Who would you choose as benevolent dictator or philosopher king today?

[Linden Arden]

I would choose Warren Buffett.

I know conservatives hate him but he is beyond reproach, honest, brilliantly intellectual, and disinterested in terms of making money from public graft.

Our current form of government is sorely lacking and Plato has been on my mind.

Any objections?

[Oakminster]

Yeah, I object. If anybody gets to be Benevolent Dictator it oughta be me. Otherwise, I'll have to go all Red Dawn on somebody's ass.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Linden Arden

Our current form of government is sorely lacking and Plato has been on my mind.

I think Bertrand Russell sussed it -- from A History of Western Philosophy, Chapter XIV, "Plato's Utopia":

. . . Although all the rulers are to be philosophers, there are to be no innovations; a philosopher is to be, for all time, a man who understands and agrees with Plato.

When we ask: what will Plato's Republic achieve? The answer is rather humdrum. It will achieve success in wars against roughly equal populations, and it will secure a livelihood for a certain small number of people. It will almost certainly produce no art or science, because of its rigidity; in this respect, as in others, it will be like Sparta. In spite of all the fine talk, skill in war and enough to eat is all that will be achieved. Plato had lived through famine and defeat in Athens; perhaps, subconsciously, he thought the avoidance of these evils the best that statesmanship could accomplish.

"Put the smart guy in charge" might seem like common sense and maybe it is, in general terms; but, you'd have to accept Plato's whole system, including his value-system (which despises the "democratic man"), before you accept his reasons for making kings of philosophers.

[Der Trihs]

A Culture Mind.

I certainly wouldn't trust any human to be competent, benevolent or incorruptible enough to be such a ruler.

[UFC Is Sux]

Stephen Hawking. But he would never accept the job.

[Dennis Arthur PERRETT]

What about Jimmy Buffet? If we chopped his head off cause he bored us to death with his music noone would really give a fuck.

As for a philosopher King I put forward Dennis Miller. The president's address would still be full of political mumbo jumbo and some crap about war and the economy but funnier and more entertaining.

[BrainGlutton]

Can anyone here actually name any living philosophers of note? Let's start there.

[j666]

I wouldn't want a brilliant or perfectly ethical person; I would want some one who could inspire the service and devotion of brilliant and ethical people. Then he would be subject to a variety of opinions.

And it would have to be a man, so prevent the accusations of being too easily manipulated by his advisors. Well, a man or Madeline Albright. And he should be tall, and good looking, because people like and are re-assured by that. It also would give him additional confidence, necessary to not be threatened by people more intelligent and ethical than he.

He would have to be intelligent enough to select the most gifted advisors, and, ideally, less intelligent than they, so he would take their advice. He would have to be less ethical than his advisors, because government always requires compromise. He would have to have more than his fair share of charm, for the same reason.

He would also have to be a populist. The oligarchs will always support a stable government; he will need the support of the populace to keep the society stable - which is good for everyone. So, he will need that common touch, folksy manner, what ever you want to call it.

So, I want a tall, good looking, smart and charming man, with a folksy manner that hides his intelligence.

[UFC Is Sux]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Can anyone here actually name any living philosophers of note? Let's start there.

Noam Chomsky
Jurgen Habermas
Saul Kripke
Alasdair MacIntyre
John Searle
Peter Singer

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by UFC Is Sux

Noam Chomsky

OK, he can be King!

[UFC Is Sux]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

OK, he can be King!

Another question about whether he would accept it. He'd have to take a considerable pay cut and I just don't see him going for it.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by UFC Is Sux

Another question about whether he would accept it. He'd have to take a considerable pay cut and I just don't see him going for it.

Yes, it is hard to lure the top minds away from the earning potential of philosophy.

[XT]

Any objections?

Yeah, I'd object to Mr. Buffet. Besides being associated with those all you can eat thingies that I really, truly hate, and besides the questionable assertions that he's 'beyond reproach, honest, brilliantly intellectual, and disinterested in terms of making money from public graft' (to paraphrase from Groundhog Day, we ARE talking about a human here, right? ) he's, well, old. He'd never last as a benevolent dictator, and then what would we do? Re-elect someone else or give the job to one of his kids in a year or so when the pressures had him shuffling off this mortal coil?

