About Politics

Steven Sonsino asked:


One of the skills that successful leaders need to master is a bit of a dirty word these days. It’s not the sort of thing they offer leadership training courses on, but it lies at the heart of most business relationships. What I’m talking about is office politics.

When we call someone ‘a political animal’, we’re often not being complimentary. We tend to mean that they’re manipulative and untrustworthy, maybe even immoral or dishonest.

A person who’s good at politics, in our eyes, is someone who likes to score points over others, who tries to scramble to the top of the heap over his or her colleagues.

But politics isn’t all about manipulation. There’s more to it than that. And whether we like it or not, politics is everywhere in the workplace and a good leader needs to know how to make the most of it.

So what does politics have to do with good leadership? Well, to start with, politics involves being aware of the effects your words and actions have on others. And - even more importantly - it also means knowing how to influence people.

In an earlier article, we touched on leading change as a political process, but let’s focus for a moment on your interpersonal political skills in leading change negotiating, persuading, influencing. These leadership skills are essential for success and survival.

In a way, introducing change into an organization is like running a political campaign. If you get it right, your people will support you and your decisions.

How to get your people to accept change:

1. First, set up your campaign team. This isn’t just your fellow leaders, who’ve helped you draw up the plan behind the scenes, it’s also the movers and shakers in your organization. You need to identify them carefully and well. These are the people who can influence OTHER people. Perhaps the people that you can’t reach. If the movers and shakers know about and support what you’re doing, the job will be that much easier.

2. Now prepare yourself. You and your fellow leaders have been working on the plan for a long time. You know how much work has gone into it, and you know how vital it is for your business. Now is the time to get everyone else on board. But be prepared: not everyone’s going to like it.

3. Let the debate go on. Listen to what everyone says: be careful not to spend all your time with people who agree with you. Your fiercest opponents are valuable people: they help you gauge the level of resistance, they set out the arguments you need to defeat, and, if they eventually come round to your way of thinking, they will be some of your most valuable supporters.

The politics of business:

1. Find allies in ALL parts of the organization: you can exchange vital information that you might otherwise not have access to. And you can form coalitions, so together you can influence current and future developments.

2. Intervene in the political processes of the organization: share agendas, influence decisions and decision-makers.

3. Make sure you’re not simply surrounded by ‘yes’ men and women. You need to listen to the devil’s advocates - that way, you’re less likely to make mistakes.

There’s more, of course, there’s more. But deal with office politics on a project by project basis and you won’t go too far wrong. Leadership is sometimes described as a contact sport. It isn’t so much what you know as who you know.

So let me ask you this: who do YOU know?

Warren

mehuligan2001 asked:


How exactly are they intertwined?
What is art?
What is politics?

Jerry

vadi v asked:


Once UK’s politics & politicians were also totally corrupted like India’s. Today, I am sure that UK’s politics is corruption free or atleast many times better than Indian politics. One time Margaret Thatcher mentioned that Indian politics will get out of corruption like the way UK did. I am more curious to know how UK did that. Thanks in advance.

Lester

Segued♠Swiftly∞ asked:


I’ve noticed that the teenage population gets “turned off” (at least most of them do) by politics. What are some creative ways to get involved in this upcoming election ‘08?

Joanne

Mo asked:


It usually takes me a half dozen stupid answers or questions from shallow and stubborn people before I have to go into another subject. Politics brings out the worst in me.

Javier

Tim Bryce asked:


When we join a new company, we’re all hoping for a fresh start and clean slate. The last thing we want is to get embroiled in political intrigue, regardless of how petty it might seem. Most of us just want to do our work and move along with our lives. Even if this were so, which is rarely the case, we must still deal with “political correctness” as defined by society; we have to recognize certain protocols in our mannerisms, language, and conduct. So, even before we get started in a new job, we have to recognize there is going to be some form of politics, like it or not. I remember visiting a manufacturing company in the Midwest where a Vice President proudly said to me, “You’ll like this place Tim, there’s no politics here whatsoever.” And I think he firmly believed it too. In reality, they had more cutthroat politics than I had ever seen before.

