The Slave King

[Cognisant]

The video that inspired this train of thought:
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWcetuR3Jv0"

Anarchism is inherently flawed, in the absence of institutions of authority the new authority becomes whoever is most capable of oppressing others.

I think institutions of authority are necessary for passing on wisdom and enabling a leader to actually lead. I think the ideal leader would be someone who is born into the role, groomed and trained for the purpose, denied any form of interpersonal relationship (no friends, family or lovers), basically a slave in a gilded cage with absolute power to dictate policy insofar as it doesn't result in their freedom.

No bias, no conflicting interests, incapable of being bribed or extorted.

 

[QuickTwist]

What you suggest is impossible for everyone except psychopaths.

Everyone needs personal relationships. Like if you don't give a baby human attention it dies. That is how powerful human connection is.

 

[Puffy]

^ That. Also, the argument assumes that good leaders are purely the result of nurture. I doubt that personality is completely malleable or that anyone could lead a country with the right training and preparation.

 

[Cognisant]

Everyone needs personal relationships. Like if you don't give a baby human attention it dies. That is how powerful human connection is.

The infant is cared for by people wearing masks and form concealing clothes, these carers are on a randomized roster and trained to move/act in a non-self-identifying way, i.e. all their motions/actions are carried out as if conducting a ritual. The point being to prevent the subject being able to form a relationship with anyone specific, they'll be cared for and nurtured but their carers represent a nebulous presence rather than a specific person, the carers are supervised and face harsh penalties if they don't adhere to this strict code of conduct.

Also, the argument assumes that good leaders are purely the result of nurture. I doubt that personality is completely malleable or that anyone could lead a country with the right training and preparation.

There's several prospective leaders raised this way, the one that is most receptive to the training and demonstrates the best aptitude for the role is used, the other's are kept in reserve or disposed of depending upon their demonstrated aptitude. The point of this isn't simply to nurture a leader, the point is to create a leader who has no biases, no conflicting interests, who can't be bribed or extorted, someone who is essentially incorruptible because they're isolated from society's influence, specifically the influence of those who seek to corrupt politics to server their own interests.

 

[QuickTwist]

I can almost guarantee that anyone who is never able to form a legitimate relationship with someone that they would almost certainly harbor a deep resented hatred for their destiny and as such would probably take it out on everyone who was subservient to them.

They would probably be the most lonely person who has ever lived. I would not wish that fate on anyone.

 

[Cognisant]

*sigh* humans are impossible to work with.

What if we used some sort of reptile with an enlarged neocortex?

 

[QuickTwist]

*sigh* humans are impossible to work with.

What if we used some sort of reptile with an enlarged neocortex?

That is absurd enough that it doesn't bother me really.

 

[Puffy]

There's several prospective leaders raised this way, the one that is most receptive to the training and demonstrates the best aptitude for the role is used, the other's are kept in reserve or disposed of depending upon their demonstrated aptitude. The point of this isn't simply to nurture a leader, the point is to create a leader who has no biases, no conflicting interests, who can't be bribed or extorted, someone who is essentially incorruptible because they're isolated from society's influence, specifically the influence of those who seek to corrupt politics to server their own interests.

I don't personally understand how a good leader could exist in a vacuum from society. A leader makes decisions for the benefit of society and its very diverse groups & stakeholders. How could a leader be trusted to act for the benefit of others if they have no capacity to empathise or understand life or society outside hir private bubble? They're more likely to act in the interests of the isolated bubble they know to be their world than anyone outside it. This isn't much unlike how corrupt power dynamics often work.

It sounds like a typical monarchist problem, where a dependency is set up in which the monarch needs their advisors (whoever is 'training' them in this case) for information of what life is like outside their bubble, thus opening up the loophole of being provided misinformation and being manipulated by them for the advisors own ends.

 

[Jennywocky]

The video that inspired this train of thought:
"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWcetuR3Jv0"

Anarchism is inherently flawed, in the absence of institutions of authority the new authority becomes whoever is most capable of oppressing others.

I think institutions of authority are necessary for passing on wisdom and enabling a leader to actually lead. I think the ideal leader would be someone who is born into the role, groomed and trained for the purpose, denied any form of interpersonal relationship (no friends, family or lovers), basically a slave in a gilded cage with absolute power to dictate policy insofar as it doesn't result in their freedom.

No bias, no conflicting interests, incapable of being bribed or extorted.

"Alexa, please be our leader."

Or maybe Janet from The Good Place.

 

[Haim]

A leader without connection to powerful people(rich) is a powerless leader, it is a necessary thing, you need somehow to effect the everyday of people.
I don't see how north Korea is a good model for a good king.