No, what you need is someone like, well, me. I mean what's not to like? I'm dashing (it's the Hispanic blood no doubt), round (you don't want some military type with bulging muscles, right?), balding, and not TOO old...plus, I really want the job, which I'm sure no one else on this board would think to put themselves forward for it (discount that first post in the thread please). I think the title should be God Emperor however.

Buxom and nubile female types, there is an application for grape peelers and palm frond fanners....line forms over there to the right please...

-XT

[UFC Is Sux]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Yes, it is hard to lure the top minds away from the earning potential of philosophy.

As the Pirate Bay has taught us, who pays for intellectual property these days? And what true philosopher would accept anything but a token $1 per year payment? Fox News would eat him alive if he accepted anything more than cab fare. Combine that with a cool crown and ermine robes and you've got ... you've got ... I got nothing.

[Wesley Clark]

Fareed Zakaria. I'm sure tons of people are more qualified, but he comes to mind as a fairly rational policy wonk.

[BrainGlutton]

If I become Supreme Philosopher God Emperor of America, I promise to subject all deconstructionists to public deconstruction by the public torturer (officially, the Wielder of Occam's Razor).

[foolsguinea]

Benevolent? Benevolent?

I'm sorry, y'all need whipping.

[ITR champion]

If I had to choose somebody, I would go with Barry C. Black, currently the Chaplain of the U. S. Senate. He combines a lot of attributes that I find desirable in a leader. He has an inspiring life story, being born in poverty in inner-city Baltimore and working his way through college. He is very educated, with five graduate degrees including two Ph.D.'s. He's studied and written on a broad range of topics that a leader should know, including politics, economics, religion, philosophy, history, and psychology. He's been awarded by the NAACP for his civil rights achievements including being the first black admiral in the U. S. Navy and the first black man in his current post. His post has also necessitated working with members of both parties. Having seen him speaking in public, I can testify that he is an excellent speaker.

That said, I would still prefer democracy to dictatorship by anyone.

[BrainGlutton]

Of course, if we're gonna do this Plato's way, we're gonna have to breed and train our philosopher-kings. In a cloistered, ivory-tower environment.

[Latro]

Originally Posted by ITR champion

That said, I would still prefer democracy to dictatorship by anyone.

How about a kind of intermediate?
A senate composed of educated, intelligent people, instead of the political creatures.

Maybe no president? Presidents are beacon for powergrabbers, and an easy step up to dictatorship.

But how do we ensure this senate stays filled with the right people?
There should be 'checks and balances'.
It should remain open to new blood, not an inbred club that resticts membership to its own.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Latro

How about a kind of intermediate?
A senate composed of educated, intelligent people, instead of the political creatures.

You don't get it. The problem with the Senate we have now is not lack of intelligence/education.

[Wesley Clark]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Of course, if we're gonna do this Plato's way, we're gonna have to breed and train our philosopher-kings. In a cloistered, ivory-tower environment.

That is what happened to the Kims in Korea. They have been told they are Nietszche's Ubermensch and above concepts like human morality. The end result was just a family of sociopaths.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Wesley Clark

That is what happened to the Kims in Korea. They have been told they are Nietszche's Ubermensch and above concepts like human morality. The end result was just a family of sociopaths.

Oh, the Kims just haven't been properly indoctrinated with Platonic philosophy. Teach them lots of geometry and tell them about the Cave, they'll be all right.

[YogSosoth]

The person I'd choose is the same person I hope that Americans Elect ends up choosing for president: Jon Stewart

I know he's no lawyer, nor some politician who understands how the ins and outs of Washington works, but he's something that I believe is very underrated in a leader: he's a comedian.

To be funny, really funny not just Dennis Miller "funny", you have to have a level of introspection and the ability to objectively look at a situation in order to point out its absurdities. Comedians do that, that's ALL they do. The good ones can make fun of themselves just as easily as someone else because they can see what is funny about an issue that everyone else takes for granted.

