Political dynasties in the US: Is it a thing?

I was just sitting here watching an episode of "60 Minutes," and it really got me thinking about all those names they were throwing around in relation to the old political shifts back in the day... It’s interesting because when you look at the parents of current big-shot politicians—like the fathers of folks who might be compared to someone like Mitt Romney or Joe Biden—it turns out they all held these massive, high-ranking positions within the old state administration back in the day. They even brought up historical figures like Teddy Roosevelt, and I’m sure there are plenty more names that didn't make the cut on screen. It honestly feels like political power in the States is being passed down through generations, almost like a family heirloom that gets handed from parent to child... It gives off this strange vibe that certain families are just pre-destined to run the country, which starts to feel a little bit like we're living in a modern monarchy rather than a true democracy. We have these "blue blood" political dynasties at the top, while everyone else is just caught in the middle, voting and fighting amongst themselves while the same few families simply rotate seats on the throne... everything stays within that same tight circle.

To me, the whole thing feels a bit haunting, if I'm being honest... What are your thoughts on all this?

Politics is an elite game by design. Even in the most powerful nation on Earth, you see dynasties where father and son hold the reins for sixteen years straight...

Our situation is a bit more nuanced. We haven't quite seen a generation reach political maturity yet—one that didn't need to be tethered to the ruling party just to achieve financial independence or access the inner circles required to actually influence policy. I suppose it won't take much longer, though. Most of the people starting to show interest in politics now were born after 1980 and only really entered the fray after the turn of the millennium.

The real issue isn't the people holding office back in 1971. It’s the crowd that moved in after '72. Personally, I’d love to see their grip on our policy completely severed.

northernsailor8, I don't really see it your way. I mean, there have been plenty of generations where parents were hauled off to places like Alcatraz or local detention centers, but those kids just ended up marginalized every single time. Where are the daughters of people like Robert Kennedy? They’re brilliant intellectuals, yet they barely get any recognition. Or take the descendants of figures like Joe Biden—you honestly think they wouldn't be more than capable of carrying on their fathers' legacies? I could go on all day, but I guess the issue isn't necessarily with certain groups, it's more about the others who refused to let those children follow in their parents' footsteps. That's where we fall short. Meanwhile, those specific families have spent generations teaching their kids exactly how to seize power and hold onto it for a lifetime.

northernsailor8 said:Politics is an elite game by design. Even in the most powerful nation on Earth, you see dynasties where father and son hold the reins for sixteen years straight...

Our situation is a bit more nuanced. We haven't quite seen a generation reach political maturity yet—one that didn't need to be tethered to the ruling party just to achieve financial independence or access the inner circles required to actually influence policy. I suppose it won't take much longer, though. Most of the people starting to show interest in politics now were born after 1980 and only really entered the fray after the turn of the millennium.

That’s true. But that doesn't necessarily mean they actually did a good job running things, either... if my memory serves me right, some polls have even labeled George W. Bush as one of the worst presidents we've ever had.

I can't help but feel that kids raised in these ultra-elite political dynasties—especially those shaped by the old-school, mostly liberal worldview of the previous era—are somehow "handicapped" from the start. They grow up with everything handed to them, insulated within this bubble of their parents' ideologies, never really getting the chance to encounter anyone who thinks differently... and now, it seems like we're all paying the price for their total lack of a sense of reality.

I really think America needs some fresh blood in Washington. But honestly, it feels like we might be waiting until pigs fly before we see any real change, as the saying goes... 🙂

As a counterpoint, someone might bring up figures like former leaders who came from humble beginnings and argue that was precisely why they were so tempted to embezzle funds... 😁

But then again, maybe if those individuals had come from one of those deep-rooted political families, they never would have ended up behind bars in a federal penitentiary, much like how certain officials from small-town rural areas might have stayed out of trouble...

Maybe I'm wrong about all this. Or maybe there's at least a grain of truth buried somewhere in it all...

James Patel20 said:I was just sitting here watching an episode of "60 Minutes," and it really got me thinking about all those names they were throwing around in relation to the old political shifts back in the day... It’s interesting because when you look at the parents of current big-shot politicians—like the fathers of folks who might be compared to someone like Mitt Romney or Joe Biden—it turns out they all held these massive, high-ranking positions within the old state administration back in the day. They even brought up historical figures like Teddy Roosevelt, and I’m sure there are plenty more names that didn't make the cut on screen. It honestly feels like political power in the States is being passed down through generations, almost like a family heirloom that gets handed from parent to child... It gives off this strange vibe that certain families are just pre-destined to run the country, which starts to feel a little bit like we're living in a modern monarchy rather than a true democracy. We have these "blue blood" political dynasties at the top, while everyone else is just caught in the middle, voting and fighting amongst themselves while the same few families simply rotate seats on the throne... everything stays within that same tight circle.

