Academics and Despots

Few people today would listen to a conversation in which a defence of Libya's leader, Muammar Gaddaffi was offered. Instead, a good number of scholars and leaders both in and outside the continent of Africa have suffered serious embarrassment for their associations with that regime. What is clear is that in  a moment of crisis, the extreme despotism of Muammar Gaddafi and the intolerance of his sons has come fully to the fore. In spite of his record of ruthlessness and intolerance for dissent.

With that in mind, I find Dani Rodrik's frontal confrontation of this delicate matter totally impressive and sincere. As he says, there are moral ambiguities related to interaction in person or through emissaries of despots and leaders who have no meaningful democratic credentials.  And in spite of my full appreciation of the desire to do good that may inform the choice to offer professional advise to despots, one must draw the line where the said leader has previously exhibited unabashed contempt for human life and dignity. As a result, any scholar worth his salt should realize that more often than not, these despots seek  amity with high profile academics in order to create a favourable name as a person who is curious about ideas. And any leader who does not appreciate the central idea of personal freedom probably cannot appreciate many other which flow from that essential one.