Understandably, we don’t much like talking about death, and have an even stronger cultural distaste for criticizing the recently departed, or senior citizens for their declining health. But sometimes there are more pressing practical problems we have to confront. Many of us have been there at some point with our own aging relatives, and know how difficult it can be to take the necessary steps. But sometimes, it simply is necessary, and we are not doing anybody any favors by looking the other way.

America’s political gerontocracy is a genuine problem. It fuels dysfunction, distrust, and concrete negative policy consequences. We can’t sweep it under the rug any longer: too many of our high officeholders, including a disproportionate number of Democrats, are simply too old. It’s not unacceptable ageism to say so; it’s the cold, hard reality. And it’s time to confront it head on: we need a mandatory retirement age for politicians.

  • megopie@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    There are some very old politicians doing great jobs, there are some younger ones who are just as much part of the problem as Chuck Schumer or Mitch Mconnell.

    If there is an issue with gerontocracy, it goes far beyond politics, to the fact that the entirety of society is built on seniority, particularly ownership of assets, and thus control of the economy and politics at large. To fix the problem of gerontocracy in politics would require a decoupling of politics from private interests, or a massive systemic shift of ownership in the economy.

    Like, is the fact that some law makers are suffering from late stage dementia bad? Yah, sure, but 98% of the problems with the lawmakers would remain even if they weren’t older than ARPANET. Age limits or mental capacity exams wouldn’t even make a dent.

    Most would still be bought and payed for, most would still participate in revolving door lobbyist system. Most would still be only representing half of the constituents in their districts. Most would still be sitting in safe seats where they were confident of never getting primaried and the opposition party not standing a chance in the general.

    Like, all this talk about it recently seems like missing the forest for the trees, or a cynical attempt to redirect criticism to a highly visible issue that can be addressed with a simple fix without actually challenging any entrenched power structures. It’s the same issue I have with term limits on politicians. It’s just addressing a cosmetic facet of a larger issue.