Introspection, something our last president wasn't very big on, is to me a huge criteria in a good leader. Every man needs to be able to step back once in a while and evaluate themselves and doubt, yes doubt, their own decisions and reasoning and get other opinions. I'd rather a man be able to doubt himself than charge forward confident in his own abilities. If its one thing sure about humans, its that all of us make bad decisions sometimes. Better someone who can catch them than the traditional stupid American full of bluster about the indestructibility of his own individualism.

That said, I also think he's very smart, or at least with the help of his writers he is. During his debates, even I want him to call out the bastard conservatives sometimes, but he rarely does it in a way that makes them confrontational. He's open to new ideas. He makes great insightful points that cut to the heart of the matter. And he's a good person, witness how he shamed Congress into helping out the 9/11 first responders, or the way he tried to have the first political rally to bring people together and restore sanity. This is a guy who gets it

[Johanna]

Originally Posted by j666

it would have to be a man, so prevent the accusations of being too easily manipulated by his advisors.

Sexist much?

I'm for Alice Walker.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Johanna

Sexist much?

Comes with the Plato. (Who was a raging feminist by Classical Greek standards, but, still . . .)

[Una Persson]

I would choose a pentumvirate made up of Eleanor Clift, Clarence Page, Monica Crowley, Pat Buchanan, and John McLaughlin, and not allow them to pass any new legislation without unanimous consent among them. Then sit back and watch the gridlock.

[Typo Negative]

Lewis Black

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by spooje

Lewis Black

Seconded! Hail Lewis I!

[j666]

Originally Posted by Johanna

Sexist much?

I'm for Alice Walker.

Read much?

Not "prevent", but to "prevent the accusation"

Doesn't Alice Walker have better things to do?

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by j666

Doesn't Alice Walker have better things to do?

Look at it that way, all intellectuals and artists have better things to do than govern.

[TreacherousCretin]

Originally Posted by YogSosoth

The person I'd choose is the same person I hope that Americans Elect ends up choosing for president: Jon Stewart

I know he's no lawyer, nor some politician who understands how the ins and outs of Washington works........This is a guy who gets it

Agreed.


.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by YogSosoth

The person I'd choose is the same person I hope that Americans Elect ends up choosing for president: Jon Stewart

I know he's no lawyer, nor some politician who understands how the ins and outs of Washington works, but he's something that I believe is very underrated in a leader: he's a comedian.

It's been done . . .

[The Second Stone]

Samuel L. Jackson.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by The Second Stone

Samuel L. Jackson.

What's his philosophy?

[Seratiel]

Hiya,

The very question posed by the debate is a problem in answering. The reason being is that those who most people would want to take the job never would. And those that seek the job are the wrong people in the first place. And especially when your putting such import on philosophy. Most philosophers are so wrapped up in theoretical problem solving they miss the human interaction and day to day life around them. There is an old saying, that a person can be extremely intelligent but have no "common sense" whatsoever. In my view no philosopher would make a good leader. It requires practicality, empathy, and common ground with your people. Therefore the perfect candidate in my view, is a triumvirate, like the romans had. But pick a rich person a poor person and 1 in between at random. The only stipulation being they have a IQ so they can make their own decisions based on evidence and advice provided by specialists, but the balls to make the decisions on their own free will. Probably as close as I can get would be Bill Gates, + Aung San Suu Kyi, + Any Black police/army/navy/air force officer above the rank of sergeant who came from a deprived area.

[Boyo Jim]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

What's his philosophy?

Get rid of the fucking snakes!

[j666]

Originally Posted by Johanna

Sexist much?

I'm for Alice Walker.

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Look at it that way, all intellectuals and artists have better things to do than govern.

Right, so let's get some-one just smart enough to recognize really smart people and charming enough to sucker them into helping.

Hmm, a Dream-Team Cabinet for our Benevolent Dictator.

[Boyo Jim]

My candidates -- Matt Parker and Trey Stone can serve as alternate dictators. They wouldn't even take the job seriously, so they probably wouldn't be too dangerous.

[Foggy]

Really now, was there any other choice? Lord Havelock Vetinari.

It was his discovery that people only really want stability and that tomorrow should pretty much resemble today, and this has been his greatest contribution to Ankh-Morpork. Impressively, he manages to keep this up even while he drags Ankh-Morpork, sometimes kicking and screaming, into the future. It is said that Vetinari can accomplish more with irony than most others can with steel. He can also accomplish more with one raised eyebrow than most people can with two of them and a lifetime of practice.

