January 15, 2008
Column: Hillary Clinton and the thrill of political power
Western politicians routinely say that they are motivated by a “desire to serve” and they are routinely disbelieved. With her near-tears in New Hampshire, Hillary Clinton briefly managed to puncture that scepticism – and, perhaps, to swing the US presidential election back in her direction.
Her performance raised a fundamental question about politics. What motivates people to seek power?
Mrs Clinton said that she was upset because: “I have so many opportunities from this country. I just don’t want to see us fall backwards.” In other words, she was weeping not for herself but for America.
Continue reading this column here. Please post comments below.
Brilliant article! Many say that politicians long for power because of the money they can control (and - oh! - steal). But it’s not. It’s the thrill of the red carpet. Breakfast at the Four Seasons. The silent corridors of power. And so on. Anyway, good work!
Posted by: Balazs Barabas | January 15th, 2008 at 9:02 am | Report this commentTwo points:
- When the politicians say they want to serve, they are telling a half-truth because, for the most part, they want to serve their own ego / Libido / pocket or ethnic pressure group.
- About Mr. Rachman’s “Erection Theory”, I think it is a bit broader than he suggests. I think most Brits are simply overawed by the Yanks, probably because ethey have been brought up watching so much Holywood output that portrays the Americans as rich, righteous and heroic.
This is why the most goofy Yank in London can pull the most gorgeous girlfriends and is also why any grim-looking girlie with a N American accent would be surrounded by a fawning swarm of eager London lads!
(Recently, a young American banker who looked like Shrek’s kid bro admitted to me that this was a main reason for his seeking a posting in London).
Hope Mr. WMC forgives these light-hearted inanities!
Best,
P
Posted by: Pacifist | January 15th, 2008 at 10:21 am | Report this commentI would not set much store by Gideon’s witness from Cobra. The image of generals and admirals “sitting around in uniform” having erections is mind-boggling. He might not be uniquely juvenile, but I bet the generals and admirals had enough time on their hands to wonder what this excitable young fellow was doing there.
Not being sympathetic to our present government, I do wonder how much the power image of Cobra is another sham; generals and admirals do not do their best work “sitting around”.
In my worm’s eye view of really successful people, they have almost always earned their lonely eminences and, insofar as they are reflective people, they are often surprisingly insecure.
Even Hilary Clinton, a dedicated hard-working seasoned politician, deserves her eminence; the one good reason to doubt if she should be president lies in the voter’s doubt about her strategic programme for his country. Too often the scepticism of the journalist and his readers is based on the unjustified belief that they each deserve the fun and excitement the stars of “West Wing” are obviously enjoying.
Posted by: Rupert Butler | January 15th, 2008 at 10:29 am | Report this commentBeing a leader is important but being the President of America is a pivotal role in this world. Power is no different from ‘drugs’ and once you get hook by it, you will always want more. It is therefore crucial that every human being is empowered even with the slightest role to assure that self importance.
Leaders today in every single country, large or small, ’super-power’ or ‘under power’ are essentially after the position in self interest before the interest of serving. As a result, we have a clueless 19 year old who do not mind stepping into his late mother’s shoes when there are many other competent people who are far more capable in leading the party.
Leaders with power consume power is like consuming food. Power is needed on daily basis and any deprivation create insecurity and instability. Thus, he/she needs this dose every second and minute without even asking if they are able to make ‘good’ of the power entrusted to them. They seem to forget that power comes with responsibilities and accountabilities.
One must never forget, leaders with power in a democratic country is empowered by people who vote. It is therefore crucial that voters make tha right and prudent decision. The decision ought to be diligent. It is the voter who should be able to evaluate and decide the appropriate person they wish to empowered. Do not blame power crazy human being if we nominated and voted them as our leaders because deep down, all of us are the same…it is a matter of degree of narcissism that makes the difference.
Posted by: Sue Ali | January 15th, 2008 at 11:50 am | Report this commentL.S.,
Maybe it’s just that I am too young to serve as a basis for generalisation, but this “erection theory” sounds about right to me. I certainly remember the buzz of working (briefly) in the Justus Lipsius in Brussels. (The headquarters of the Council of Ministers of the European Union.) In fact, in Brussels it’s the badges that make it all even worse, since they are worn quite visibly, and have different colours to distinguish the lesser gods from the A’s.
Posted by: martinned | January 17th, 2008 at 3:00 pm | Report this commentI just want to say how much I enjoyed reading the sentence, “The image of generals and admirals ’sitting around in uniform’ having erections is mind-boggling.” Nice Ruppert. But about this piece; I’ve got one word, well, two: Ralph Nader.
I doubt Ralph can even get an erection, but who really thinks Ralph would be wooed by power. Sure, all men are susceptible to the same types of feelings, but Ralph is not a man, he’s a consumer advocate machine.
Posted by: barmakid | January 17th, 2008 at 8:19 pm | Report this commentNot true that SC primary voting pattern bad news for Obama. For him to poll 25% of the white vote in a deep Southern state against two well-financed white opponents he previously trailed by double digits speaks to significant momentum and is truly historic. In every other primary or caucus to date he has polled considerably more sizable percentages of the “white” vote as well. Why do you think the Clintons are so anxious to paint him as the “black candidate”? If he really was coming across that way, they wouldn’t have to lift a finger, let alone wag one in reporters’ faces. Obviously, the Clintons’ internal polling is telling them something very different from your conclusion.
Posted by: tconnelly | January 28th, 2008 at 10:49 pm | Report this comment