Politics attracts mentally ill people.
These people crave adulation, sycophancy, ability to manipulate others.
Since they spend all their time deluding their charges, and since their
sense of reality was altered before they even started on the political
road, they tend to convince themselves, once in their positions, that they
deserve the perquisites with which their office is adorned. There
is a natural tendency in the people who compose any governing body to enhance
those perquisites, and to protect the office, and their possession of it,
in a manner which, left unchecked, develops into impunity.
It was thus a turning point in human
history when Washington refused first the kingship of America that had
been offered him, and then, as president, the field command of the troops
who put down Shay's Rebellion. In doing so he turned away from the
path of impunity that leads always to such characters as France's Napoleon
III, popular and populist criminals who can gather all the reigns of power
in their own grubby hands and then lead their nations into the particular
perdition that their little minds have missed in their petty calculations.
The historical antidote to personal
dictatorship has been the development of bureaucracy. The bureaucrats
make themselves necessary by adumbrating (look it up) rules that only they
can understand, and of course they are then necessary to the function of
the government. This checks the executive, who perforce must consult
the bureaucrats to get anything done. Thus, the true function of
bureaucracy is not to administer the rules, but rather to serve as a greater
or lesser counterweight to the executive, whatever it's titles and methods,
which would otherwise naturally tend to become absolutist and overweening.
Bureaucrats in power will follow the
normal course of human nature and attempt to perpetuate the system that
rewards them, and those at the top will develop, within the limits of their
system, their own kind of impunity, getting away with whatever they can
get away with as long as they can. The guys (meant in a gender-neutral
sense) on the European Commission, having reached the level where they
thought themselves observed only by themselves, came to see themselves
as above the rules of decency, as people in those positions tend always
to do.
But in this age of instant access
and shifting political sands they found themselves beached, as have monarchs
of the past, on the sands of parliamentary scrutiny. Unable to justify
themselves in any language they could muster (no charisma to ask for forgiveness,
plead for another chance, call forth the love of the people, those tools
being the sole preserve of the executive, and unavailable to bureaucrats)
they had to do away with themselves. Good riddance. But of
course their replacements will be subject to the same psychological and
social forces.
Well, I always have thoughts about
what to do about things. "String em up" is not an option. Solves
nothing. Never has. My thought is that every seeker after public
office, whether elective or appointive or civil service, should post a
performance bond. A big one. Equal to, say, their entire current
net worth plus their entire projected income for the coming, say, twenty
years. Seems to me that might tend to keep them on the straight and
narrow.
What do you think?