Whether you are a new employee or a visiting consultant, one of the first things you have to determine about a company is its pecking order. An organization chart makes a convenient road map in this regards, but it doesn’t truly define the power structure in a company. For example, a weak manager may actually draw his strength from a powerful assistant. Nonetheless, it is important to identify the fiefdoms of the company, who the key players are, and who the allies and adversaries are. Without such knowledge, you will inevitably trip into some political dispute or become an unwitting pawn in a power play. The best advice in the early going is to simply keep your eyes and ears open, and your mouth shut.

Aside from the power players in an organization, the three most common types of political animals you will encounter are the Suckup, the Radical, and the Saboteur. The Suckup (aka “Brown Noser”) essentially has no spine and is the perennial “Yes Man” to the boss. The boss says “Jump” and the Suckup says, “How High?” But the Suckup has a political agenda of his own which typically is an advancement through the assistance of the boss. He therefore bends over backwards to please the boss at the expense of losing the respect of his coworkers.

The Radical represents “the bull in the China shop” or “loose cannon” and is best known for revolting against the status quo, not quietly but loudly, and is not afraid of stepping on a few toes along the way. In many ways he is like Sherman’s march to the sea. Perhaps his mission is correct, and perhaps it isn’t. Regardless, this type of person has a slim chance of succeeding as his detractors will work overtime to undermine him. When dealing with such a person you basically have two choices: either join him and hope for the best, or get the heck out of his way so that you are not run over.

The Saboteur is perhaps the most vicious of the three and can probably best be characterized as the “conniving weasel” or “backstabber” who schemes to make the lives of others miserable. He is driven by petty jealousy and wants desperately to be seen as a power broker in his institution. Since he has no real life of his own, the Saboteur gets his jollies by undermining anybody that garners more attention than he does. Whereas the Suckup and the Radical can be dealt with politically, the Saboteur is a pest that must be exterminated.

Office politics is about loyalty and trust. At some point, you will be asked to choose sides and this to me is what makes office politics ugly. I might understand this in government politics, but not in a company where we are all suppose to be on the same team. Politics is an inherent part of the corporate culture; some companies deplore it, others thrive on it. I guess it’s a matter of whether a company values the concept of teamwork or rugged individualism. I have found there is much less politics in companies promoting the former versus the latter. Either way, my advice to anyone joining a new company, be it a corporation or nonprofit organization, is actually quite simple: “En Garde!”

Howard

Jackson Kern asked:


Copyright (c) 2008 Jackson Kern

China recently demonstrated its willingness to brutally suppress stirrings of Tibetan sentiment. Angry protestors in Paris and elsewhere then seized the occasion of the Olympic torch’s passing to express their ire toward the hosts of this year’s Games. Some foreign dignitaries have acknowledged that they will not attend certain events, and others have refused to confirm that they will travel to Beijing at all. The big B-word has been vocalized.

However it is unlikely that a large-scale boycott will come to pass for two reasons. The first is that the fate of most economic powers is now more closely intertwined with China’s than they would care to admit; for practical reasons, they are not inclined to antagonize a Chinese government which has made clear that any boycott will be considered a national insult. The second is that more than three months remain before the opening of the Games. The human mind often maintains a very short-term horizon; it is likely that the current uproar will soon come to pass. China, newly aware of the foreign attentiveness, will defer further hammering of domestic political opponents until the closing ceremony.

But as the specter of a boycott is raised, what does the action of Olympic boycott really mean? “One of the basic principles of the Olympic Games is that politics plays no part whatsoever in them.” These are the words of Avery Brundage, then chairman of the U.S. Olympic Committee, in 1936. Brundage and the American political leaders of the time sent American athletes to compete at Munich in the Games hosted by Hitler’s rising Nazi Germany. The black American sprinter Jesse Owens claimed four gold medals; Hitler refused to shake his hand or present the medals to him on the stand. These were the early days of the Olympic stadium as the arena of high politics.