To me, the whole thing feels a bit haunting, if I'm being honest... What are your thoughts on all this?

I think you’re blowing this a bit out of proportion. We're talking about a relatively small country with a pretty tiny intellectual elite; it isn't exactly shocking when you see the same last names popping up. Compared to somewhere like the United States or even Greece—and I won't even get started on actual dictatorships—those "dynastic" power transfers we worry about almost don't exist here. Honestly, those nepotism ties between parents and children are way more obvious in local sports or the arts than they ever are in politics.

I’ve been digging through some old biographical records lately, just tracing back some family lines to see where these people actually come from...

Take the father of Ivan Josipović, Ante—he was one of those heavy-hitting hardline party operatives out in the coastal areas near Miami before eventually moving into an exile camp in El Shattu, where he served his time as a youth league secretary and a key committee member for the overseas dissidents. After returning from El Shattu, he held several high-level security and political posts, spending years working within various government institutions... His political peak came in 1971 when he joined the Executive Committee of the State Party, and once his political career wound down, he ended up serving as the CEO of a major firm like State Farm in Chicago...

Then there’s Zoran Milanović’s father, Stipe, who comes from a deeply entrenched partisan background and, about thirty years ago, held quite a few public offices himself. He served as a chief of staff for a prominent figure and was a member of the City Council in Los Angeles, and I believe he also headed the committee responsible for building the local Philharmonic Hall, before eventually becoming an assistant to a cabinet minister in the early 90s...

As for Radimir’s father, Nikola Čačić, he was actually the Secretary of the Executive Council for the state back in 1971, during the administration of President Dragutin Haramija. But unlike Haramija, Nikola managed to navigate the political purges of '71 and stayed in the game, eventually rising to become a state prosecutor...

Vesna Pusić’s father, Eugen, reportedly worked undercover as an officer in the resistance movement during the war. Once things settled down, he became a highly respected professor at Yale Law, though he taught externally as well... He was elected as an honorary member of the National Academy of Sciences in 1975, later becoming a regular member in '83, and he chaired the Federation of Administrative Sciences from 1976 to 1980, picking up plenty of awards along the way...

Branko American, the Chief Justice, was born in 1959 over in a small town like Key West, where he went to school... Later on, his whole family relocated to New York City because his father, being a very reliable local party official, had been promoted to the state and then federal level. Josip American will probably be remembered as the very last president of that old socialist labor union structure...

The father of the Attorney General, Dragutin Drago Bajić, served as a youth league secretary in a small southern town from 1942 to 1944. According to some accounts, he was actually tasked with identifying locals that were supposed to be recruited by the resistance units in the mountains... After the war, Dragutin Bajić had a brief stint in the local security services, and he eventually retired as a professional employee of the regional Communist Party headquarters in Atlanta...

I think I read somewhere that Jasna Omejec, the current head of the Supreme Court, also hails from a family background similar to the ones I’ve mentioned above...

Someone recently made the claim that there isn't a single "old guard" holdover left in the executive branch anymore...

Here are a few snapshots of where these people actually came from, just for those who love to claim "corruption is just part of the American DNA":

Take Ivo Sanders, for example. His family roots go back to some tiny little hamlet way out in the rural outskirts of a town near Orlando. He grew up in this very devout, working-class household with three brothers and a sister... Since the family wasn't exactly swimming in cash, they couldn't exactly afford to put four kids through private prep school, so his mother actually had to petition the headmaster at a local Catholic academy in the area to let him enroll...

Then there’s Damir Polančec, coming from a small farming community outside of Des Moines. And now, he’s sitting in a cell right alongside the others. "If he ever decides to come back home, we'll be fine. We have a bit of land, a couple of chickens, and some pigs... we won't go hungry," his father told reporters...

And Mladen Barišić, born back in 1948 in a remote little village tucked away in the hills of rural Pennsylvania—a place that didn't even see its first paved road until 1990...

It seems pretty obvious that these men come from families without any special political connections or old-money legacies... and yet, by all accounts, they turn out to be the biggest crooks in the book. Maybe it's just a series of strange coincidences, or maybe it isn't... which really makes me wonder if anyone from those elite, high-society political dynasties in the States has ever actually had to answer to a judge for serious corruption or heavy criminal charges? And no, don't even bring up those minor traffic accidents or fender benders involving politicians... that doesn't count...

