Chat

7499 readers

8 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

AskBeehaw

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

There's no way for some humans to have power over other humans and it not go wrong. (beehaw.org)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by kool_newt@beehaw.org to c/chat@beehaw.org

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Just a topic to chat about.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Jho@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It is often said that being in a position of power over others corrupts people. But I believe Robert Caro when he says "Power doesn’t corrupt, it reveals." Essentially, being in a position of power makes you more of what you already are.

Therefore, I believe there must be situations where people having power over others can be positive. But having established positions of power lends itself to having one bad actor reach that position and causing great suffering, and worse, they often have the power to change the system to make it so only bad actors can have power over others.

So, I find it difficult to counter the argument you have presented in this topic. Is there any way we can prevent bad actors from reaching positions of power over others?

[–] AnarchoYeasty@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Anarchist philosopher and writer Pyotr Kropotkin wrote this amazing article called "Are we good enough" and I'm going to copy paste part of it here because it's really relevant to your point about preventing bad people from taking over

Men are not good enough for Communism, but are they good enough for Capitalism? If all men were good-hearted, kind, and just, they would never exploit one another, although possessing the means of doing so. With such men the private ownership of capital would be no danger. The capitalist would hasten to share his profits with the workers, and the best-remunerated workers with those suffering from occasional causes. If men were provident they would not produce velvet and articles of luxury while food is wanted in cottages: they would not build palaces as long as there are slums.

If men had a deeply developed feeling of equity they would not oppress other men. Politicians would not cheat their electors; Parliament would not be a chattering and cheating box, and Charles Warren’s policemen would refuse to bludgeon the Trafalgar Square talkers and listeners. And if men were gallant, self-respecting, and less egotistic, even a bad capitalist would not be a danger; the workers would have soon reduced him to the role of a simple comrade-manager. Even a King would not be dangerous, because the people would merely consider him as a fellow unable to do better work, and therefore entrusted with signing some stupid papers sent out to other cranks calling themselves Kings.

But men are not those free-minded, independent, provident, loving, and compassionate fellows which we should like to see them. And precisely, therefore, they must not continue living under the present system which permits them to oppress and exploit one another

To answer the question you presented at the end of your comment, Kropotkin says no. There is no way to prevent this and thus we must destroy the positions of power to stop men from using it to oppress others.

Full link to Are We Good Enough

https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-are-we-good-enough

And in video format for those who prefer to listen instead of read

https://youtube.com/watch?v=t2Al-ivn074&feature=share8