Athletes have since on various occasions used the Olympics for the articulation of political messages (or in 1972, once again in Munich, as a stage of political action; the capture of eleven Israeli athletes by Palestinian gunmen reached an ending only with their deaths after a botched rescue attempt). The first large-scale boycotts of the Games came shortly thereafter.

Most think first of the American-led boycott of the 1980 Moscow games when confronted with the notion of Olympic boycott. But the truth is that the first mass-scale politically motivated absences came at the previous 1976 games in Montreal. In that year, a group of twenty-eight African nations refused to participate in protest at New Zealand’s presence. South Africa had been banned from the Games since 1964 because of its apartheid regime of institutionalized racism, and these countries were angered by the previous year’s South African tour of New Zealand’s ‘All Blacks’ rugby union. Iraq and Guyana too joined the boycott when the International Olympic Committee refused to bar New Zealand from participating. Also in 1976, the IOC refused to allow Taiwan to participate under the name “Republic of China”, leaving only the People’s Republic of China (Beijing) to carry that name. Taiwan would only compete again in 1984 under a new flag and the name “Chinese Taipei”.

After the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, U.S. President Jimmy Carter issued an ultimatum stating that the United States would boycott the Moscow games of 1980 if Soviet troops did not withdraw by February of that year. When Soviet troops remained, the boycott was joined by Japan, West Germany, Canada, China and sixty others. The United Kingdom, France and Greece were sympathetic to the boycott but allowed their athletes to participate of their own volition if they so wished. Italy’s government also supported the boycott. Those of its athletes who were members of the military corps did not compete.

In 1984, the U.S.S.R. responded by refusing to take part in the Los Angeles games, citing “chauvinistic sentiments and an anti-Soviet hysteria being whipped up in the United States”. The U.S.S.R. was joined by thirteen of its allies, while post-revolution Iran also joined, making it the only nation to boycott both the 1980 and 1984 games.

In any gathering of international delegations, sporting or otherwise, political tensions are bound to run high. My favorite story comes from the 1956 Melbourne Olympics in which Hungary and the Soviet Union engaged in an impassioned water polo match as Soviet tanks rumbled into Budapest. The water was, the story goes, tinged red at the match’s end. Melbourne concomitantly saw the first-ever Olympic boycotts; the Netherlands, Spain and Switzerland refused to attend because of the events in Hungary, while Cambodia, Egypt, Iraq and Lebanon boycotted owing to the Suez crisis.

For better or for worse the Olympics have become the playing ground of high politics. However it is a high politics that remains highly symbolic. Should any major powers eventually choose to boycott Beijing, it would serve only to showcase their unwillingness and inability to press for real change to China’s abominable human rights record.

Yolanda

Murad Ali asked:


America has become a confusing place for many people who are trying to decipher through the mess of politics that is inherent in a huge country that touts democracy. The Critical Review’s (No. 1 Vol. 19) article Ignorance as a Starting Point: From Modest Epistemology to Realistic Political Theory states that a new elitist political paternalism may be necessary to counter the general ignorance of the population. In other words, brighter minds need to make decisions for people.

The concept of political elite makes some sense but in reality this is already the case. We have in the U.S. a pseudo-democracy in the sense that all of the candidates are known but few, except the elite, know what the candidates stand for. Democracy, in its early American terms, meant that politics was done on a local basis. People knew who the runners were, shook their hands, asked them questions, etc… This is one of the reasons why many politicians still travel the country.

At one time in history it meant something to be part of a party. However, as these parties matured (Democrats & Republicans) the lines of difference in their ideologies have changed. People seem to float near the center and it is almost impossible to determine their party simply based on the way they vote. Some are liberal and some are conservative but parties have become only a path to politics; not an ideological difference.

The fact that candidates and parties have become confusing, the average person has become confused as to what the issues really are. For example, people might not know what all of the candidates stand for and may possibly vote on race issues, locality, and appearance instead of actual political ideology. In other words, issues of importance are no longer the issues of politics.

When people are faced with making a decision without adequate information or with confusing information they will choose what they know. If someone appears to be honest or they speak in a tone or manner that makes sense then they will vote for that candidate. In some cases people will simply vote for a candidate because they remember their name. This means the process is breaking down.

