Ancient Politicians and Power Intoxication
Politicians who are noticeably old and unable to do their jobs properly are becoming more common around the globe. This is true whether one wants to look at the alleged drug baron who was installed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the President of Nigeria, who can barely stand and talk without producing meme-worthy performances that flood the social media channels of young educated Nigerians, or one wants to look at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who is seemingly making an unfortunate habit out of being caught behind a microphone freezing in ways that plainly indicate irreversible age-related decline. The current President of the United States, Joseph Biden, falling on stage and looking completely lost, old, and frail in public is also worrying. The rise of aged politicians who cling to power despite clearly not being able to fully do their jobs is a significant problem for democracy all over the world.
When someone broaches the topic of ailing geriatric political figures’ dogged refusal to relinquish power and how dangerous this is for a democratic society, the predictable line of counterargument is to accuse the person of engaging in ageism. Of course, ageism, like most “isms,” is profoundly unfair and should not be encouraged throughout society. However, complaining that there are specific individuals with the demonstrated incapacity to perform certain roles because they are too advanced in age is decidedly not ageism. Ageism would require discriminating against a person unfairly on the basis of age, not merely pointing out that someone’s advanced age has led to that particular person’s inability to perform certain roles. There are also some people who once could do their job well, but with advanced age, have declined in such a way that they are no longer able to do their job satisfactorily. To call that ageism, would be akin to suggesting it is sexism to state the uncontroversial fact that a female athlete in her third trimester of pregnancy is incapable of engaging in the rigors of competitive professional sport while in that state.
Aging is a fact of life. It is the reason why people are encouraged to work hard while they are young so that when they are old and unable to work, they will have accumulated enough wealth to be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor. One does not need to be a celebrated academic gerontologist to understand or state the fact that aging ultimately leads to cognitive and physical decline. This fact, however, does not mean that older people have no utility. Although there are multiple examples of excerebrose senior citizens who clearly demonstrate that age does not necessarily cause wisdom (see the 45th President of the United States for one popular example), one can say that age is correlated with wisdom. For this reason, it is a good practice to have a society where there are some older people in positions of power, and where older people are in positions to advise younger leaders and pass on their knowledge.
However, throughout the world, we are not generally seeing sages who are capably leading in important offices. We are seeing senile dinosaurs, who are wholly defined by their political titles, greedily refusing to relinquish power. Some of these people are not even skilled at their jobs. At least in the case of someone like Ruth Bader Ginsburg—who everybody now agrees overstayed her time on the Supreme Court, dying in the seat and allowing herself to be replaced by her young ideological antonym—she was inarguably excellent at her job. She was clinging on to a job she did excellently. Some of these political leaders were never even good to begin with.
Fundamentally, it is dangerous for democracy for old people whose cognitive skills have declined significantly to remain in important positions. If they are clearly unable to do the tasks that are required of them, then who is behind the scenes doing these tasks? Obviously, someone who voters did not elect. Why should someone who cannot do the job that they were elected to do be allowed to sit in the seat and have someone else do the work in the shadows? What is the point of electing a person when they will simply be a lifeless puppet for someone else with the mental acuity to pull the strings in the shadows? If this is permissible, then what is next? Perhaps seven-year-old politicians who are titular political heads, but whose offices are run by nefarious characters in the shadows?
The point here is not to argue that important political offices ought to be fully occupied by millennial yuppies, or heaven’s forbid Generation Z. From what has been seen of millennials in American politics thus far, they tend to be irritatingly performative and severely lacking in gravitas. This can be seen from the theatrical activist antics of an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to the exasperating “Debate me, bro!” smarminess of a balatron like Vivek Ramaswamy. There is definitely a need for leaders with more advanced age, wisdom, and political poise—just the ones who can actually still do their jobs.
Society does not need politicians who are too old to do their jobs. However, the lamentable reality is that there are some old people who are so unhealthily attached to their positions because they do not have a clue who they are without their titles. Instead of being content with what they have achieved in life, and using their old age to thoroughly reflect on their legacies, spending time with family and friends, and using their limited time on the planet to deepen their spirituality and connection with the Almighty, all they can think of is desperately clinging onto one more day of political power, even without the ability to do the job. It is the height of personal insecurity, and it is extremely dangerous for democracy.