Do you understand how and why people want power in general—not just politicians?
Sort of. I understand the motivation to use power as a means to an end. To use it to do something you want to do. I guess I sort of understand the motivation to have power as a status indicator too.
Maybe you should… broaden the range of your information sources.
That’s what I’m trying to do here. 1) Because I (for the most part) trust people on LW to be honest and reasonable. 2) Because I don’t really know where to look and I don’t want to read any books or long articles (right now).
Two points. First, power is an important terminal value for some people. Unsurprisingly, such people tend to gravitate towards positions of power. Beware of the typical mind fallacy.
Second, politics is complicated—certainly much more complicated than a simple scheme with only three players—voters, politicians, and lobbyists. I am not sure it can be usefully condensed into something that’s not a book or a long article.
On the terminal value, the first thing I thought when I read this post was the quote below. Not sure if I actually find it convincing psychology, or I just find it so aesthetically effective that it gains truthiness.
Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know what no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
Second thing I thought was that if the query was genuine, adamzerner would in some ways be ideal to be appointed dictator of something, thought probably less great at actually trying to win at the Game of Politics (you win or you’re deselected)
I wouldn’t be surprised if people who have some talent for and interest in politics end up loving politics partly because politics is complicated. It’s fun to access your knowledge.
Sort of. I understand the motivation to use power as a means to an end. To use it to do something you want to do. I guess I sort of understand the motivation to have power as a status indicator too.
That’s what I’m trying to do here. 1) Because I (for the most part) trust people on LW to be honest and reasonable. 2) Because I don’t really know where to look and I don’t want to read any books or long articles (right now).
Two points. First, power is an important terminal value for some people. Unsurprisingly, such people tend to gravitate towards positions of power. Beware of the typical mind fallacy.
Second, politics is complicated—certainly much more complicated than a simple scheme with only three players—voters, politicians, and lobbyists. I am not sure it can be usefully condensed into something that’s not a book or a long article.
On the terminal value, the first thing I thought when I read this post was the quote below. Not sure if I actually find it convincing psychology, or I just find it so aesthetically effective that it gains truthiness.
Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know what no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
Second thing I thought was that if the query was genuine, adamzerner would in some ways be ideal to be appointed dictator of something, thought probably less great at actually trying to win at the Game of Politics (you win or you’re deselected)
I wouldn’t be surprised if people who have some talent for and interest in politics end up loving politics partly because politics is complicated. It’s fun to access your knowledge.