While we'd all like to ostracize a few toxic politicians, term limits seems like a more equitable idea that can be less subject to manipulation. It prevents the unlimited accumulation of position power and makes long-term financial crimes less likely. Unfortunately, nothing prevents the revolving door that sells government influence now for a cushy corporate position after you get kicked out. Now the insiders who favor corporate interests and then become wealthy lobbyists are some obvious folks to ostracize.
Maybe more of a no-confidence vote would be in place, one that accumulates and then has an effect on terms, or if overwhelmingly high to instigate an investigation? As it is today, the position of most politicians is a very comfortable one, with mostly no repercussions for misbehavior.
In this sense, a more public ostracism-like mechanism might be helpful. But then again, who to authorise a measure like this if not politicians who have nothing to gain from it? Would they?
I'm not sure that ostracism would work in our modern world or, if it could, how it would.
"Get outta town" is pretty easy if you're in a city-state, but a nation-state is a different beast.
Get outta which town? D.C.? The state capital? The country? And, as you note in the article, where to? Going to another country isn't just a matter of walking across the border anymore. Visas can be hard to get.
An even greater tragedy for human knowledge... the loss of soooo many early works of history, science and the arts . . . to say nothing of the impact the encroachment upon a truly open society that was Alexandria by greedy religious zealots, hungry for money and power... Sounds kind of familiar, doesn't it?
Not the definition of "ostracism" that was applied toward attacking Hypatia of Alexandria, however... I'm more in favour of using actual shards to remove slowly the skin of a recent "pseudo-president..."
While we'd all like to ostracize a few toxic politicians, term limits seems like a more equitable idea that can be less subject to manipulation. It prevents the unlimited accumulation of position power and makes long-term financial crimes less likely. Unfortunately, nothing prevents the revolving door that sells government influence now for a cushy corporate position after you get kicked out. Now the insiders who favor corporate interests and then become wealthy lobbyists are some obvious folks to ostracize.
I thought Ostracism was already back?
Maybe more of a no-confidence vote would be in place, one that accumulates and then has an effect on terms, or if overwhelmingly high to instigate an investigation? As it is today, the position of most politicians is a very comfortable one, with mostly no repercussions for misbehavior.
In this sense, a more public ostracism-like mechanism might be helpful. But then again, who to authorise a measure like this if not politicians who have nothing to gain from it? Would they?
I'm not sure that ostracism would work in our modern world or, if it could, how it would.
"Get outta town" is pretty easy if you're in a city-state, but a nation-state is a different beast.
Get outta which town? D.C.? The state capital? The country? And, as you note in the article, where to? Going to another country isn't just a matter of walking across the border anymore. Visas can be hard to get.
An even greater tragedy for human knowledge... the loss of soooo many early works of history, science and the arts . . . to say nothing of the impact the encroachment upon a truly open society that was Alexandria by greedy religious zealots, hungry for money and power... Sounds kind of familiar, doesn't it?
Not the definition of "ostracism" that was applied toward attacking Hypatia of Alexandria, however... I'm more in favour of using actual shards to remove slowly the skin of a recent "pseudo-president..."