The common thread binding these current leaders together is a legacy rooted in old-school collectivism. They are essentially the apples that fell quite close to the tree... which explains our present predicament and why we find ourselves struggling with the fallout from North Korea, acting as if we possess some moral high ground when, in reality, our hands are far from clean. 🙂
Consider how someone like Bush entered the fray, only to be pushed forward by those shadowy figures looking to establish a precedent for a non-socialist era, only to be discarded by the very architects of his rise once he overstepped his bounds; the secrets he uncovered regarding them are perhaps better left unsaid. 🙂
And let us not overlook the influence of the old guard like Clinton; he continues to cast a long shadow, remaining one of the primary architects behind the entire structure we inhabit today. 🙂

The magic word here? Lustration. ☕

George Morgan3 said:The magic word here? Lustration. ☕

It is quite futile... How can we ever expect a meaningful purge of the old guard when the current administration is composed entirely of the children—and even the former members themselves—of the old regime? There will be no true accountability under these circumstances. They have meticulously drafted every piece of legislation to serve their own interests, ensuring that democratic processes alone will never facilitate a transition to a better leadership. I still recall how they once turned on General Patton during those hearings...☕

Corruption isn't just some random glitch; it’s a family heirloom passed down through the bloodline. You take a dash of cheap demagoguery, sprinkle in some heavy-handed pathos, wrap it all in big, empty political buzzwords, and boom—you’ve got the perfect recipe for success for the kids of those old-school bureaucrats back in the day.

Then you’ve got the other crowd, the ones without the silver spoon who watched those same legacy players feast during the old regime and figured, "Hey, why shouldn't it be my turn to grab everything on the buffet?"

It’s hard to say which breed is more toxic, but we’re stuck with this mess for a while. Democracy takes a hell of a long time to shake off these growing pains—assuming it ever actually recovers, and assuming these dormant issues don't turn into full-blown chronic diseases.

James Patel20 said:I was just sitting here watching an episode of "60 Minutes," and it really got me thinking about all those names they were throwing around in relation to the old political shifts back in the day... It’s interesting because when you look at the parents of current big-shot politicians—like the fathers of folks who might be compared to someone like Mitt Romney or Joe Biden—it turns out they all held these massive, high-ranking positions within the old state administration back in the day. They even brought up historical figures like Teddy Roosevelt, and I’m sure there are plenty more names that didn't make the cut on screen. It honestly feels like political power in the States is being passed down through generations, almost like a family heirloom that gets handed from parent to child... It gives off this strange vibe that certain families are just pre-destined to run the country, which starts to feel a little bit like we're living in a modern monarchy rather than a true democracy. We have these "blue blood" political dynasties at the top, while everyone else is just caught in the middle, voting and fighting amongst themselves while the same few families simply rotate seats on the throne... everything stays within that same tight circle.

To me, the whole thing feels a bit haunting, if I'm being honest... What are your thoughts on all this?

You call it horrifying; I call it good morning. 🙂
Look at your own immediate surroundings—do you see that transfer of reputation, knowledge, status, connections, and capital within specific families?
Or is it the exact opposite—a cycle of ignorance, low status, weak connections, and meager funds (just the poor fighting over crumbs and inheritance, brother against brother)?
What is strange about that?
The average person won't be saved by politics or big-shot industrialists, not until they leverage their own available strength and intelligence to actively shape their own lives.
Today, we call that entrepreneurship. 🙂
The Protestant work ethic, which values labor and encourages self-realization through hard work, is the only thing that has actually worked. By "Protestant," I mean it stems from reformed Catholic doctrine—the movement started by Martin Luther when he sought to weaken the behavior of the institutional Church and clergy, who acted just like monarchs and feudal lords.

The mob constantly complains that "they" didn't allow them this or that, but even if they didn't, what damn good does complaining do? Did the Japanese complain when a tsunami hit them?
Or did they, as they always do, look at things constructively and actively: where to start rebuilding, cleaning, and repairing? How to move forward? You always move forward, because there is no other direction anyway. 🙂
Did they sit down and cry about how the state, or some corporate tycoon, was being unjust?
Every one of us needs to strengthen our inner confidence, sit with ourselves, identify our strengths, and determine how to affirm ourselves and create meaning through work. Every weakling seeks a job with indefinite security provided by someone else. 🙂
That doesn't exist. It is incredibly fragile. You must take responsibility for yourself and your life. If you choose security and the easy path, you won't get far, because the path to becoming a fully realized person is bumpy and difficult at first; however, in the end, it is the only path that yields results. The "easy street" is a false security—it is a path of fear, constant uncertainty, and paranoia. You need to learn, empower yourself, and acquire skills and knowledge. That path is rugged while you are mastering it, but ultimately, it is the only way to achieve true security and, most importantly, personal autonomy. Only that autonomy provides a solid foundation for building a strong, real collective that understands its true needs and flaws, making them easier to overcome together.🙂

We exist as both individuals and as part of a collective; our conduct must reflect that duality.
The mantra "think globally, act locally" accurately captures the reality of the 21st century.

