[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Re: What is Politics, anyway?

Poster: "David H Ritterskamp"<dhritter@dpcmail.dukepower.com>

Author:  lharrop@mrj.com

Lord Jonathan Blackbow writes:

>      [Funny thing, that - politics is the single entity that can
     >      turn into a "you're either with us, or against us" scenario.
Which raises the interesting question, is any issue inherently political?
Is the Northern Principality Question, or any other question, like the
distribution of kingdom level events between North, Central, and South,
Political questions by necessity?
     [Show me two people or more and I'll show you politics.  Simply put,
     even if everybody agrees on a question, there's a reason they agree;
     it's highly unlikely that three or more people can agree on
     *everything* *all the time*.]
Perhaps questions only become political when they ONE: cause the
fractionalization of a social entity, and TWO: are decided by institutions
which govern some activity of that entity, and THREE: hide within the
question some motivation, or suspicion of motivation, not directly
applicable to the question.
     [By that definition, the only questions that aren't political are
     those asked by a single person to himself.  Because when you ask a
     question, well, it's like the old joke that says it takes two of
     anything before you need names.  If there were no doubt about an
     issue, the question would never be raised.]
When we settle issues with consensus, without reference to governing
authority, and solely on their own merit, do we often regard the question
as simply not being political?
     [Too nebulous.  Give me an example of an issue that was settled with
     consensus without reference to governing authority on its own merit.

     Go ahead. Try.  I think you'll find that what I said above is the
     case; if there were universal agreement about something, then there
     would never be a question about it.]

     [HOWEVER:  to answer your question in the broader sense, that of
     whether an issue that is overwhelmingly accepted by the majority can
     become political...

     I rolled up into a little ball and thought about this one for awhile.
     After I unrolled, I still didn't have a good answer.  The best one I
     can come up with is, unfortunately, what I said previously, which is
     that an issue that is settled by consensus really wasn't ever an issue
     to begin with.

     I would challenge anyone to come up with an issue that was settled by
     consensus that didn't have SOME discussion involved.  I'd be
     interested in the results.]

Is all politics bad politics because we only think of bad politics as
politics at all ;-) ????????
     [It would seem so.  If you have an issue, it automatically has two
     sides; and those two sides aren't necessarily going to disagree
     politely, which leads to "bad" politics.

     Hmm...maybe there's an answer.  POLITICS isn't necessarily the
     discussion itself, but rather the BS surrounding the discussion.  IMO,
     if an issue is handled properly in a political sense, that's good
     politics.  If it enters into backbiting, etc., that's bad politics.]
Just a thought,
        Just a slightly longer thought,

        Ld. Jonathan Blackbow
        House O'Shannon

List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org