The following choice quote has perhaps already been recycled here. It has surely done the rounds elsewhere. But just to be sure, here it is for Samizdata readers, either again or for the first time:
“After five years in government, I now have the same respect for politicians that the pigeons of Rome have for statues.”
Which, I think you will agree, nicely sums up the Samizdata attitude towards politicians, whether we have been “in government” on not. Usually, just having a particularly governmental bit of government done to us is sufficient, and it does not require five years of it to happen before such enlightenment is arrived at. And you certainly do not have to be a politician for half a decade to find out how nasty politics is.
This was said by Antonio Martino, Italy’s Defence Minister from 2001 until 2006, at the 2006 meeting of the Mont Pelerin Society in Guatemala. It was quoted by Charles Murray at the start of this speech, which was given in Washington just after that MPS meeting.
I came across this speech by Murray because I was looking for a picture of him to use in a posting at my education blog, about this article by Murray entitled The age of educational romanticism.
After many years of being on the receiving end of politicians benevolence, I now have the sort of respect for them and their heavily-armed minions that one normally accords to stinging insects or venomous reptiles.
Hopefully those grazing here will click on Murray’s 2006 Atlas speech.
Tucked into that speech is one of the principal clues as to the changes that will be ongoing and set the next readjustment of the social, cultural, political and economic course of the three major “Open Access” societies of the West.
That clue is the reference to the changes in the way (and thus what) information flows into the public conciousness – where it is and will be converted into knowledge.
While information is not knowledge, practically all knowledge is based on information, achieved by a “connecting the dots” process of determining the relationships between bits of information (however obtained).
The presently accelerating changes in how and what information is disseminated, and thus become available for assembly by many different persons and forces into knowledge (and the applications of that knowledge) is widely observed, most often by reference to the internet exchanges which now replace rather than supplement the traditional print media, as well as the similarly constrained visual and sound media (whose influences have really had a short life historically).
Oakeshott’s “Great Conversation” (now plural) is beginning in a broader form, though not so discrete. Burke’s “Small Platoons” are forming in the chaotic groupings like this.
This does not go without notice by those who would see the world managed (even ordered) by the “knowledge” of those “advising” a new elite (bureaucrats chiefly).
Thus we have the EU attempting (under various guises – “Human Rights,” “Dignity,” etc.) to limit the effective formation and activities of the chaotic groups that will form the basis of a return to the civil society, in which individuals organize themselves into units that are capable to and do restrict the aparati of governments and thus the functions and positions of bureaucrats and their advisors.
On a central academic building (designed by Stanford White) facing Jefferson’s Rotunda at the University of Virginia, appeared (in Greek):
“Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set ye free”
It is from whence and what that “Know” is determined, that will in turn determine how far we shall be “set free.” That will turn on how we are informed.
Thanks for the links to Murray-he talks good sense.I wouldstrongly recommend “Human Achievement” as a very good read.
Another day gone and another day of speculations on who will be the next President. Another round of mud slinging and unfounded rumors. And I am not talking about those running to become the next US President. I am talking about the American people – or at least some of them. I am astounded to read some of the things people have to say about those leaders who are willing to put their hand up in a difficult time in the American history. What is it that makes people dig so deep to find their own worse self in the way they speak about the candidates? It’s like being in South Africa all over again back in 1994 when we had our own first democratic elections. The doomsayers lived large. But the truth is that all three would make fairly good Presidents – and all have their flaws. It won’t be the end of America. Can’t people just focus on what makes America great instead of scrapping the bottom of the barrel of humanity in the way they talk about their potential future leader? http://angryafrican.net/2008/05/07/november-is-coming-start-stockpiling-baby/
Angry Afrikaner:
You might find it helpful to your understanding to become familiar with the differences between an Open Access Order (which is what the U.S., U.K. and France are) and a Limited Access Order (which is what S.A. has been and continues to be). The resource is in the current works of the Nobelist Douglas C. North, which are available in the publications of the World Bank, and principally in NBER Working Paper 12795.
Being in Boston, and possibly with mostly an “intellectual” exposure, you have an inadequate “slice” of America and the reason and emotions of her peoples. But, welcome to a life-long learning experience.
Well RRS has cited Murray citing Oakeshott and and Burke, so I what I am about to type is very low brow in comparison – but it is still true:
The new Prime Minister of Italy and the new Mayor of Rome may not achieve any great rolling back of governnent (thus providing room for the regrowth of civil society) – but their election victories have really upset the leftists.
When one reaches my age one is greatful for such pleasures.