David McElroy

making sense of a dysfunctional culture

Uncategorized

Listen to Samuel’s ancient warning to Israel about anointing a ruler: ‘…you shall be his slaves’

By ·

In the Book of I Samuel, the prophet warned the people against their demand for a king. The Hebrews were unhappy with having Samuel’s sons to judge them, because the sons were corrupt. Instead of seeking freedom from corrupt men, the people asked for a king.

According to I Samuel 8:11-18, the prophet warned the people with these words: “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots. And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men and your donkeys, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

The people got what they asked for. Saul became the first king of Israel. If you know the story, you know things didn’t end well. The practices of kings haven’t changed much from Saul’s day, even if we call them something other than kings now. We need to look past the day of allowing a king to rule over us, even if that’s what the majority want.

Related Posts

Does the delusion that most people agree with us explain the appeal of majoritarian systems?

By ·

I frequently hear people trying to support their opinions by claiming that “everybody” thinks the same thing they do about some issue. It doesn’t matter much what the issue is, because most people seem to believe that how they see the world is typical of how other normal, mainstream people see the same world.

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the psychology behind this — and I’m trying to track down research that might address it — but right now, I’m thinking about the implications of it. If most people honestly believe that others share their general views, could this help explain why people are so supportive of majoritarian systems? Could it be that they have an unconscious belief that an honest vote will produce a result they’re going to like?

In 1969, U.S. President Richard Nixon was faced with very vocal and growing opposition to the war in Vietnam. He gave a famous speech in which he asked for support from the “great silent majority” who he thought agreed with him. Nixon’s approval rating had been hovering around 50 percent (and was 56 percent at the time of the speech) but after invoking the notion that most people agreed with him, his support immediately jumped to 68 percent. Since nothing else happened to explain the change, it seems reasonable to believe that people have a need to identify with the majority if a politician claiming something to be the majority position increases his approval rating by 12 points almost overnight.
Keep Reading

Related Posts

Why keep playing a game that’s impossible for you to win?

By ·

As I watch angry people scream about the political change they want, I’m frustrated that they can’t see they’re playing a game they can’t win. If you’re playing a game where the rules make it impossible for people with minority views to win, why keep playing the game?

You probably know who the Harlem Globetrotters are, but do you know who the Washington Generals are? The Generals are the patsy team that the Globetrotters typically play in their entertaining exhibition games. The players are paid simply to provide inept opposition. They’re not supposed to have a chance of winning a game.

In exhibition comedy basketball, there’s nothing wrong with that. But if you hold a minority view about the world, you’re the one playing the patsy when you play majoritarian political games — regardless of which minority political position you hold.

If you’re being paid as a basketball player to be intentionally beaten and humiliated, that’s fine. It’s a job. But if you’re playing the same role in the political game, you’re getting nothing out of it. You’re the patsy. It’s time to quit playing a game that can’t be won.

Related Posts