Much
of this blog has been dedicated to promoting and explaining ideals.
The message has been, in a few words, that we need to encourage our
students in civics and government classes to consider an ideal polity
– one based on federalist principles of communal governance. But
how about the real; shouldn't our students be exposed to the
realities of politics? This concern was brought to the fore for me
with the recent action in the Senate where background checks for gun
sales at gun shows was voted down. This action took place despite
the fact that polling indicates over eighty percent of the electorate
support this change in our nation's law. Therefore, there seems to
be a political reality that simply does not become evident when one
focuses on ideals, even if those ideals are of the
democratic-republican variety.
I
have pointed out and extensively described and explained what I see
as the prominent view of governance among our people today. To that
view I have given the name, the natural rights construct. In
philosophical writings, it is known as classical liberalism – a
name that might confuse someone who is not familiar with that
literature.1
Its central principles are that the individual should be allowed to
determine the values, aims, and goals for him or herself, should be
reasonably allowed to pursue those values, aims, and goals, and that
that person should not stand in the way of anyone else doing
likewise. The prominence of this view has resulted in a general
reality of how we go about our governance and politics. It is a
general mode of behavior noted for its individualism. I have, in the
past, cited ample expert reporting and opining that supports this
conclusion.2
With
this posting, I want to introduce a series of postings that will
appear from time to time in the future; the series will report on
relatively specific beliefs of how to best manage one's interests
given the prevalence of the natural rights perspective. That is, if
one were to seek out advice on how to succeed in our real, natural
rights, world, what would that advice be? I don't present this
advice as wisdom or as anything I believe a good citizen should heed.
Instead, I present these bits of advice as legitimate topics for
classroom discussion in a civics or government class. One advantage
of introducing these messages in class is to point out that politics
and governance do not refer only to formal government
activities and structures. There are politics and governance in any
organized effort and much of what will be presented as wisdom is
intended, by those who offer it, to “teach” people who work in
the private sector how to advance within a business hierarchy.
As
of now, I will be relying on the writings of Robert Greene and his
book, The 48 Laws of Power. I must commend Mr. Greene on his
honesty. Most writers who write in this vein are usually somewhat
circumspect. Mr. Greene is unabashedly promoting a very
self-centered view of how one should proceed within the real arenas
of competition among workers of an organization. I believe this
first posting will give you a good sense of Greene's view of reality.
Law
number one is: don't go too far in demonstrating your talents to
your superior less you instill in him or her a sense of inferiority,
insecurity, and/or fear. It is better to make your superior seem to
be more talented and brilliant than he or she is. In class, a
teacher can present this law as a “springboard” (jargon for a
discussion starter) and then have a series of questions that are
generated by federalist thinking.
I'm
sure a teacher can think of a variety of questions by which to
analyze the implications of this “law.” I will present two types
of questions.
The
first set of questions would be about the evidence that exists to
either support or negate this law – in other words, the “law”
should be presented as a hypothesis. Greene, in his book, of course,
cites several historical cases that support the “law.” Let me
share the first one. He tells the story of Nicolas Fouquet of
France, King Louis XIV's initial finance minister. In order to
solidify his position in the King's government, he threw an
extravagant party – and by extravagant you will have to take my
word for it since there is not enough space here to describe how
otherworldly this affair was – to honor the young king. The party
had the opposite effect and before long the now insecure king had
Fouquet imprisoned to spend the rest of his days (twenty years worth)
behind bars. This is only the first case Greene offers and he goes
on to provide several others.
In
addition to these cases, students can do an Internet search on how
successful business leaders treat talented employees. My limited
review of that literature seems to indicate that instead of punishing
talent, business leaders seem to be in competition to find and retain
talent. But this is a good area of reality that students would
benefit from researching.
My
second concern or set of questions regarding this “law” has to do
with what would happen if one were to follow it; how would an
organization be affected if this view were widely held by the
employees of a particular business? Would this strategy help or hurt
a business if its employees are as focused on their own individual
fates as this law assumes employees to be? Should employees be about
presenting false messages to stroke egos and to calm insecurities?
If not, what would be a better frame of mind and mode of behavior for
a business leader to promote and reward? If yes, is the real world
so cynical? So two-faced? In other words, if reality within a
particular business is counterproductive to accomplishing
organizational goals, what can businesses do to offset these real
challenges?
In
general, organizational theory has shifted from a purely systemic
approach to a more communal one. That is not to say that there has
been a complete abandonment of a concern for the real needs and
ambitions of individuals within organizations. As for students,
civics instruction can serve as a platform by which to introduce and
analyze the conditions that characterize organizational realities.
Are federalist ideas and ideals, as explained in this blog, useful in
such a study? Are they useful in promoting the disposition among the
younger generation that would be helpful to organizations of the
future in setting their cultures toward productive ends? The use of
federalism theory in guiding the content of such a lesson strategy is
based on the belief that the answer to this last question is yes.
1One
might see it as a form of what we currently call liberalism or left
of center politics.
2See
for example Lipset, S. M. (1996). American
exceptionalism: A double-edged sword. New York: W. W.
Norton and Company.
No comments:
Post a Comment