Thursday, June 30, 2005
Human nature.
We humans are strange beings and political aspirants are more strange than most.
Politics is a tough game - no arguments there. The people that you are forced to mix with are most likely persons that you normally wouldn't choose to and it is wise to count your fingers after shaking hands.
When someone undermines work we have done or works against us we take that as a personal attack. It isn't necessarily so.
We are prone to mistake a rival's ambition to win with a desire to see us lose. The two are very different and I see the ability to differentiate between them as a mark of political maturity.
People who strive to win a contest often adopt a "if you aren't with me you're against me" mentality. They fail to understand that a rival might not want to see you fail so much as they want to see themselves win. It isn't necessarily personal.
Another quirk of human nature is that we condemn others for acts we are prepared to commit ourselves.
A candidate will see nothing wrong with stacking branches to ensure their own delegates are appointed to a selection committee but will condemn a rival for doing excactly the same thing.
Only those who choose not to take part are entitled to complain about such activities.
A candidate will see nothing untoward in trying to undermine the position of a rival but will complain bitterley when the rival does the same thing to them.
What needs to be understood - and it's a pretty basic concept - is that a rival is entitled to use the same tactics as you and that it is OK for them to do so.
No one has a "right" to win any contest. Your work to manipulate a system to your advantage doesn't entitle you to a free run.
Others work just as hard, have just as much desire and have just as much, or more, to offer.
Politics is a tough game - no arguments there. The people that you are forced to mix with are most likely persons that you normally wouldn't choose to and it is wise to count your fingers after shaking hands.
When someone undermines work we have done or works against us we take that as a personal attack. It isn't necessarily so.
We are prone to mistake a rival's ambition to win with a desire to see us lose. The two are very different and I see the ability to differentiate between them as a mark of political maturity.
People who strive to win a contest often adopt a "if you aren't with me you're against me" mentality. They fail to understand that a rival might not want to see you fail so much as they want to see themselves win. It isn't necessarily personal.
Another quirk of human nature is that we condemn others for acts we are prepared to commit ourselves.
A candidate will see nothing wrong with stacking branches to ensure their own delegates are appointed to a selection committee but will condemn a rival for doing excactly the same thing.
Only those who choose not to take part are entitled to complain about such activities.
A candidate will see nothing untoward in trying to undermine the position of a rival but will complain bitterley when the rival does the same thing to them.
What needs to be understood - and it's a pretty basic concept - is that a rival is entitled to use the same tactics as you and that it is OK for them to do so.
No one has a "right" to win any contest. Your work to manipulate a system to your advantage doesn't entitle you to a free run.
Others work just as hard, have just as much desire and have just as much, or more, to offer.
# posted by Yakbladder @ 6:18 AM 
