> And yet it’s not obvious that we have produced either a better leadership class or a healthier relationship between our society and its elites Part of the problem is as follows and I see it so often in politics. We have an excellent technocratic leadership class. But being a technocratic leader does not make you a great leader of people, and frankly -- given the way many technocratic fields in the humanities are ta…
> It's not a surprise to me that the Kennedy family, being Catholic, the exact opposite of Buddhism in that sense, was always seen as particularly charismatic and alluring amongst political dynasties I don't think the "technocrats" (or whatever they're called, "materialistic liberals", yada yada) are drawn to Buddhism and stoicism because of their actual content. Platonism is an extreme form of a detachment style phi…
While certainly many Christian philosophers cite Platonism, I think you're missing the point. Buddhism encourages a detached style of living life. In practice, in its traditional form, I don't think it suggests ignoring relationships and turning inwards. However, in the practice of America's aristocracy, it takes on these tones.
However, Christianity, especially Catholic Christianity, is explicitly in favor of attachment to people. It's not like Buddhism in that sense, and especially not the pop 'Buddhism' practiced in cities by young Americans today.