I think there's a gap in both journalism and history; we don't do enough to recognize the role that luck and power (differentials) play in human affairs.
Determining who has the power, and why, is often a better way to analyze things than alternatives such as racism, etc. And looking at the effects of power differentials on the holders of power and the the subjects of power is as important. Lord Acton's " Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely" is a favorite.
It's possible to determine the powerful and those who have to cope with the powerful, but much harder to determine the lucky. Just finished the bio on James Baker. The authors note the ways he was lucky in his rise to prominence. I don't know of any rules or analysis of the subject though.
No comments:
Post a Comment