Currently, the country is run by political elites. This is the group of people who have the highest level of income and education. They are the ones that contribute to campaigns, read their newspaper on a regular basis, and view politics as a method of maintaining wealth. For example, the Israeli lobby as the countries largest lobby even though it is a foreign entity. Where are the domestic issues in relation to this issue?

Thus, the article Ignorance as a Starting Point: From Modest Epistemology to Realistic Political Theory premises that a paternalistic political elite need to be developed in order to steer people into the right candidates is already in existence. It isn’t a formal method or system as outlined in the system but that those who control the labor control the country. The farther you move up the wealthy scale the tighter knit the group.

Helen

pari_paree asked:


do u people think that it play a vital role in one’s life .
do u think that educated youth should enter the politics,
is it got for the development of the nation.

Ann

CounselorDave asked:


I’m 58 years old! I am a Veteran of the U.S. Navy who worked in Top Secret communications! I am a Recovering drug Addict with over 13 years of clean time, after having used drugs for nearly 30 years! I have been incarcerated many times and am a convicted felon! I am a Certified Drug and Alcohol Abuse Counselor! Does this mean anything? Not in itself, but if I may, let me try to qualify! My primary presence on the Internet has been as the WebMaster of my Addiction Recovery site, “Addiction: Why Me?” I have had over a dozen articles pertaining to Addiction and Recovery from this disease, published on the Internet. I have had one article published regarding my Political views. I thought to myself, recently, why should anyone care what I think about politics? Well, just what does qualify someone to make public commentary? Surely, some of the commentators regularly on television don’t seem to know anything special! So, I’ll take a shot at making my case…
 
My family migrated from Missouri to California in 1958, when I was 9 years old. This move in itself most certainly changed my future and that of my entire family. Missouri is a conservative area. California is liberal and trendy. They are two very different places in our Society. Thus, ingrained midwestern values and beliefs were the root of our family, and over a lifetime, we have melted into the West Coast lifestyle and have become Californians. Thus said, on to my life as it pertains to my political views…
 
A teenager of the 1960’s, I’m sure that I am a typical baby-boomer in many ways. But, in many ways I’m not a typical or average citizen, at all! Only about 1% of the U.S. population succumbs to drug addiction. I am one of them! I am also a Veteran of the Armed Forces, also a small percentage of the population, since the WWII Vets are passing in great numbers. I am also a convicted felon. Would it surprise you to know that 1 out of 99 Americans is incarcerated over the course of a month? I don’t know the stats on those who have ever been incarcerated. Currently 2,300,000 Americans are incarcerated. That said, let’s move on to my individual case…
 
When I was 13, John Kennedy was assassinated. That event had a prominent effect on me as a person, as it did many Americans. The mystery of that incident brought politics into the lives of people who had previously basked in the luxury of the robust American lifestyle that followed WWII. Before that most citizens of the U.S. took it for granted that we had the best, most honest government possible. It has never been the same since. The Vietnam War added to the questionability of our undaunted faith in Government and it’s many agencies. When President Richard Nixon was branded as an outright liar, a little more confidence slipped away. Average American belief systems were challenged by the Civil Rights movement, the Women’s Rights movement, and concerted efforts on the part of our citizenry, as a united front, to force an end to the Vietnam War.
 
As I approached the age of 18, it was a safe assumption that I would be drafted into the military. Every boy who was not wealthy and able to find an exemption of the privileged, got drafted. That part has not changed. The poor still fight the wars for the rich. The poor still do the dieing for the Capitalists. Having had many friends die in Vietnam, I reached the conclusion that the only way to avoid being drafted into the Army Infantry was to enlist, which I did. On November 17, 1967 I took the Oath to defend my country in the U.S. Navy. I was just a kid. I had no idea how prolific an effect this would have on my life. The worst thing that happened as a result of serving was that my recreational experience with drugs would turn into an Addiction lasting nearly 30 years.
 
