3 ms·

PG seems to have a cynical conception of what "politics" is, since he seems to be saying that practising it is anathema to earnestness. I understand what he me

PG seems to have a cynical conception of what "politics" is, since he seems to be saying that practising it is anathema to earnestness. I understand what he means if by "politics" he means self-interest and hoodwinking voters. And that may be his experience of politicians, but it doesn't define the field any more than Mulligans define golf. Champion golfers don't take Mulligans, don't kick their ball closer to the hole, and don't miscount strokes. They are all far too earnest, and have been since they started in the sport. Likewise with politics. MLK did what he did because he cared for the rights of people. So did Thomas Jefferson, They're not the only ones, though it is difficult to come up with examples that are universally admired because when it comes to politics, we all have different opinions, because we all have different interests. But what is politics? When I studied it at university, we learned on the first day that politics is just who gets what, where, when, and how, in a society. Anyone who fights for the rights of other people in society, whether for left or right, for rich or for poor, may be earnest, and virtuous in the eyes of their peers.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
But I kinda feel like your example proves the point, because I've never seen MLK described as a "politician" or "political figure". Politics as most people understand it is the process of deciding who ought to run the government, and King specifically avoided discussing this (https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/statement-presidential-endorsement https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/sta...) because he felt that doing so would undercut his mission of social change.
- wombatmobile 6y ago
  > Politics as most people understand it is the process of deciding who ought to run the government That's a narrow definition, sometimes known as "party politics". And that well might be what PG was referring to. The limitation of party politics in America, and other places, is that to become an elected representative you need money for advertising, which you have to get from somewhere, e.g. donations. These usually come with the expectation of a quid pro quo; oil companies want pipelines across the commons and lax pollution laws. They get these by buying politicians. And so there is a contradiction in a "democracy" like the USA whereby votes are in the hands of the people, but the ability to stand for office is in the hands of the financiers. It leads to a duplicity, which is possibly why PG describes "politics" as anathema to earnestness. But politics is more than that. Politics is who gets what, when where and how. It exists in classrooms and workplaces, and cars full of screaming kids on a hot day. It most certainly exists in the competition to have ideas funded by VC. So, in fact, PG is a skilful politician. He just practises his craft outside of party politics.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Ultimately, I guess, "politics" is just a word which can be defined however we want. So I can't tell you that you're wrong or the definition you're using is untrue. It's not obvious to me that a definition of "politics" which groups together party politics, funding startups, and screaming kids coming home from soccer practice provides much useful insight into the world. At best, it's an imprecise statement of the same sentiment as "everything is physics", that party politics has a large influence on how the world looks. At worst, and I've seen it used quite frequently in this way, it's a sleight of hand maneuver used to slip party politics into contexts where it'd otherwise be excluded.
    - wombatmobile 6y ago
      Your analogy to physics is useful. "Everything is physics" might be true, but as you say, it isn't very useful because it is too broad a brush. That's why we talk about atomic physics, astrophysics, dynamics, optics, nuclear physics, quantum physics, and for that matter, chemistry, and inorganic chemistry. Each of these is a discipline with its own nomenclature and epistemology that enable practitioners to home in on the elements they study in sufficient detail, with an efficiency of language. Similarly, politics. To answer the question, what is your hourly rate of pay and why is it so, we have to turn to politics. Physics won't help us, nor will chemistry. Politics is the appropriate discipline, because in politics humans are the atoms, and their interactions are described by the laws of politics. Your hourly rate of pay is a function only partially of the legislation enacted by your elected representatives. Your state legislature may set a minimum hourly rate of pay. Whether that rate applies to your job, and to you personally, depends on a number of other human interactions, both in the present and throughout history, which occurred independently to the legislature. And whether you have your job, which pays $X per hour, or another job, which pays $Y per hour, is a function of... that's right, politics. Or more precisely, labor relations, market forces, race relations, immigration, what school you went to, how much funding your school received, what companies your local layers of government attracted to your area. These factors are in turn influenced by taxation, investment law, transport infrastructure, natural resources, environmental regulations... everywhere you look for the answer to the question What is your hourly rate of pay, you encounter a different sub-discipline of... politics.
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  King was a political figure for sure. People use a broader definition of politics all the time. Office politics. Geopolitics. Realpolitik. Identity politics. Political correctness.
lambdatronics 6y ago
My understanding of 'politics' is: when power is transacted via social influence instead of money. This is why you get corporate politics. The financial incentives within the company (such as bonuses & raises) aren't strong enough to transmit the required forces. Soft power steps in to fill the vacuum.
- darkerside 6y ago
  Pretty good definition. I don't know if it deserves the hate it gets. I've heard politics described as, relationships. And the more I think of it that way, the more acceptable, and even positive, it seems. Would you rather do things because your boss exercises role power (I'm your boss and you must do what I say), or because you like, respect, and trust your boss (relationship power)?

