I'm not a "progressive" in the sense of expecting people to be the best versions of themselves. Nor do I believe they'll perversely strive to be worst versions of themselves. My assumption is that they'll half-ass personal growth and land on mediocrity 80% of the time. Like me.
-
-
But things like politics are structured by necessity rather than the contours of a golden-age possibility. Politics is not the *kind* of activity that can experience golden ages. At best it can fund and get out of the way of activities that *can* experience golden ages.
Show this thread -
It's like the difference between public market investing (nobody can beat the S&P consistently) and VC (there is such a thing as a hot hand and a track record of good investments that are not fooled-by-randomness outcomes).
Show this thread -
I favor strong high-authoritah BDFL CEOs in business but strongly democratic politics over authoritarian rule for precisely this reason. Running a business IS the sort of activity where excellence and good emperors are possible. In VC investing, it pays to follow the hot hands.
Show this thread -
But in politics, believing in an authoritarian leader is basically like believing a particular investor can consistently beat the S&P. Which is why I prefer average candidates who don't pretend they're Great Men who can deliver golden ages.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.