"Though the general principles of statecraft have survived the rise and fall of empires, every increase in knowledge has brought about changes in the political, economic, and social structure"
About this Quote
A calm sentence with a quiet warning tucked inside it: you can keep reciting the “general principles” of governing, but knowledge will keep rearranging the furniture. John Boyd Orr, a politician who also moved through the worlds of nutrition science and international institutions, is pushing back against the comforting fantasy that statecraft is timeless craft. Yes, empires collapse and the basic problems of power persist. But each leap in what societies know - about resources, health, production, communication - doesn’t merely add tools to a ruler’s kit. It changes the room in which politics happens.
The intent is reformist, almost managerial: treat governance as an adaptive practice, not a museum piece. The subtext is a critique of elites who hide behind tradition when they’re really protecting outdated arrangements. “Increase in knowledge” sounds neutral, even benevolent, yet Orr frames it as destabilizing. That’s the point. Knowledge is not just enlightenment; it’s disruption. New data makes old hierarchies harder to justify, old economic models easier to outcompete, old social norms more contestable. If you govern as if the structure hasn’t shifted, you’re not conservative - you’re negligent.
Context matters. Orr lived through two world wars, the growth of mass media, the rise of welfare-state thinking, and early global governance efforts. In that era, science and policy collided: nutrition research became an argument for social provision; logistics and industrial capacity became political destiny. His line reads like a brief for modern government: legitimacy will belong to systems that can metabolize knowledge faster than they can mythologize the past.
The intent is reformist, almost managerial: treat governance as an adaptive practice, not a museum piece. The subtext is a critique of elites who hide behind tradition when they’re really protecting outdated arrangements. “Increase in knowledge” sounds neutral, even benevolent, yet Orr frames it as destabilizing. That’s the point. Knowledge is not just enlightenment; it’s disruption. New data makes old hierarchies harder to justify, old economic models easier to outcompete, old social norms more contestable. If you govern as if the structure hasn’t shifted, you’re not conservative - you’re negligent.
Context matters. Orr lived through two world wars, the growth of mass media, the rise of welfare-state thinking, and early global governance efforts. In that era, science and policy collided: nutrition research became an argument for social provision; logistics and industrial capacity became political destiny. His line reads like a brief for modern government: legitimacy will belong to systems that can metabolize knowledge faster than they can mythologize the past.
Quote Details
| Topic | Knowledge |
|---|
More Quotes by John
Add to List
