As you say, people often have to make compromises of various kinds to gain and maintain power. If you intend to make up for those compromises in the future then that's fine (to a point). One of the greatest temptations though, is to always push into the future the time when you will actually "spend your political/financial/cultural capital" to do the right thing. One is tempted to think, "perhaps if I keep my powder dry I can use my power for even better purposes in the future." This is so tempting in part because it really is at times true, and yet it's also often just rationalization because you can always tell yourself this.
One example is that many Republican politicians and staffers will say off-the-record that they think Trump is corrupt, enacting bad policies, and unfit to be president. But they were silent publicly. Why? A common rationale was to maintain their influence so that they can act at a more crucial moment in the future. But for most of them, that moment never came, not even after January 6th, and Trump came back to power more in control of the party than ever.
I don't think power inherently corrupts but it's good for powerful people to be very wary of its temptations.
Came here to say this. From an EA perspective, this is part of why I think it's good to have norms like the Giving What We Can Pledge. Sure, maybe you can use some arcane EV calculation to convince yourself that not donating is the more value-promoting play ("if I invest those donations, they'll compound and then I'll be able to donate more later!"). But I think there's intrinsic value in trying to benefit the world *at all times*, even if that means slightly curtailing your long-term EV-maxxing. Part of your do-gooder commitment should be to the very idea of doing good--and, of course, we are what we habitually do.
To put it more simply: if you're planning to seek power and think you might succeed, you should be willing to spend a considerable amount of money and effort on remaining good and not turning evil, even at the cost of reducing your peak potential power. If this is not self-evident to you, you should maybe reconsider that whole power-seeking thing.
Can’t you get a similar effect of corruption via selection? We don’t know ourselves perfectly and so the selves that acquire power may be mostly bad.
Eg in theory I say have a 5 percent chance to acquire power and then use it for good or evil. I think i have only a 10 percent chance to be evil so i should get power and use it for good. But if I’m much more likely to get power if evil then maybe 30-50 percent of the time I get power I’m evil and will use it for bad instead of good much of the time. Thus I should avoid trying to seek power
As you say, people often have to make compromises of various kinds to gain and maintain power. If you intend to make up for those compromises in the future then that's fine (to a point). One of the greatest temptations though, is to always push into the future the time when you will actually "spend your political/financial/cultural capital" to do the right thing. One is tempted to think, "perhaps if I keep my powder dry I can use my power for even better purposes in the future." This is so tempting in part because it really is at times true, and yet it's also often just rationalization because you can always tell yourself this.
One example is that many Republican politicians and staffers will say off-the-record that they think Trump is corrupt, enacting bad policies, and unfit to be president. But they were silent publicly. Why? A common rationale was to maintain their influence so that they can act at a more crucial moment in the future. But for most of them, that moment never came, not even after January 6th, and Trump came back to power more in control of the party than ever.
I don't think power inherently corrupts but it's good for powerful people to be very wary of its temptations.
Came here to say this. From an EA perspective, this is part of why I think it's good to have norms like the Giving What We Can Pledge. Sure, maybe you can use some arcane EV calculation to convince yourself that not donating is the more value-promoting play ("if I invest those donations, they'll compound and then I'll be able to donate more later!"). But I think there's intrinsic value in trying to benefit the world *at all times*, even if that means slightly curtailing your long-term EV-maxxing. Part of your do-gooder commitment should be to the very idea of doing good--and, of course, we are what we habitually do.
Hard agree. The Pledge is the absolute moral core of the movement.
To put it more simply: if you're planning to seek power and think you might succeed, you should be willing to spend a considerable amount of money and effort on remaining good and not turning evil, even at the cost of reducing your peak potential power. If this is not self-evident to you, you should maybe reconsider that whole power-seeking thing.
Can’t you get a similar effect of corruption via selection? We don’t know ourselves perfectly and so the selves that acquire power may be mostly bad.
Eg in theory I say have a 5 percent chance to acquire power and then use it for good or evil. I think i have only a 10 percent chance to be evil so i should get power and use it for good. But if I’m much more likely to get power if evil then maybe 30-50 percent of the time I get power I’m evil and will use it for bad instead of good much of the time. Thus I should avoid trying to seek power