It would've been better for everyone if Lord Acton had never said, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." People fallaciously use this aphorism as if it were an axiom. I hate that so much. Especially when they quote it wrong, like, "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." When quoted incorrectly like that, it makes it even more stupid, because power doesn't always corrupt. Acton was making an observation, and the only reason I don't hate him more is because he says "tends to" in between power and corrupt.
How do we know this isn't post hoc reasoning? What if the person was corrupt before they received power? What if they sought power because of their corruption? What if the power allowed the previous corruption to manifest itself? People say the phrase frequently any time there is an argument about government or the like, and it annoys me so. They act smug, as if they are contributing to the conversation. I also feel like I have to address the fact that nobody can have absolute power anyway.
So go on, world. Ignore me and use this stupid phrase as a poor placeholder for an observation a child could make.
P.S. That's right, Lord Acton said it. Not Voltaire, as I've heard someone say before. Seriously, as if you didn't make me mad enough by using the quote, you misquote it twice by attributing it to Voltaire and not using "tends to". But it's okay, we can still be friends. In fact, I'll quote Voltaire now, "A witty saying proves nothing," which is kind of hypocritical of me, but fitting given the context of stupidity.