[The Man With The Golden Gun]

Adolf Hitler, in his present form.

Hey, even der Fuhrer himself couldn't do any harm when he's dead. And one could argue that a dead body would do better than a lot of living people.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Boyo Jim

Get rid of the fucking snakes!

We went far enough putting a Catholic in the WH once, we are not having one who actually thinks like St. Patrick!

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by The Man With The Golden Gun

Adolf Hitler, in his present form.

Hey, even der Fuhrer himself couldn't do any harm when he's dead. And one could argue that a dead body would do better than a lot of living people.

Some Apes who had deposed their king fell at once into dissension and anarchy. In this strait they sent a Deputation to a neighbouring tribe to consult the Oldest and Wisest Ape in All the World.

"My children," said the Oldest and Wisest Ape in All the World, when he had heard the Deputation, "you did right in ridding yourselves of tyranny, but your tribe is not sufficiently advanced to dispense with the forms of monarchy. Entice the tyrant back with fair promises, kill him and enthrone. The skeleton of even the most lawless despot makes a good constitutional sovereign."

At this the Deputation was greatly abashed. "It is impossible," they said, moving away; "our king has no skeleton; he was stuffed."

-- Ambrose Bierce

[The Second Stone]

http://www.aeonity.com/ab/soundboard...-l-jackson.php

[Buck Godot]

Originally Posted by YogSosoth

The person I'd choose is the same person I hope that Americans Elect ends up choosing for president: Jon Stewart

This was my first thought too, but on reflection he just is too nice a guy and doesn't have the ego to pull it off. In order to be an effective president you have to be megalomaniacal enough to actually believe that you are the right man for the job. I imagine in crisis time John Stewart crouched in a corner second guessing himself to oblivion.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Buck Godot

In order to be an effective president you have to be megalomaniacal enough to actually believe that you are the right man for the job.

Which would be fine, except that to be a good president requires a lot of things besides "effective" and some of those things might conflict with megalomania.

[scabpicker]

Originally Posted by Una Persson

I would choose a pentumvirate made up of Eleanor Clift, Clarence Page, Monica Crowley, Pat Buchanan, and John McLaughlin, and not allow them to pass any new legislation without unanimous consent among them. Then sit back and watch the gridlock.

Please, no. You'll kill my wife. A half hour a week of Monica was probably all she could take. She'd be wild with rage if Monica was allowed to speak any longer. Anyone else can sit to McLaughlin's left, but please not Monica. How about Rich Lowry instead?

[Buck Godot]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Which would be fine, except that to be a good president requires a lot of things besides "effective" and some of those things might conflict with megalomania.

Can you name a president that wasn't at least a little monomaniacal? Believing that of all of the people in the country you are the best person to be in charge is pretty darn egotistical.

[YogSosoth]

Originally Posted by Buck Godot

This was my first thought too, but on reflection he just is too nice a guy and doesn't have the ego to pull it off. In order to be an effective president you have to be megalomaniacal enough to actually believe that you are the right man for the job. I imagine in crisis time John Stewart crouched in a corner second guessing himself to oblivion.

But you see, that is the beauty of it. Jon can second guess himself but given some time, he usually comes to the right conclusions. He doesn't have a big enough ego that he can't use his show to apologize and make fun of himself when he gets something wrong while looking sheepish and hilarious doing it. Just a couple weeks ago, a website called him out on his mistake about Christmas celebrations in the past and he responded on his show with an admission and a funny skit

For good, decent things, I have absolutely every confidence that he'd do the right thing and fight for it. He literally was the lone voice on TV repeatedly calling out Congress and other networks about the shame of not helping out the 9/11 first responders. Many of us liberals wish Obama would do that. Jon already does, and with a national audience, I could see him replacing the weekly fireside radio broadcasts (do they still do that?) with a twice weekly show on the kind of crap he wants to fight against. It takes a lot of balls to go on someone's show and call him out to his face like Tucker Carlson and Jon's no coward

[Wesley Clark]

Originally Posted by Boyo Jim

Get rid of the fucking snakes!

Yes they deserved to die, and I hope they burn in hell!