Do you think its possible?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do honest politicians exist?
- Thread starter JustGeorge
- Start date
I actually know one. Just one he is a local councillor of the town i lived in the UK
an anarchist
Your local loco.
No
What about the guy @ChristineM knows?
Only local i doubt any Americans or even most brits have heard of him
Still. If there's at least one out there somewhere, that's hopeful.
Truthseeker
Non-debating member when I can help myself
To get elected a politician has to present himself in the best light he can. That I consider a weakness of democracy.
Yes, there are some...a few...a very, very few...
an anarchist
Your local loco.
Britain isn’t real anyways... don’t ya kno?
I think there is… but they don’t get the limelight. (so to speak). It doesn’t sell news.
Hmmm... always thought it sounded too good to be true.
I think it's possible that many high-minded, idealistic, and scrupulously honest people would be inclined to enter politics, but the real question is whether they can remain that way throughout their political career.
I recently posted a link to a movie called The Candidate, which shows how a brash, idealistic community activist is transformed into a politician who has to be made acceptable in the eyes of mainstream audiences. He doesn't deliberately set out to lie or misrepresent himself, but he's constantly goaded and pressured to say things differently or to water things down to the point where it's meaningless tripe. He has hecklers wherever he goes, along with amorous groupies, the press following him everywhere, and his wife, while fully supporting him, is also feeling the strain.
There's also the spirit of competition in politics, in that both sides want to win very badly. The stakes are higher than any high stakes poker game. Political campaigns appear very grueling, to say the least. A lot of people (including myself) would not really be cut out for that kind of life.
Could an honest person enter politics and have any chance against the wretched hive of scum and villainy that awaits them?
an anarchist
Your local loco.
In all seriousness though I would say congressman Ron Paul has the reputation amongst anarchists of being the sole honest American politician. Him being vocal against the Iraq war early on as well as being vocal against the federal reserve has helped create this reputation. Though he was a bit before my time. It was his son, Senator Rand Paul, (who I discovered in the republican 2016 presidential race) that led me from Conservatism to Libertarianism. Which in turn led me to Anarchism.
So I would say the Pauls are honest with the fact that they don’t view government as beneficial. Are they honest completely? Idk, they are still politicians. I would say Ron Paul is honest enough to where he is labeled as a conspiracy cook nowadays, as he will frequent anarchist media.
The fact that much anarchist media will even give Ron Paul, a former politician, the time of day, speaks to his reputation.
So I would say the Pauls are honest with the fact that they don’t view government as beneficial. Are they honest completely? Idk, they are still politicians. I would say Ron Paul is honest enough to where he is labeled as a conspiracy cook nowadays, as he will frequent anarchist media.
The fact that much anarchist media will even give Ron Paul, a former politician, the time of day, speaks to his reputation.
I find that the ones I find to be honest are mostly at the local level, rarely above state representative or state senator...however, just because they may be honest does not mean that I agree with their positions on policy...
Ron's alright, from what I've seen. Don't care much for Rand.
I'd like to see family members in politics... on opposing teams.
Still... honesty is impressive, even when disagreeable.
unfortunately, currently, one of the most dishonest of politicians seems to be truthfully telegraphing what he desires and intends for his second term, should he be elected...
Only on the local level
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
The answer is no because the way the election process is run, makes it hard to be honest. The majority of voters are emotional thinkers that can be reached easier by exaggeration, being biased, or by outright lying. They are not swayed by the logic of the content, but judge by how the words makes them feel. If you are very honest and objective and say I will do my best, but doubt I can be prefect since many others already told me, they will foot drag and try to sabotage me, unless I play ball, many people would not react well, to this objective truth. But if you promise the moon and create an ambiance of nostalgic romance, you got much of the female vote. The goal today is to win votes, with the good guy finishing last, since there are too many emotional thinkers, made worse by public education dumb down. Other tactics work better; conflict of conscience.
