Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Why great men are almost always bad men
Why great men are almost always bad men
Feb 17, 2026 3:15 PM

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” is the most famous quote by the English Catholic historian Sir John Dalberg-Acton. But what exactly did he mean by it?

That particular es from a letter to Bishop Creighton in which Lord Acton explains that historians should condemn murder, theft, and violence mitted by an individual, the state, or the Church. Here is the context:

I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. s, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.

Here are the greatest names coupled with the greatest crimes; you would spare those criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice, still more, still higher for the sake of historical science.

Lord Acton is saying that rather than excuse “great men” because of the burdens placed upon them by their office or authority, we should judge them even more harshly than we would actions of mon man or woman. It’s ironic that Acton had to tell this to a bishop since the Bible has quite a lot to say about abuse of power. Yet even Christian tend to thinkthat we are immune to the temptations of power and that if we were give more authoritywe wouldn’t abuse it.

Haveyou ever imagined what you’d do if you were made ruler of the world (or at least a small country)? Your first inclination is likely to be to use your power as a benign dictator to enact positive reforms that would make everyone better off. So why don’t actual rulers do the same? Why don’t they act in a rationals ways like we would if we had their power?

The main reason, asCGP Grey explains in this clever video, is that no person can rule alone. Because of that, rulers(and powerful people in general) have incentives to use—and abuse—their power in ways that tend to lead to corruption.

(If you find the pace of the videos too slow, I’d mend watching them at 1.5 to 2 times the speed. You can adjust the speed at which the video plays by clicking on “Settings” (the gear symbol) and changing “Speed” from normal to 1.25, 1.5 or 2.)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
PBR: A Mainline Bailout
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Under the Obama administration, the faith-based initiative will increasingly e a means to bailout flagging mainline and liberal denominations and ministries, who will have no problem modating their religious practices to secular standards. And in this we will see even clearer manifestation of the theocratic hopes of the religious left. ...
PBR: On Faith
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” Perhaps taking a cue from this week’s PBR question (or perhaps not), the On Faith roster of bloggers have been asked to weigh in on the following question this week: “Should the Obama Administration let faith-based programs that receive government grants discriminate against those they hire or serve?” Notable responses include those from Chuck Colson, Al Mohler, and Susan Brooks Thistlewaite, the latter of whom has these...
The Buckleyization of America
William F. Buckley, 1956: [I’d] sooner be governed by the first two thousand people in the Boston telephone directory than by the two thousand members of the faculty of Harvard University. Rassmussen poll results, 2009: Forty-four percent (44%) voters also think a group of people selected at random from the phone book would do a better job addressing the nation’s problems than the current Congress, but 37% disagree. Twenty percent (20%) are undecided. ...
An Alternative Stimulus
Washington is all atwitter about the “Stimulus,” which is currently being pushed through Congress (without being read by most members). Acton’s own Michelle Muccio e up with a plan of her own, and did a bit of independent research to see if her proposal would find any support: ...
An Economic Recovery for the Religious Left
Mark Tooley calls out “emerging church maestro” Brian Mclaren in a piece today in The American Spectator titled “A Real ‘Economic’ Recovery.” I was introduced to Brian McLaren in seminary when new students were required to read his books in introductory classes. Unfortunately, I was one of only a handful not impressed. He also lectured in person to a class I took, but honestly I don’t remember much about the lecture, except conservatives were generally denounced and “big oil” was...
PBR: Do We Need a New New Deal?
In response to the question, “What are the moral lessons of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)?” Perhaps the most effective historical trope in pushing through the massive stimulus package on Capitol Hill has been the notion that if only the New Deal of the 1930s hadn’t had to wait more than three years for the election of FDR, the Great Depression might have been avoided. But have you ever wondered why the Great Depression persisted for so long?...
PBR: Public Good and the Faith-Based Initiative
In response to the question, “What is the future of the faith-based initiative?” I have little confidence in the future of the faith-based initiative because conservatives who gain office are unwilling to take any fire at all in order to advance the cause beyond concept. At the same time, liberals will be unable to make productive use of the idea because of giant fissures regarding public religion in their movement. In theory, President Obama would make an ideal person to...
PBR: Something for Nothing
In response to the question, “What are the moral lessons of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)?” The ARRA makes clear that we have not learned one great moral lesson: You can’t have something for nothing. Or, among economists, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. I’m not even sure that anybody is seriously arguing that most of the items contained in this bill constitute “stimulus.” Congress can genuinely stimulate the economy in two ways: decreasing taxes and...
PBR: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) is poised to be signed into law after weeks of wrangling. Since we know that “budgets are moral documents,” then spending and stimulus bills must be as well. So this week’s PowerBlog Ramblings question is: “What are the moral lessons of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)?” Ramble on… Ramblings: Do We Need a New New Deal?Something for NothingDangerous Deficit SpendingGovernmental Accountability and Transparency? ...
Roepke was right
In my Winter 2007 article on economic globalization for AGAIN Magazine, I quoted economist Wilhelm Roepke. (AGAIN is published by Conciliar Media Ministries, a department of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Church of North America). Roepke: Economically ignorant moralism is as objectionable as morally callous economism. Ethics and economics are two equally difficult subjects, and while the former needs discerning and expert reason, the latter cannot do without humane values. In light of all that has happened with the U.S. economic...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved