Out-of-control leaders —> out-of-control society

Meanwhile, an L-dotter points to the larger significance of the DSK story (which I’ve previously discussed here):

Reply 6—Posted by: bpl40, 5/22/2011 7:57:06 AM

The sad part is that this circus is obscuring what is perhaps the most important point here. All his adult life this man’s attitude towards other people’s money has been exactly similar to his attitude towards chamber maids. Putting him in charge of the world’s money is like making him the Chief Warden of a women’s prison.

Let us recall that DSK’s most notable accomplishment as head of the IMF was to organize a trillion dollar bailout of the EU’s more improvident members. A man with no sense of limits on his sexual desires, was put in charge of loaning money to countries with no sense of limits on their economic desires.

Remember that fact, when liberals and libertarians tell you that people’s private morality has no public significance. It used to be understood (in America if not in France) that the proof that a man was qualified to govern others, was that he had demonstrated government over himself.

- end of initial entry -

LA writes:

Here’s another item on the same theme: In response to a story (which is in the realm of unconfirmed rumor) that Arnold Schwarzenegger has two additional out-of-wedlock children that his wife didn’t know about, this exchange occurs at Lucianne.com:

Reply 3—Posted by: donna quixote, 5/22/2011 2:55:56 PM

who cares

Reply 5—Posted by: Hobbiest, 5/22/2011 2:59:14 PM

I care because it offers insight as to why someone who sounded so good as a fiscal conservative when first campaigning for office governed so differently.

Hobbiest understands what the American Founders understood: that there is a connection between private morality and public responsiblity.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 22, 2011 03:17 PM | Send