4 ms·

> Or maybe I have never known the desperation of living in a dying region? I'll bite. The first thing I would do in a desperate situation in a position of po

> Or maybe I have never known the desperation of living in a dying region? I'll bite. The first thing I would do in a desperate situation in a position of power in a dying region is be radically open to feedback and transparent with my own ideas. A desperate situation is no room for ego or selfishness. You involve the community, and you try to listen to everyone, and if an opportunity presents itself that is above your paygrade you try to hope that the COLLECTIVE wisdom of multiple people with different strengths might somehow help offset your power imbalance. Now, listen to the podcast that interviews this inexperienced elected official and ask yourself if he did anything of the sort, or if he just saw an opportunity to enrich and embiggen himself: https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/wbhjwd https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/wbhjwd

smt88 7y ago
> The first thing I would do in a desperate situation in a position of power in a dying region is be radically open to feedback and transparent with my own ideas. I'm glad that people like you exist, but it is extremely rare that they are elected or stay in office. It's common for intellectual humility to be perceived as incompetence or weak leadership. "I don't know what to do, but I'm open to hearing your ideas!" is not confidence-inspiring. Admitting to mistakes can be the same. > You involve the community, and you try to listen to everyone Similar to the above, this can be seen as weakness. Look at the criticism of Jack Dorsey and Twitter. People mock him for this behavior instead of making unilateral decisions with incomplete evidence. > if an opportunity presents itself that is above your paygrade Again, not something a normal human in a leadership position often thinks. You don't think to yourself, "Wow, I'm just not smart enough to understand a large company promising something." Especially in the US, where people trust the legal system to force the other party to make good on its promises. > he just saw an opportunity to enrich and embiggen himself I agree that he did this. He wasn't the only person who saw this opportunity. It's also how democracy is supposed to work: someone wins a popularity contest and then wants to win it again. The incentives this creates are sometimes perverse. You do stupid things that sound good just because they sound good. Can you imagine being an official brave enough to say they don't think Foxconn would follow through? No one would want to vote for you. We've seen this repeatedly with Trump: he promises impossible things like the return of the coal industry and manufacturing jobs. Some of his rivals in the Republican Party did not promise this, and they were nowhere near as popular as him.
- supernova87a 7y ago
  > It's common for intellectual humility to be perceived as incompetence or weak leadership. "I don't know what to do, but I'm open to hearing your ideas!" is not confidence-inspiring. Admitting to mistakes can be the same. I think this is a failing of our constantly-broadcasting news cycle and incorrect belief about what leaders should be. Yes, leaders should help their people be confident. But we also need to stop putting expectations on leaders that they know the answer at every minute or communication. Otherwise we incentivize them to put out incorrect information or decisions for fear of being seen as weak. I also have a feeling that our instant "like" culture, mass mobilization of (generally uninformed) public opinion, and belief that democracy to the lowest level is not the right way to manage situations that require contemplative expertise and specialized knowledge.

smt88 7y ago

> The first thing I would do in a desperate situation in a position of power in a dying region is be radically open to feedback and transparent with my own ideas. I'm glad that people like you exist, but it is extremely rare that they are elected or stay in office. It's common for intellectual humility to be perceived as incompetence or weak leadership. "I don't know what to do, but I'm open to hearing your ideas!" is not confidence-inspiring. Admitting to mistakes can be the same. > You involve the community, and you try to listen to everyone Similar to the above, this can be seen as weakness. Look at the criticism of Jack Dorsey and Twitter. People mock him for this behavior instead of making unilateral decisions with incomplete evidence. > if an opportunity presents itself that is above your paygrade Again, not something a normal human in a leadership position often thinks. You don't think to yourself, "Wow, I'm just not smart enough to understand a large company promising something." Especially in the US, where people trust the legal system to force the other party to make good on its promises. > he just saw an opportunity to enrich and embiggen himself I agree that he did this. He wasn't the only person who saw this opportunity. It's also how democracy is supposed to work: someone wins a popularity contest and then wants to win it again. The incentives this creates are sometimes perverse. You do stupid things that sound good just because they sound good. Can you imagine being an official brave enough to say they don't think Foxconn would follow through? No one would want to vote for you. We've seen this repeatedly with Trump: he promises impossible things like the return of the coal industry and manufacturing jobs. Some of his rivals in the Republican Party did not promise this, and they were nowhere near as popular as him.

supernova87a 7y ago
> It's common for intellectual humility to be perceived as incompetence or weak leadership. "I don't know what to do, but I'm open to hearing your ideas!" is not confidence-inspiring. Admitting to mistakes can be the same. I think this is a failing of our constantly-broadcasting news cycle and incorrect belief about what leaders should be. Yes, leaders should help their people be confident. But we also need to stop putting expectations on leaders that they know the answer at every minute or communication. Otherwise we incentivize them to put out incorrect information or decisions for fear of being seen as weak. I also have a feeling that our instant "like" culture, mass mobilization of (generally uninformed) public opinion, and belief that democracy to the lowest level is not the right way to manage situations that require contemplative expertise and specialized knowledge.