I remember a story I once read about the iconic Bob Dylan; the interviewer asked him something like if he had another "Subterranean Homesick Blues" left in him to write. The musician shook his head sadly: "My head doesn't work like that anymore."
Most of us as we age past our prime learn the painful, cruel lessons of Father Time. Maybe we've lost a step, take longer to recover from injury, can't bench press the same weight, etc. One telling example I still remember: Michael Jordan led the Bulls to 6 NBA championships between 1991-8 (sandwiched around a 2-year hiatus) before retiring at the top of his game. I lived in the Chicago area for most of those years (nope, never went to a live game). I remember opposing his coming out of retirement to play 3 seasons for the Bullets starting in 2001. Don't get me wrong; the guy still scored over 20 points a game which is respectable for a guy in his late 30's playing for a non-contending team. But one moment I remember in particular during that tenure is the master of acrobatic dunk shots went up for another--and miserably failed, to the jeering of the fans in attendance.
Elon Musk, the entrepreneur behind Tesla and SpaceX, started a kerfuffle on Twitter by suggesting a maximum age for elected public office, suggesting that old men have nothing in common with most Americans. (Note that I use "men" in a generic sense here to include women.) I suppose, as an older American, I could get defensive over his stereotype, call him ageist, etc. I oppose discrimination by government and extra-constitutional requirements. I do think there are certain health risks associated with age and voters have a right for politicians to be transparent about their physical and cognitive fitness for office. One obvious example is the oldest sitting US Senator Dianne Feinstein, whose alleged cognitive decline has been questioned by incidents like repeating questions to hearing witnesses.
Psychologists suggest a link between leadership and age, the wisdom of elders and elephants:
[A]ge can be seen as a cue for wisdom so whenever groups encounter problems that require some knowledge about norms, values and old ways of doing things (traditions) we would expect them to endorse an older leader.
This idea is partly informed by the animal literature. In elephants the oldest individual in the herd, the matriarch, leads the herd across the desert to a waterhole that no one knows about except her. So it is in the interest of the herd to follow the oldest member if they want to survive. But of course elephants do not have Google Maps and neither did we humans before a decade ago. Other research shows that as people get older they become better at thinking about social conflicts, and so does their crystallized intelligence –combining knowledge from various sources.
The research also suggests if people are dealing with novel issues and/or see the need for change, they may seek out more youthful leadership who can think "outside the box". One classic example I remember is POTUS George HW Bush seemed blown away by a grocery store barcode scanner. A more youthful Bill Clinton (47) seemed more in sync with the emerging Internet economy while Bush had been muddling through a painful recession. We saw a similar face-off in 2008 between 47-year-old Obama took on McCain (71). McCain hurt his own cause by selecting an inexperienced first-term Alaska governor as a running mate, unilaterally suspending his campaign for TARP legislation and admitting he needed to be schooled in economics.
The Greek philosopher Plutarch wrote a famous essay on the topic “Should an old man engage in politics?”:
Plutarch’s answer, then, is yes, old men should remain engaged in politics....The complexity of his positive response is to be found in his interweaving of encouragement and caution. He wants all politicians to understand that they possess different abilities at different stages of life, and that they are therefore called on to play different roles at different times. In the case of older politicians, their greatest asset is not the wisdom that comes with age, but the composure that comes with experience. Their steadiness makes older politicians especially valuable in times of crisis, when less experienced leaders may lose their heads. That is why, Plutarch argues, the people will sometimes “bring an old man back from his farm,” even if he prefers to remain in retirement, and then “compel him to take the helm and stabilize their affairs.” This summons to return, then, rather than physical strength or energy, is what empowers the older leader to steer the ship of state.
Age has been an issue in discussing the Presidency. For example, I recall discussions of Reagan dozing off in meetings. Trump constantly attacked Biden on his age, questioning his cognitive skills.
So what's the point? Biden gave a speech in east Europe which has been well received by others. I didn't think so; I thought his personal attacks on Putin over the Ukraine invasion were undiplomatic and counterproductive, making a face-saving exit more difficult and playing into the hands of Putin's propagandists.
But even worse, Biden went off-script at the end of his speech, vowing Putin could not remain in power. The immediate implication was Biden was calling for regime change in Russia. While the Biden White House quickly backed away from that conclusion, the damage was done. This is a man who spent over 4 decades in DC, 8 years as VP, and instead of playing this steady hand with social intelligence, he is exacerbating tensions with another nuclear power. One of my biggest issues with Donald Trump was his lack of self-discipline. Joe Biden let his emotions get the best of him on the global stage, and it could have (still might) have confounded an already tragic conflict into an even wider one.
