4 ms·
This trend — to quit — instead of participate, is a dangerous path for politics. Lyndon Johnson (possibly the greatest politician in modern history) taught us t
by kbuchanan 9y ago
This trend — to quit — instead of participate, is a dangerous path for politics. Lyndon Johnson (possibly the greatest politician in modern history) taught us that politics is the "art of the possible". And the only way to make a difference is to be there. To be present. And if it's "beyond politics" now, for you, then you're throwing in the towel on two pillars of democracy, communication and compromise, that have made our democracy last so long and produce so much good.
- dragonwriter 9y agoNot cooperating with a particular political actor is not quitting involvement, it's choosing method of involvement.
- dogma1138 9y agoNot cooperating guarantees you won’t be taken into account.
- dragonwriter 9y agoAssuming you mean “by the entity you choose not to cooperate with”: (1) no, it doesn't, and (2) moreover, it's usually done by people who have already concluded that they aren't being taken into account anyway, and (3) even if it did, it can increase your influence in other channels of influence, formal or informal. Even if not democratically accountable through formal means, governments have only the power they are given by people choosing not to cooperate with rather than defect from the dictates they issue.
- falcolas 9y agoAnd yet to participate associates your name with their actions; perhaps even your tacit approval of their actions. And at some point, you have to just admit that as a CEO of a relatively small non-profit, you will have no real impact on anything by staying.