Andrey (azangru) wrote,

"But he's an idiot," I propose. "I’m not arguing that he shouldn't be president; it may be more fun having him as one than some sanctimonious prick — or, in the interest of gender equality, twat, — but, for chrissake, why would you want to listen to him? Why would you want to wade through the flood of triviality, cluelessness and nonsense?"

"Because," I hear back not once and not even twice, "he is the most powerful man on the planet".

This puzzles me, on several levels.

First, I don't understand what this phrase even means. How much of his position is ceremonial, how much is it subject to checks and balances? What makes him rather than, say, Jeff Bezos, or an unchecked autocrat like we-know-who, the most powerful man on the planet?

(Tucker, by the way, likes to use a similar turn of phrase, "the most powerful woman in the country", when talking about Nancy Pelosi.)

Second, even if we agree on what "the most powerful man on the planet" means, nowhere does it follow that powerful people are worth listening to, just as it doesn't follow that the fastest runners, the highest jumpers or the heaviest lifters are worth listening to. One can sure gawk at them and admire their achievements, but being, say, the fastest runner is still compatible with being an idiot, and where's the joy of listening to an idiot?

  • (no subject)

    com-petere со-ревновать-ся

  • (no subject)

    Someone is actually running a youtube ad campaign targeting React developers with a course on becoming a UI architect: The site that the ad…

  • (no subject)

    A beautiful cartoon on the front page of The Week:

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic
    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.