By Douglas Castle
Political Editor
Dear Readers:
Firstly, I am apolitical, and I tend to assess people by who they are as individuals. As Political Editor of THE NATIONAL NETWORKER, my principal objective is to redefine and examine the political processes into their counterparts in the area of networking, Relationship Capital and team-building.
While I do not support any political party per se, I will seldom turn down a catered affair hosted by any political aspirant or group. In between bites of sweet and sour chicken, and platefuls of baked ziti, I observe, and I learn. While it is sometimes painful, I spend a great deal of my time merely watching, listening and nodding my head.
Everything in politics revolves around persuasion. In fact, the principal objective of any candidate running for any office is to be elected -- and this essential first process requires either wielding or utilizing power in order to persuade voters to say "yes..."... whether reluctantly or tentatively, for fear of reprisals or of an even greater evil, or "yes!" because they (the voters) perceive something of great value in the candidate.
As an interesting observation, negative campaigning has becoming increasingly prevalent, generally speaking, due to its inherent psychological advantages and its tremendous efficiency. It is Human Nature to fix blame -- it gives listeners (or readers) a focus away from their own miseries and failings, and unites them in distaste or hatred for the candidate or out group portrayed as "bad" or "dangerous". The "good" candidate does not have to render a cogent or convinging argument about his or her abilities, merits or plans -- these require pursuasion, inspire thought and possible debate, and would obviously require a demonstrable mastery of the political subject matter. It is easier to persecute and prosecute than it is to put one's own record of achievements and plans for the future in the spotlight. In these types of campaigns, voters cast their ballots against the mailigned candidate instead of voting in favor of the candidate who demonstrates superior skills.
My sainted mother (who is actually very much alive and living in Florida, actively hustling her elderly lady friends out of vast single-digit sums of money at nightly card games held at an undisclosed Senior Citizens gaming hall or profaned house of worship) once said to me: "It's easier to unite people through hatred than it is by trying to achieve concensus by merit." Although I am paraphrasing, she is, and has always been a flowing font of folk wisdom.
More to the subject of this article, political influence and political networking tend to operate through two principally different means -- yet, ironically, they are both focused on the goal of siezing and keeping power. Each employs a separate value system (i.e., an inherent assessment of Relationship Capital) . Each employs a separate promotion system, with different criteria for advancement.
Traditionally, Republicans have been successful in their networking and team-building because the following attributes have been generally stressed and rewarded:
- Unconditional public support of the party line and agenda. Utter unity;
- The ability to keep secrets and suppress personal objections which could foster intr-party division, exhibit a lack of certainty and ignite debate;
- A focus on fighting enemies and threats, and uniting through base Human fears, instead of on courting friends and championing positive causes or solutions to problems;
- Personification of emenies, e.g., making the assualts personal;
- Respect for seniority (and occasionally senility) within the party, and advancement by A) seniority, and B) a willingness to put party principles ahead of personal preferences and individuality, and be be trusted, beyond morality and reproach, to carry forward the party mission.
As a side note: these techniques helped Hitler to gain power, to enable McCarthyism, unified the old-school Mafia Families, and are actually valuable (and mission-critical) qualities in soldiers under battle conditions. I urge you to suspend moral judgment, and simply view the merits of policies which work. These are powerful lobbying and networking strategies for recruiting, assessing and uniting people to work together. From an NLP perspective, these strategies all have visceral and emotional appeal. The track for growth and rewards is predictable -- this is very comforting to many people who are terrified of uncertainty and risk-taking.
Traditionally, Democrats have been successful in their networking and team-building because the following attributes have been generally stressed and rewarded:
- The ability to formulate and articulate ideas (i.e., a cerebral approach, and an appeal to reason);
- The willingness to engage in spirited debate in order to refine or trouble-shoot ideas. Obviously, the difficulty emerges when these "family fights" within the party chambers become media fiascos, and are interpreted by many (including the social icon "Joe Six-Pack") as weakness and indecision;
- Their technique of speaking to the public, and willingness to listen to, and to incorporate, constructive feedback in terms of policy or platform modification;
- Their aggressive use of volunteers, interns and communications technologies to stay in touch with the voting public on a personalized level;
- A time-honored sytem of promotion by A) meritorious work and intelligence, and by B) the ability to frenetically socialize and build interpersonal rapport.
Again, suspend your judgment of how you feel about the traditional party platform, and simply look at the merits of their techniques. Look at their value system.
From the perspective of networking, both principal parties have certain strengths in their approaches to networking and measuring Relationship Capital. Each system has merits, and they are not completely at conflict. I believe that the ideal system should incorporate a synthesis of both approaches.
If I had to summarize the most powerful points of this brief article, it is that the two values which seem to compbine to produce the greatest measure of merit in terms of our assessment of others, are trustworthiness and competence.
Every one of us campaigns every single day. Do your colleagues and prospective constituents see you as trustworthy and competent? If they do not, you are not campaigning as successfully as you otherwise could.
Faithfully,
Douglas Castle
________________________________________________________________
Posted to THE NATIONAL NETWORKER. To subscribe for your free newletter, go to http://www.thenationalnetworker.com/. For the complete National Networker Relationship Capital Toolkit and a free RSS feed, go to: http://thenationalnetworkerweblog.blogspot.com/.
Forward/Share This Article With Colleagues And Social Media:
No comments:
Post a Comment