The emotional thinkers are why mud slinging becomes so important to campaigns. This tactic can use the lions share of the campaign money. This tactic is not honest or objective, however, this negative exaggeration becomes part of most campaigns. You can even lie to the voters, using a fear-lie tactic like Obama and the Democrats did about Mitt Romney. It had the desired affect of getting the vote of the shallow emotional thinkers. Later it was debunked, but the cheat worked, since it got the vote. Romney's honest denial could not sway the emotional thinkers as fast as the fear-lie. Honest debunking did not have the time and the electron was over. After the fact is too late.
If we had an objectivity test requirement, to vote, then we could attract honest people who may not be as good at the games needed to get votes from emotional thinkers. Such a test could get rid of the bottom barrel emotional thinkers, so we could end up with a higher ratio of rational people, where truth and logic would be the winning formula. We could get better leaders that way.
The Democrat Party is now doing a full count press of negative mud slinging and emotional manipulation; get TRUMP, since logic is not on their side. Their base is also chock full of emotional thinkers who will buy the lies of they feel good. They also are big on slogans, since this works on emotional thinkers, like the Inflation Reduction Act, that caused inflation; right over their heads. But it felt good, when coined.
One way to help our corrupt leaders and their corrupt handlers become more honest is to tax campaign donations by treating it as the big business that it is. Both Presidential Candidate will raise over a $billion in donations; tax the rich. The value of this tax is now the IRS is attached to elections and can audit campaigns and uncover the dark money and others violations of dishonest people. Dishonest people need help being honest. How about we also allow law suit for mud slinging; liable and slander, that have no statute of limitations. The crooks will not like either change, but honest people, arguing policy, would feel more at home.
Alien826
No religious beliefs
Every election season (pretty much continuous in the USA) I watch TV news and have the same thought. The subject is presented like the coverage of a sports event. How successful is a particular team being in moving the ball in the desired direction? What skills are they using to win the game? Fair enough in sports, but in politics? Because I realize that the "ball" is us, the electorate. And the "skills" are measured by how likely it is that a given demographic will vote a certain way. Of course the TV news reports it that way because that's how it is. Before an election politicians focus on getting elected, and how that gets achieved is secondary to the election itself.
Is it all surprising though? Imagine yourself to be dedicated to making a particular change in our society. You determine (correctly) that you need power to do that and that power resides in government. You get into politics and soon discover that honesty won't cut it. You have to say something that appeals to the electorate, and your honest thoughts don't work because people typically want to just vote to get what they want, and will select you based on how grandiose, or emotionally satisfying, your claims are. You now have a choice. Get out and do something else, or play the game. Maybe you think your aspirations are so important that achieving them justifies the means. So you play, and gradually your honesty takes a back seat more and more to pure expediency.
So our system effectively selects for dishonesty. And the blame rests with us, the electors. Essentially we get the government we vote for (duh!) but the basic power is ours. So long as we keep voting for these clowns, the circus will go on.
The answer? I don't have one. Maybe humans just aren't capable of governing themselves effectively.
Is it all surprising though? Imagine yourself to be dedicated to making a particular change in our society. You determine (correctly) that you need power to do that and that power resides in government. You get into politics and soon discover that honesty won't cut it. You have to say something that appeals to the electorate, and your honest thoughts don't work because people typically want to just vote to get what they want, and will select you based on how grandiose, or emotionally satisfying, your claims are. You now have a choice. Get out and do something else, or play the game. Maybe you think your aspirations are so important that achieving them justifies the means. So you play, and gradually your honesty takes a back seat more and more to pure expediency.
So our system effectively selects for dishonesty. And the blame rests with us, the electors. Essentially we get the government we vote for (duh!) but the basic power is ours. So long as we keep voting for these clowns, the circus will go on.
The answer? I don't have one. Maybe humans just aren't capable of governing themselves effectively.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The late Shelly Silver a corrupt Democrat in New York (3 men in a room) stated its just the way business is done.
So no. There are no accommodation for honest people anymore unless drastic changes are made including accountability standards along with real actual penalties for corruption to discourage dishonesty.