Vietnam". I voted for Goldwater, and , sure enough, we bombed North Vietnam. Candidates are all a bunch of liars. The say whatever i s necessary to get nominated; then they say whatever is necessary to get elected; then they do whatever is necessary to get re-elected. If anyone i s dumb enough to think otherwise, read on. Further, my one, individual vote never would have made a difference anyway, so I do not waste my time picking and choosing among self EDiamond SBates RRovere The Spot: The Rise of Political Advertising on Television. Cambridge, MA. 50-59. Halberstam, D. 1993. The Fifties New York 1992. June, 1960 220 Quoted in Oakley's God's Country . 416. As a personal aside, when explaining to acquaintances why I never vote, I cite my experience with the election in 1964. I was told. serving liars to cast a vote that d oes not matter anyway * Viking Press New York. 44-45. Some phoniness is required by the medium: One must use make-up to look natural on American TV and be artsy in conveying the truth. But phoniness aside, visual trump s verbal WCostello 1960 300 The Facts about Ni xon * The American Presi dent WLeuchtenburg 2015 Oxford University Press 374 New York * The Situation Room . CNN. In the 1950's, the two contenders were pretty equally bald JCafferty Oct. 27. 2010 * Skyhorse Publishing; NewYork DHiddenJeffries History 2014. 220 * MBeard Spqr Liveright 2015 454 New York * The Last of the President's Men. Simon & Schuster BWoodward 2015. 131 New York * LFreedman Strategy 2013. 322 Oxford University Press New York * The Ruling Class GMosca 1939 McGraw-Hill * New York 50 1900 * Campaign comment. Quoted in Gertz, B. The Failure Factory. Crown Forum Obama BSenator 2008. 2008 151 New York * The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Ol d Liberal Order GWill SHayward Posted on the net (AO L?) Monday Sept. 1975. 2001. New October 24. 2017York. June 7, 2004 See also, Hitchens, C. The stupidity of Ronald Reagan. at 1:03 PM ET * Public Affairs SMcclellan 2008 New York What Happened * ArnoldOp cit. 45 * The Triumph of Politics. Harper & Row; NY DStockman 1986 33 * An undated quotation on page 658 of P. McWilliams. op. cit. (FDR's phrase actually was ".that small group of selfi sh men who would clip the wings of the American eagle to feather their own nests FRoosevelt Great image! * DEisenhower Pres Jan. 17. 1961 Farewell Address * /it-wasnt-a-mortgage-recessi on-afterall-so-why-d ont-we-feel better? AOL 2010 02/ 26. Mar. 2. 2010 * Winner-Take-All Politics JHacker PPierson 2010 Simon & Schuster 118 New York * The Logic of Collective Action MOlsen 1965 Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA * Undated quotation on page 632 of P EBenn McWilliams. op. cit * Extraordinary Popular Delusi ons and the Ma dness of Crowds CMackay 1852. 1980 New York 2nd ed.. Republished by Harmony Books * In a review of Trial Techniques by Irving Goldstein EMorgan Harvard Law Review 49 1935 Grace, N. 2005. Objection. Hyperion * RFrost Undated citation on page 207 of P. McWilliams. op. cit * Fair Trial. Harper & Row; NY. xii. 42. Freedman. op. ci t RMorris 1967 326 * PMishra Age of Anger. Ferrar, Straus and Giroux * 95. (A comment attributed to J-JRousseau 2017 * Pre-1875. A biographical section about A. Batbie, who termed the idea (Edmond) JClaretie Burke's Paradox. Quoted on pp. 119-120 of Paul Bloom's Against Em pathy * Quoted on page 220 of C. Horner"s Red Hot Lies HMencken 2008 Washington, D.C * The Puritan Family EMorgan 1644 * Thou Shalt Not Abuse the Earth RMacdonald REaston New York Times Magazine Oct. 12. 1969 Quotation of Fred Eissler * Mishra Op cit. 236 * Undated. Oral history DAcheson Truman Library