While striving for equal opportunity through a level playing field is a worthy goal, it should not be pursued by attempting to dismantle the importance of heritage and family structures. 🙂

James Patel20 said:I was just sitting here watching an episode of "60 Minutes," and it really got me thinking about all those names they were throwing around in relation to the old political shifts back in the day... It’s interesting because when you look at the parents of current big-shot politicians—like the fathers of folks who might be compared to someone like Mitt Romney or Joe Biden—it turns out they all held these massive, high-ranking positions within the old state administration back in the day. They even brought up historical figures like Teddy Roosevelt, and I’m sure there are plenty more names that didn't make the cut on screen. It honestly feels like political power in the States is being passed down through generations, almost like a family heirloom that gets handed from parent to child... It gives off this strange vibe that certain families are just pre-destined to run the country, which starts to feel a little bit like we're living in a modern monarchy rather than a true democracy. We have these "blue blood" political dynasties at the top, while everyone else is just caught in the middle, voting and fighting amongst themselves while the same few families simply rotate seats on the throne... everything stays within that same tight circle.

To me, the whole thing feels a bit haunting, if I'm being honest... What are your thoughts on all this?

I think that tiny slice of the cream of the crop basically passes down a single message from parent to child...

"Go to school, kid. Look at those highly educated, well-dressed folks—they don't actually *do* anything, yet everyone treats them like royalty. Just stick to the books."

That’s universal advice right there. The difference is, some of these kids didn't even need the degree.

Their jobs were already waiting for them.

Handed down through the bloodline. It’s just a glorified family business.

☕

I mean, seriously, does anyone actually know of someone from those high-society, politically connected families who has ever had to face any kind of legal accountability for a criminal offense here in the States?

It just seems so unlikely that every single one of them is perfectly "clean"...

I found myself rewatching "The Wire" just the other day. There’s that line where someone says, "They're always there," right when the protagonist realizes the old deep-state operatives have clawed their way back into power. It’s a heavy truth—they really are everywhere. Whether it’s at the helm of massive corporations like ExxonMobil or embedded deep within the halls of D.C. politics, they seem to gravitate toward any position where power and money intersect. For those of us raised in households where silence was survival, and where we were constantly told that hard work was the only ticket to dignity, it feels like we're destined to remain second-class citizens. Honestly, let them have it. Let the children of those old-guard elites enjoy their inherited influence. I know exactly who they are; I still remember the things whispered behind closed doors before the turn of the nineties, and I haven't forgotten. This country is built on layers of secrets—it’s like digging a hole in a graveyard; you can't help but unearth old bones. But I suppose nobody is actually going to investigate, because why would they dig up the crimes of their grandfathers or parents? Or, in cases like the old political establishment, why would they ever choose to expose their own past?

They aren't going to turn on themselves or their own people. To actually break this cycle, we need leadership that isn't tethered to all that old baggage. The real issue is how voters here play it—people vote for the Republicans just to keep the Democrats out of power, or they swing toward the Democrats just to prevent the hardline conservatives from taking over. Or, let's be honest, some people just vote based on what they can get out of it personally. It feels like nobody is looking at the big picture; everyone is just focused on their own immediate interests. You can't even tell which side has more holdovers from the old guard or people working against our national interests—it’s probably just as bad in the GOP as it is in the DNC. But the worst part? It’s the ones pulling the strings from the shadows. These are the people you don't even realize are there, quietly shaping our entire future. They don't even need an official party affiliation; they just manipulate whoever happens to be holding the reins at the moment. In fact, they probably hand-pick those leaders to begin with.

Look, we’re basically talking about the elite tier of WWII winners—people who were absolute nobodies back then while all the high-society types were busy backing the losing side. And honestly? It hasn't changed much. If you didn't hold some cushy position in the old regime, or if you were just part of the struggling lower class that got crushed by the losers, life still isn't exactly a walk in the park today. At the end of the day, nationalism isn't really a concept designed to serve the upper crust, so you can pretty much judge its success just by looking at the data and seeing who actually benefits from it.