7 ms·
> Hence it is evident that the state is a creation of nature, and that man is by nature a political animal. And he who by nature and not by mere accident is wit
by gm678 1y ago
> Hence it is evident that the state is a creation of nature, and that man is by nature a political animal. And he who by nature and not by mere accident is without a state, is either above humanity, or below it; he is the ‘Tribeless, lawless, hearthless one,’ whom Homera denounces — the outcast who is a lover of war; he may be compared to a bird which flies alone.
Sure, Aristotle wasn't talking about corporations, but as the author says "you can refuse to participate, but that doesn’t make it go away," you shouldn't be a bird which flies alone.
- amarant 1y agoTribeless suits me just fine. The whole reason I avoid politics is because it's not solution oriented. I don't get the feeling people discussing politics are trying to solve any problems, they're just fighting a tribal war, to have their tribe win over the other tribe(s). Tribe cohesion seems to be valued waay higher than end results, and I'm a results-oriented person, so politics just isn't an attractive passtime to me. I also detest fighting/bickering, and I think it's not entirely unfair to describe politics as a bickering contest.
- jitl 1y agoDid you read the article? > feeling people discussing politics are trying to solve any problems it's explicitly about how you need to work in political ways to solve problems at work. It's not about country-wide politics or something.
- mindcrime 1y ago> Did you read the article? FWIW, the HN guidelines[1] specifically ask that we not do that. Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that". [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- scarface_74 1y agoWe can go by the guidelines or we can look at reality. It’s blindingly obvious that he in fact did not read the article and based everything he said on the title
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- amarant 1y agoI actually was thinking specifically about the office politics at one of my previous employers when I wrote that comment. Yes it's also applicable to the other kind of politics. The two are entirely too similar imo. All the more reason to steer clear if you ask me.
- scarface_74 1y agoYou realize the article is about “politics” in the workplace or more accurately learning how to deal with people and getting your ideas across? Your comment doesn’t address the article at all.
- mlsu 1y agoThe counterpoint to this is that in order to motivate large groups of people to get stuff done, you need to be 'involved.' A good leader cannot be someone who says "we're above all of this" -- they have to be involved, they have to influence, and they use their influence to productive ends. You actually cannot be solution oriented without politics. If you are "not involved in politics," that means that politics is involved with you, and you'll be forced to go wherever it lands, instead of attempting to influence the outcome.
- shadowgovt 1y agoIt turns out in the end, we are solving problems for real people, and so all the messiness of real people: the pettiness, the tribal nature, the bickering, the facts-bent-to-justify-feelings... That's in the problem domain. (For software engineers in particular, who can trend towards wanting to think of themselves as little logic-machines divorced from that kind of behavior: I also think it's a good exercise to keep that stuff in-scope because we are not immune to our own humanity, and recognizing when others are being tribal and petty makes it easier to recognize it in ourselves.)
- marcosdumay 1y agoThe problem is way more "involved in what exactly?" than whether people should be involved or not. The GP is right that people tend to name stuff as "politics" when there is no external goal. And getting involved on those is just bad. But also, the GP is wrong if you go with the formal definition for that word, like you are doing.
- the_other 1y agoIf you're not involving people in the problem solving, you're probably solving the wrong problem.
- teddyh 1y ago> Tribeless suits me just fine. Just because you’re not a part of the prominent tribes that you see around you does not make you tribeless. — […] and I have no culture of my own. — Yes you do. You’re a culture of one. Which is no less valid that a culture of one billion. — Star Trek: The Next Generation, season 6, episode 16, Birthright, Part I
- suzdude 1y ago> I don't get the feeling people discussing politics are trying to solve any problems It depends on what you view a "discussing politics". To borrow a quote, "politics is the art of the possible." You have to use politics to define what problems are even considered, much less the possible ways they might get solved. For instance, unlimited spending on political campaigns is either a problem, or not a problem, depending on your politics, never mind if it should be solved via amendment, court packing, or congressional act[1]. I agree, many people go hardcore on tribalism. I would likely agree it is a bad thing that many Americans define politics as, "us" and, "them". If you want to be results oriented, you have to convince people it's a problem, you're going to need to use politics to do so. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
- Brian_K_White 1y agotribelessness itself is a poor result and does not solve any problems. It's a dead end. It's irrelevance. It's being an animal that eats for a while then dies and does no one else any good in the mean time. By arranging things so that no one else is a part of you, you are also not a part of anyone else. What is the point of that existense? It's the same as living in a vr where all you do is self-gratify and it has no effect on the world.
- bravetraveler 1y agoSounds fun, I'm in. Didn't ask for the ride/responsibility and the only reason it hasn't ended by now is sheer cowardice
- Brian_K_White 1y agoWhy did you come here to express the opinion that that sounds good?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bravetraveler 1y agoThe church door was open, that simple. Many conversions lately?
- Brian_K_White 1y agoI walk by countless open doors. I only enter the ones that I have some interest in. This door contains other people, who you claim to have no interest in.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bravetraveler 1y ago
- wat10000 1y agoPolitics and discussing politics are pretty much unrelated things. Actual politics is 100% solution oriented. It's about getting other people to do what you want to achieve the outcome you want. Disagreements are about which outcomes are desired, or which actions will best achieve them. Discussing politics is, at best, about saying what you wish other people would do.
- bitwize 1y agoYou may not be interested in the dialectic, but the dialectic is interested in you.
- t0bia_s 1y agoAbandoning care about current politics gives me: - more focus of personal responsibility for my own actions, I do not belive that uknown electorate solve my problems - open mind for those, who have different political view, I no longer see enemies and it gives mindset to have less biased conversations on various topics - more time to education about alternative topics, creativity, building, care about family, etc.
- dotgov 1y agoThere is a word in German: "vogelfrei". It means "free as a bird". Sounds romantic, but what it actually means is that the person who is free as a bird does not enjoy the protections of the law and hence there are no repercussions for killing them.