Power Corrupts

**Jesus The Inane** · May 16, 2006, 05:40 PM

"It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power." ~David Brin

I would say that this quote is correct. If we look in history, then we can see clearly that this statement is correct. For example, Alexander the Great did not become corrupt because of power, he always wanted power, even when he didn't have it, so he always did what he had to do to gain power. In constrast, Simon Bolivar never wanted power, and when he gained power, he didn't try to gain more of it -- he even refuse a crown.

What ya'll think?

**Sétanta** · May 16, 2006, 05:42 PM

Sometimes the best leaders are those who don't want to lead. It is true that power corrupts but often times people are pushed into a leadership position that they don't really want and those are often the people who don't get corrupted.

The quote is very true.

**the Black Prince** · May 16, 2006, 05:46 PM

absolutely. the best leader is the one who reluctantly takes the job because he realises he is the best for it after much persuasion.

this is why democracy is bad. anyone that WANTS to run for president should be kept as far from the oval office as possible... prefarably in a little caravan somewhere in Oklahoma

**Spiff** · May 16, 2006, 05:47 PM

maybe this is more of an Ethos, Mores issue.

But anyway, is it fair to say 'corrupted'? Maybe power just reveals ones true nature

**SovietDoom** · May 16, 2006, 06:14 PM

The problem is, those with the will will generally beat out those without it anyways.

**Jesus The Inane** · May 16, 2006, 06:24 PM

But anyway, is it fair to say 'corrupted'? Maybe power just reveals ones true nature

Thats exactly the point of the quote. That power does not corrupt.

The problem is, those with the will will generally beat out those without it anyways.

Unless you have a determine person who is willing to stop that ambitious person. Such as Brutus and Cassius (?).

But is it bad to want power? What about if I want power so that I can improve the world?

**Spiff** · May 16, 2006, 06:31 PM

Hitler thought he was improving the world.. the problem was the world disagreed.

Seeking power should be done in order to serve the wishes of the people i suppose.

**CaptainCernick** · May 17, 2006, 05:04 AM

I don't know. I'd still say power corrupts.Far from all "involuntary leaders" are examples of true and selfless leadership. On a side note, how do you know an involuntary leader is really an involuntary leader? It's often a form of cult they create around themselves, I am enclined to think. In Roman history, Sulla and Octavianus are prime examples of this. Caesar, IMO isn't, because he got a bit overly ambitious about his leadership.

Originally Posted by the Black Prince

this is why democracy is bad. anyone that WANTS to run for president should be kept as far from the oval office as possible... prefarably in a little caravan somewhere in Oklahoma

That's a bit of flawed logic. A democracy that puts a lot of power into one man's hands isn't really a democracy. Democracy means power to the people, not power to one man 51 percent of the population voted for.

**Marcus Scaurus** · May 17, 2006, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by Jesus The Inane

"It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power." ~David Brin

I would say that this quote is correct. If we look in history, then we can see clearly that this statement is correct. For example, Alexander the Great did not become corrupt because of power, he always wanted power, even when he didn't have it, so he always did what he had to do to gain power. In constrast, Simon Bolivar never wanted power, and when he gained power, he didn't try to gain more of it -- he even refuse a crown.

What ya'll think?

Compare Alexander to Julius Caesar: the latter was hungry for more power since the day he was born. When he became dictator of (what was left of) the Roman Republic, he wasn't corrupted by the power, not only because of his own genius but also because it costed him over thirty year to rise from an exiled enemy of Sulla to dictator.

Nobody - including himself - expected Claudius 'the Fool' to become emperor almost a century after Caesar's death. It was a Praetorian Guard who found him and who declared him emperor, as one of the last (male) familymembers of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. His rise to power was so sudden that it would be easy for him to fall into dicatorship or corruption, but he didn't. Power can corrupt, but it depends on the person in power: a young and inexperienced person who suddenly becomes emperor/king has a far higher chance of corrupting. Caligula and Nero did corrupt, Alexander didn't.

**Marcus Scaurus** · May 17, 2006, 04:34 AM

Originally Posted by Jesus The Inane

"It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power." ~David Brin

I would say that this quote is correct. If we look in history, then we can see clearly that this statement is correct. For example, Alexander the Great did not become corrupt because of power, he always wanted power, even when he didn't have it, so he always did what he had to do to gain power. In constrast, Simon Bolivar never wanted power, and when he gained power, he didn't try to gain more of it -- he even refuse a crown.

