this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
519 points (79.4% liked)
Memes
49997 readers
547 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't think you've actually backed up your thesis, just asserted it. There's no evidence to the notion that "power corrupts," there's evidence that systems like Capitalism reward corruption.
Interesting, you wish to make the widely repeated, ancient wisdom that power corrupt into a revolutionary statement against the null hypothesis ?
Very well, would you state your null hypothesis ?
Perhaps something more charitable than the following
"Power is not a problem actually, it's a matter of having the right group of elites with good and pure hearts and everything will be honky dory forever"
@Cowbee
Please choose your null hypothesis or provide your own
Improved suggestions
🔹 1. Structuralist Null Hypothesis
“Power, in itself, is not inherently corrupting. It is the structure and incentives of a given system (such as capitalism) that determine whether power is exercised corruptly.”
This frames corruption as a product of external conditions, not the mere possession of power.
🔹 2. Neutral Power Hypothesis
“Power is a neutral tool—it amplifies pre-existing tendencies in individuals or institutions, whether for good or ill.”
This positions power as neither good nor bad, just a multiplier.
🔹 3. Contextual Corruption Hypothesis
“Corruption occurs not because power corrupts, but because oversight, accountability, and community control are absent.”
Here, the claim is that power can exist without corruption if institutions around it are healthy.
🔹 4. Power-as-Delegation Hypothesis
“Power is not inherently corrupting when it is transparently delegated, revocable, and tied to responsibilities rather than privileges.”
This implies a democratic or anarchist framework where corruption is a result of opacity and lack of accountability.
🔹 5. Evolutionary Incentives Hypothesis
“Corruption is not caused by power, but by systems that reward short-term gain over long-term cooperation.”
This introduces a behavioral economics or game theory angle, where corruption is a rational response to poorly designed rules.
Concepts being old do not make them real. Few worship the gods of ancient Greece these days. Trying to appeal to the notion of "power," or some other concept of people occupying administrative, managerial, supervisory, etc roles automatically turning "corrupt," ie bad, evil, etc on the notion of common sense gets us no closer to the truth.
What matters, and what I find to be far more observable, is societal organization around the basis of class. Your schoolteacher has power, but likely isn't some evil person. Likewise, managers in factories play vital roles, as do government administrators.
Where the idea of power corrupting comes from, in my view, is a misanalysis of class society and its organizational superstructure. We can move beyond class while retaining administration, organization at a central level, etc. It isn't about finding "pure" humans, but about altering the base so the superstructure can be altered in turn.
Yes,
But it happens continuously, it is being revealed continuously.
Wherever your find unchecked concentrations of power, at every scale, from schoolyard bully to the presidency.
We cannot afford institution once again to abdicate our lives to another greedy black hole of power to digest us for another half-century
ENOUGH already
Is your problem with power corrupting, or unchecked power? What counts as a significant check?