Federalism
calls for close relations between entities within an association.
The term association is what I have called, in this blog, a federated
arrangement between people and groups. The closeness to which I am
referring, in terms of the relation between individuals, needs to be
fleshed out a bit. That is the purpose of this posting.
There
are two dimensions at play: the intellectual and the emotional.
Intellectually, federated partners need to know and understand the
general principles of human behavior and the particular
characteristics of those with which one is dealing. As I stated in
my last posting, we are uniquely put together; that is, given the
factors of physiology, nurturing agents (parents, teachers,
priests/ministers), culture, community, and the like, each of us
becomes a unique person. Who we are are the sum total of personality
characteristics along with physical characteristics. As I am sure
anyone knows, the early “formative” years of one's life are very
important in the development of these characteristics. Our social
life, therefore, can be seen as the interplay between individuals
with all the characteristics involved. Probably the most important
federalist aspect of these relations is the level of respect that is
expressed between fellow members. Due to the variance among
individuals, gaining and granting respect can often be challenging.
In
this, one is well served if one can generate and maintain genuine
affection for one's fellows, but that affection should not be clouded
with false representations or excessive sentimentality toward those
with whom one collaborates. That is, one should not let excessive
friendliness or sentiment interfere with either the judgments of
others' performances, loyalty, or motivations. This is not easy to
do. When parties are close, one tends not to see what is really
going on with these individuals, either as individuals or as social
beings. One is apt to make excuses for shortcomings or one is too
eager to show or bestow advantages to those we consider our friends.
When, due to friendship, false judgments or unwarranted benefits are
given, two things result: it encourages within the friend a false
self-image of his or her talents and contributions and/or it might
slight others who are not benefited by any special relation. When
the beneficiary becomes aware of his/her limitation, the unwarranted
rewards undermine true respect in that such interactions demonstrate
the shortcomings of the benefactor – in that he or she can't
obviously judge performance – or it raises the question of how the
recipient can justly earn the rewards bestowed on him or her. In any
case, the whole practice of favoritism, especially in extreme doses,
erodes the federalist principles of merit and equality.
The
emotional ties between federated partners are best expressed by
merely communicating and demonstrating genuine care. It doesn't
preclude the practice of extending personal favors, but such favors
are conditional. Let me express a belief many might find
disagreeable or even antithetical. Limitless, unconditional “love”
is a destructive ideal. Relations that are so defined become
abusive, degrading (to all parties concerned), and unappreciated.
Even if one feels the sense that one has an unconditional love for
another, one should not either excessively communicate it and
definitely should not act in such a way that an unlimited flow of
benefits results. To maintain respect, each party should feel and
want to engage in reciprocal rewards for acts that benefit any of the
parties in the relationship. Love should not preclude the accounting
that one naturally keeps when either party is giving or receiving a
reward or unsolicited benefit. At times, when the scales get skewed
too much and resulting abuse materializes, “tough love” might be
called for and there is no relation too close to escape this
accounting. Even the relation among spouses, parent and child (when
one needs to take into account the maturity level of the child),
relatives, or the buddy who might have saved your life, your job, or
your marriage, ultimately, at some level, accounting conditions have
to be established or understood. A lot of this is subtle and below
the radar, but it is meaningfully understood by those involved.
Probably the relation that comes closest to unconditional love is
that of a parent for his or her children. But even there, in the
extreme, parents need to establish, if not limits to love, then
limits to the benefits or “rewards” the parent might extend to
his or her offspring. Beyond those limits, continued benefits help
no one.
One
might interpret the above as a call for transactional relations:
relations noted by “tit for tat” interactions. Another saying
describing transactional relations is “You scratch my back; I'll
scratch yours.” This is a very conscious approach to the
accounting mentioned above. Such a view depletes any emotional
attachment and makes personal relations accounting exercises. This
raw approach is hard to maintain and lends itself to people playing
games with how much a good turn is worth and how one might seek and
secure a deal: two favors paid for one favor offered. Manipulations
often characterize these relations and meaningfully close relations
become illusive if not right down impossible. If transactional
relations become the common mode for social interactions, the common
welfare is easily lost since such concerns do not lend themselves to
that kind of loyalty or commitment.
Like
most of what I describe and explain in this blog, relations between
federated partners are nuanced and difficult. They are not very
conducive to straightforward conceptualizing. These relations, when
successful, seek balancing between what appear to be opposing
concerns. A lot of what is perceived as opposites often are so
because of how our popular culture treats these various factors. Yet
there is something about dignity and integrity that transcends how
our media, for example, treat such relational elements such as love,
care, concern, friendliness, loyalty, anger, joy, empathy, and other
aspects of our social interactions. In all of them, we need these
elements to further clarify who we and others are no matter how
illusive the truth might be. True meaning in life and of life counts
so much on the health of our relations. Let them be based, as much
as we can stand, on honesty and dignity with a touch of common sense
sensitivity.
No comments:
Post a Comment