Politics came head on into my life as a Navy Radioman, working in Top Secret communications at the Commander-In-Chief of the Pacific Fleet Headquarters, Naval Communications Station, Message Center Makalapa, across the King Kamehameha Highway from Pearl Harbor, several stories underground. As a result of my security clearance, I became privy to all communications to the Pacific Fleet, including operational information between CINCPACFLT, the Pentagon, and the White House. I will not now and never have discussed any details of this information, as I took an oath not to. The only exception was in protected confidence with my Counselor in drug treatment at the VA Hospital program in Fresno, California. Even then, many details were omitted, and limited to a couple of sessions. The point being, that I found out many things that obliterated my trust in the Government. During this period, President Richard Nixon was forced out of office for basically deceiving the public and abusing his power, for political gain. I couldn’t avoid politics even if I had wanted to.
 
I re-entered civilian life skeptical of government, spiritually bankrupt, and severely addicted to drugs. My dependency started in Navy schools, with Benzedrine, an amphetamine. I eventually used drugs as psychological self-medication, also. Once addicted you use drugs for any and every reason you can think of, avoiding confronting the problems that they actually mask. The first year I was out, I didn’t work. I grew my hair out, and lived outside the norm, not desiring to be a part of anything, especially Society. I did get involved in the fight to stop the War in Vietnam, helping people beat the draft, and participating in demonstrations. In my mind, the government was responsible for everything that was wrong with the World and me. Though my thinking was very distorted, I became extremely politically aware, keeping up with the daily news, and being able to factually defend my positions as an anti-social personality developed in me. Marriages failed as a result of my Addiction. I lost and quit jobs as a result of my drug use and abuse. I went back and forth from a functional addict to a dysfunctional addict. I was in and out of jail. I became a pipeline welder with my own tools for the independence and high demand that made changing jobs easy. This lasted until drug testing became a regular part of the job market. I had chosen selling drugs as my profession, which made using that much easier. But, in the end the law caught up with me. After many incarcerations and many ups and downs, I just could not stay out of jail. My arrest on January 21, 1995, and a radical spiritual experience while facing a prison sentence, allowed me to acknowledge that I had hit my bottom. I had lost the will to live and broke down mentally during my detoxification from Meth, in jail. I resorted to prayer and my prayer was answered. I used drugs for the last time at the beginning of that jail term. I took my last drink on March 24, 1995. As a result of a plea bargain, my prison sentence was suspended on the terms that I serve one year in jail and one year in a drug treatment program. I would actually only serve four months in jail and remained in the program for six months. I entered the VA Hospital, Fresno, California, Chemical Dependency Treatment Program on April 11, 1995. As it turned out the very government that I had blamed for my problems for nearly 30 years, became my saving grace. I had to seriously re-assess my political views after that. At 50 I began my quest for Certification as a drug counselor at a State University. Little did I realize how politically dependent the profession I had chosen, was. After 7 years of Counseling I had a serious health crisis that took me off of work for 8 months. During this period of time the failing economy under the Republican administration, resulted in a major cancellation of Grants. Drug treatment depends hugely on Grants as treatment is a financial impossibility for most Addicts. Having lost my job and my health insurance, I found myself approaching 60, in a scant job market, competing with people half my age. I am now living on unemployment insurance compensation, with no real prospect for a job. Politics are again very crucial to my life. Republicans fund wars and big business. Democrats fund social programs and middle America. I fear it will take a robust economy and major funding for drug treatment before the market become great enough for the job competition in my field to accommodate my demographic. Meanwhile, I contribute meekly to the Democratic Party and depend on my Spirituality to get through, one day at a time. I sponsor a needy child through Children International, and have several family members, also in financial distress, living with me. I have developed a totally non-profit Addiction Recovery website, “Addiction: Why Me?” and use it to keep me sane and as my way of still being able to help other Addicts. I feel that my experiences with the military, the criminal justice system, and my Recovery from drug Addiction, have shaped a well-informed, highly aware political position and very well developed political opinions. Of course the key word is “opinion”! I feel very qualified to comment…
You be the judge! I will quote this article as a reference in all future political articles that I submit. Thank you, CounselorDave!

Jack