@PallasRiot yeah an ostensibly good person is still going to have to compromise on their values numerous times just in order to reach a position of power in the first place and then many more times to hold onto it
@waitworry @PallasRiot If the problem is that anyone is in power, this world will always be ruled by bad or compromised people. Which it has been for as long as we have history.
Carter also tried to oppose a bad thing - the Shah's actions in Iran - and got a worse thing. That happens a lot when "good people" get into power.
>>> this world will always be ruled by bad or compromised people. Which it has been for as long as we have history.
Citation needed! This is a common and unsupported assumption in anti-anarchism arguments, but it's factually untrue. And not just a little untrue, either. For the greater part of human history nobody ruled, so the rulers couldn't have been "bad or compromised."
@AdrianRiskin @mike805 @waitworry @PallasRiot this notion of "rulers bad" is very Euro-centric.
Pre-invasion Asia had good wealth distribution under many dynasties because all followed a code (dharma). It was a sociological "fix", not a structural one. Getting rid of the crooked structure by anarchy (anarchism?) alone doesn't sound enough, or even the first thing to do.