What ya'll think?

Compare Alexander to Julius Caesar: the latter was hungry for more power since the day he was born. When he became dictator of (what was left of) the Roman Republic, he wasn't corrupted by the power, not only because of his own genius but also because it costed him over thirty year to rise from an exiled enemy of Sulla to dictator.

Nobody - including himself - expected Claudius 'the Fool' to become emperor almost a century after Caesar's death. It was a Praetorian Guard who found him and who declared him emperor, as one of the last (male) familymembers of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. His rise to power was so sudden that it would be easy for him to fall into dicatorship or corruption, but he didn't. Power can corrupt, but it depends on the person in power: a young and inexperienced person who suddenly becomes emperor/king has a far higher chance of corrupting than a man who has worked for it for many years. Caligula and Nero did corrupt, Alexander didn't.

**master of puppets** · May 17, 2006, 10:27 AM

All forms of governmental orginizations, organized religons and the MJORITY of the population are corrupted by power. Sure there are still a few good people out there, but this is JUST MY OPINION. YOU DAN'T HAVE TO AGREE.

**Marcus Scaurus** · May 17, 2006, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by master of puppets

All forms of governmental orginizations, organized religons and the MAJORITY of the population are corrupted by power.

The majority of the people don't have any significant power.

**LSJ** · May 17, 2006, 06:45 PM

I believe that no amount of power corrupts; it lets others see the powered one's true personality.
If a person does things so off from his usual morals, it is not due to the power, it is that he was mentally unstable in some way. A person who does not change with power is simply a stable-minded person. Or perhaps an incredibly evil person who uses the appearance of stability and trustfulness to be allowed more power and carry out pre-meditated plans eventually...

**Jesus The Inane** · May 18, 2006, 07:48 PM

All forms of governmental orginizations, organized religons and the MJORITY of the population are corrupted by power. Sure there are still a few good people out there, but this is JUST MY OPINION. YOU DAN'T HAVE TO AGREE.

And may I ask why and how? And what you mean with "good" people? I have come to the conclusion that the term "good" is a very vague word that should rarely be use, unless you are describing something such as a hammer.

I believe that no amount of power corrupts; it lets others see the powered one's true personality.
If a person does things so off from his usual morals, it is not due to the power, it is that he was mentally unstable in some way. A person who does not change with power is simply a stable-minded person.

But most people who are well educated constantly (or eventually) change their opinions, and perhaps their morality. So I wouldn't say that being mentally unstable is a bad thing, in this sense of the word. And then again, due to experiences and circumstances people are apt to change their opinions.

On a side note, how do you know an involuntary leader is really an involuntary leader? It's often a form of cult they create around themselves, I am enclined to think. In Roman history, Sulla and Octavianus are prime examples of this.

Perhaps if they resign their positions at the proper time, like Simon Bolivar did.

Power can corrupt, but it depends on the person in power: a young and inexperienced person who suddenly becomes emperor/king has a far higher chance of corrupting than a man who has worked for it for many years. Caligula and Nero did corrupt, Alexander didn't.

It is a fair statement, but then again aren't young people more easy to influence? And I would dare say that all young people change their views on some form or another in their youthful years. Infact, how can we say their belief systems got corrupted, if they were still in the process of building a belief system?

Hitler thought he was improving the world.. the problem was the world disagreed.

Seeking power should be done in order to serve the wishes of the people i suppose.

I suppose so but which people? I mean, did not the majority of the German population in 1935 and upwards support and loved Hitler?

And I would like to point-out a quote that I think goes well with this subject, and that perhaps will sparkle some more discussion;

"He that is of the opinion money will do everything may well be suspected of doing everything for money." ~Benjamin Franklin

**SovietDoom** · May 18, 2006, 09:02 PM

In my belief, Power doesn't ciorrupt, it merely reflects what is already there, and possibly magnifies it.

**Armfelt** · May 17, 2006, 11:49 AM

Power doesn't corrupt, it makes one realize what can be gained from it. If the person will use the power for personal gain/ambitions is determined before the person gets the power, they just don't realize what they can do before they hold the power.

**imb39** · May 19, 2006, 12:59 AM

Using my almost impossibly powerful errr... power, I shall move this. Should any object, money is a suitable way of shoing that. Just send £10 or equivalent. Not expensive, I know, but I do not want to price myself out of the corruption business... - imb39