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

But I kinda feel like your example proves the point, because I've never seen MLK described as a "politician" or "political figure". Politics as most people understand it is the process of deciding who ought to run the government, and King specifically avoided discussing this (https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/statement-presidential-endorsement https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/sta...) because he felt that doing so would undercut his mission of social change.

wombatmobile 6y ago
> Politics as most people understand it is the process of deciding who ought to run the government That's a narrow definition, sometimes known as "party politics". And that well might be what PG was referring to. The limitation of party politics in America, and other places, is that to become an elected representative you need money for advertising, which you have to get from somewhere, e.g. donations. These usually come with the expectation of a quid pro quo; oil companies want pipelines across the commons and lax pollution laws. They get these by buying politicians. And so there is a contradiction in a "democracy" like the USA whereby votes are in the hands of the people, but the ability to stand for office is in the hands of the financiers. It leads to a duplicity, which is possibly why PG describes "politics" as anathema to earnestness. But politics is more than that. Politics is who gets what, when where and how. It exists in classrooms and workplaces, and cars full of screaming kids on a hot day. It most certainly exists in the competition to have ideas funded by VC. So, in fact, PG is a skilful politician. He just practises his craft outside of party politics.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Ultimately, I guess, "politics" is just a word which can be defined however we want. So I can't tell you that you're wrong or the definition you're using is untrue. It's not obvious to me that a definition of "politics" which groups together party politics, funding startups, and screaming kids coming home from soccer practice provides much useful insight into the world. At best, it's an imprecise statement of the same sentiment as "everything is physics", that party politics has a large influence on how the world looks. At worst, and I've seen it used quite frequently in this way, it's a sleight of hand maneuver used to slip party politics into contexts where it'd otherwise be excluded.
  - wombatmobile 6y ago
    Your analogy to physics is useful. "Everything is physics" might be true, but as you say, it isn't very useful because it is too broad a brush. That's why we talk about atomic physics, astrophysics, dynamics, optics, nuclear physics, quantum physics, and for that matter, chemistry, and inorganic chemistry. Each of these is a discipline with its own nomenclature and epistemology that enable practitioners to home in on the elements they study in sufficient detail, with an efficiency of language. Similarly, politics. To answer the question, what is your hourly rate of pay and why is it so, we have to turn to politics. Physics won't help us, nor will chemistry. Politics is the appropriate discipline, because in politics humans are the atoms, and their interactions are described by the laws of politics. Your hourly rate of pay is a function only partially of the legislation enacted by your elected representatives. Your state legislature may set a minimum hourly rate of pay. Whether that rate applies to your job, and to you personally, depends on a number of other human interactions, both in the present and throughout history, which occurred independently to the legislature. And whether you have your job, which pays $X per hour, or another job, which pays $Y per hour, is a function of... that's right, politics. Or more precisely, labor relations, market forces, race relations, immigration, what school you went to, how much funding your school received, what companies your local layers of government attracted to your area. These factors are in turn influenced by taxation, investment law, transport infrastructure, natural resources, environmental regulations... everywhere you look for the answer to the question What is your hourly rate of pay, you encounter a different sub-discipline of... politics.
pseudalopex 6y ago
King was a political figure for sure. People use a broader definition of politics all the time. Office politics. Geopolitics. Realpolitik. Identity politics. Political correctness.

lambdatronics 6y ago

My understanding of 'politics' is: when power is transacted via social influence instead of money. This is why you get corporate politics. The financial incentives within the company (such as bonuses & raises) aren't strong enough to transmit the required forces. Soft power steps in to fill the vacuum.

darkerside 6y ago
Pretty good definition. I don't know if it deserves the hate it gets. I've heard politics described as, relationships. And the more I think of it that way, the more acceptable, and even positive, it seems. Would you rather do things because your boss exercises role power (I'm your boss and you must do what I say), or because you like, respect, and trust your boss (relationship power)?