|
Edited on Thu Jul-15-04 03:24 PM by porphyrian
Many of the arguments I've had with people on our side is over this kind of disconnect - those of us who believe authority should be respected until proven otherwise, and those of us who believe that authority should not be trusted until proven otherwise. I fall into the latter camp. As far as I'm concerned, the only people capable of getting to the top in this corrupt system are themselves corrupt, thus the only trust I put in them until they earn it is that they cannot be trusted. In the case of our current "leader," he has never given me any reason to do anything but hate him, and count the seconds until he is removed permanently. Perhaps I am cynical, but, to me, this is the only thinking that makes sense, given history and human nature.
The other camp tends to believe that positions of authority themselves deserve respect, and that anyone who manages to obtain such a position must have some superior quality which has allowed them to do so. This camp gives authority figures the benefit of the doubt, which makes me rip my hair out. However, for the most part, this camp does eventually come around once enough evidence of a given authority figure's incompetence or criminality comes to light, often with a ferocity I can no longer muster when they do.
Edit: syntax, spelling
|