Okay, in other words we need to consider our assumptions and definitions of “Free will” and “Determinism” when answering this question?
I really enjoyed this video on Compatibilism, and the view of Patricia Churchland (around 5:50) where she says we should reframe the question away from “what choices we have” to “how much control do we have”.
I think the reason we are seeing two candidates who are unpopular for reasons of mental fitness has to do with several forces at play, and it comes down to how power is gained and distributed in our system.
First, I am defining power as the ability to make people do things they would not do on their own volition.
In any system, the longer you stay there, the more opportunities there are to amass power. This power comes from connections you make. In my teenage years, I didn’t have much power for many reasons, but one was that I didn’t have powerful connections. All my friends were working retail or fast food or other summer jobs. With age, my connections are more powerful. My best friend works at Oracle and another at Microsoft. As a musician, I’ve been around the block a bit and now know folks who are producers and have some notariety. This is a big reason we are seeing more and more elderly folks in powerful positions. Not only do they have power, they have connections.
The classic cases of corruption we see from the outside, are people returning favors when viewed from the inside. To them it’s common decency. Imagine you were passionate about food and feeding people, and you started a restaurant or maybe a non-profit to feed the homeless. If someone you knew saw your work and believed in what you do, and they could give you a hefty low rate loan or been a donation, the decent thing to do would be to thank them, and if they asked for a favor down the line, you would feel terrible to not return the support they gave you when you were small and starting out.
Throw that in with a first past the post voting system that allows power to consolidate around two parties, and you’ll see the natural trend is for those with the most experience and connections to find their way to the top while closing more and more opportunities for younger folks to make their way in. The connections of the youth simply can’t compete with the connections of the elderly.
One part of your post that struck me was the “why do we allow”. Personally my take is that we shouldn’t make strict requirements of who someone is in order to run for office. There are other ways we can vet those unfit to serve. My concern with something like an iQ test or upper age limit is that we will be disenfranchising marginalized groups from taking power. I don’t mean to go full slippery slope, but I do think this is a dangerous precedent to set. Should an elderly person be barred from running for president? Should someone who has a mental illness like depression, bipolar disorder, ADHD, or schizophrenia be barred from holding office? If project 2025 takes place we may ask the question should trans or homosexual people be allowed to hold office? For the last one, the argument from conservatives would be that they are too “morally deficient” to hold office. Personally I find that repulsive.
By limiting demographics of who can and cannot run for office, we would also allow the possiblity of a rogue president to disqualify opponents if they can manipulate a test required to be eligible to run for president.
I think these are reasonable considerations when trying to answer your question. I hope this was helpful.
If you’d like to learn more on power structures, CGP grey made a great video that is a great tl;Dr to my first year of my polisci undergrad.
If you can reword you initial post, that would be great. I was also having trouble following what you were saying.
I think the reason I don’t follow that idea is that it sounds so similar to Neville Chamberlain’s “Peace for our Time”. The slaughter would just be put on pause, but would last longer and become more dangerous in 2 years time.
I see a difference between that and the handling of Gaza, which Trump would very much continue supporting Israel on. He wouldn’t put American troops on the ground, but he’s been saying his peace plan is for Israel to “get the job done”. This is very much what we did in Afghanistan and Iraq, and we saw how that played out. I understand there is a belief that stopping support for Israel means the death of Israel, but with BB, he is only accelerating this by continued genocide of Palestinians.
There are idealists (and I will fully admit some anti-semites) who would love to see the end of a Jewish state, and there are those who would look for a two state solution. Trump and BB have made it clear that they are not for a two state solution and are pushing for complete annihilation of the Palestinian people. Trump is not a peacemaker.
Did you click the link? 😰
“What did you learn at school?”
“That life begins at contemplation”
I will note that not everyone got through the last Trump presidency. Clinton would have had an actual response to Covid because she wouldn’t have disbanded the NSC unit that would have saved most of the 1.1 million Americans who died of Covid-19.
The argument I saw for this was that a president shouldn’t have to second guess every action they take while in office. That if they are held liable for everything they do, they may be paralyzed to make changes to the government.
I kinda thought that was kinda what the founders wanted to happen…
I think we are looking at one of them new fangled microtonal keyboards. The white keys are your standard 12 TET notes (C, C#, D, D#, etc.) and the black keys are your half sharps / half flats.
Slaps roof you could fit so much math music in this bad boy.
You fool it was SeaTac
I’m doing my part!
Agreed, there are lots of instances, and that may be one thing that allows Lemmy to actually have space for different political leanings. As I understand, conservative circles are not very large here, but that can change, and smaller communities generally are healthier. Check those out and recruit your pals- be the change you want to see in the world!
I hate that there is a loud group of people reverting to actual antisemitism in their criticism of Israel’s genocide.
I want to be arguing that a cease fire is necessary to save Palestinians. I don’t want to be arguing about a Jewish deep state that invented the Holocaust.
Agreed, what’s a good alternative I can advertise on my community?
Lol I’m a newb
I’ll edit my comment!
I just made it a few weeks ago and finally am getting around to sort of starting things up!
Thank you so much for joining! It makes my day :)
I’ve just been uploading to imgur and then posting the direct link. Lemm.ee won’t allow direct image uploads, so we kinda need to Jerry rig it for the time being. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
What I’d like to do? Play Pente with friends and family in the morning in a cafe. It’s an easy going game that you can have conversations over and it is a family favorite of mine.
Realistically? Forage for mushrooms and be successful at hunting in a post apocalyptic nuclear wasteland.