OB Badger 4 Mayor

Jackson Kern asked:


Copyright (c) 2008 Jackson Kern

The subtle difference between pure social development and social-political sustainability is very central to the pursuit of sustainable development. Just as economic development accomplishes little if the achievements heralded are unsustainable, so too must social enrichment go hand in hand with a concerted effort to ensure its persistent viability.

Open, contested political arenas offer the only means to this endarenas that are contested by you. These three phenomena endanger the sustainability of our social-political processes; they beg our devoted attention.

1. The most insidious danger of all is that of prevalent political apathy. If the population at large cannot be convinced that its fate is sufficiently at stake to engage itself actively, then all hope surely is lost. The causes of apathy are many; clearly the simplest is inner-focused individuals who are more concerned with personal than societal enrichment, or who believe that the benefits derived from social engagement will not be commensurate with the time and resources invested. This phenomenon can be likened to game theory and political science notions of the “tragedy of the commons”. A related cause of political apathy is blind faith in social and political institutions. But we must remember Sartre’s espousal of the one who “is loyal to a political and social ensemble, and who never ceases to contest it”. There is no contradiction in believing that a nation’s social and political processes are the best ever conceived by mankind, and still rising every morning to challenge them. Indeed, this is the very essence of democracy.

2. The existence of social inertia is different from apathy. We human beings are creatures of habit. Even when informed and acknowledging of specific problems, we can be resistant to the specter of addressing them aggressively via political mechanisms if so doing entails a rupture with time-honored cultural tradition. In a 2006 poll, eighty-five percent of Americans indicated their belief that global warming is “probably happening”, while half asserted that the issue of global warming is “extremely important” to them. Yet the ubiquity of single-occupant vehicles on America’s highways remains undiminished.

3. When the general populace is involved and engaged, this can often pose problems of social-political inefficiency. This issue can be particularly acute in nations which are large in population and geography. An inability to reach consensus can sometimes lead to paralysis. Under an autocratic establishment, the government can execute changes to social-political institutions with an alacrity that is sometimes enviable. But this, of course, is not consultative; sustainability of the social-political dimension is only ensured in the long run if it is reflective of the collective will. A different sort of social-political inefficiency arises when there is no obstruction to consensus but when channels for initiating change (particularly in the judiciary) are constrained, convoluted or overloaded.

Political apathy and social inertia can only be combated in ongoing daily efforts to inform, arouse and provoke. Happily, social-political inefficiency can be addressed more methodically. Governments, businesses, non-governmental and not-for-profit organizations alter and influence the state of our social and natural environment every day. Actors which seek to bridge the gap between these entities and the general populace and to facilitate their interaction, aided by extraordinary new technologies of participation, have a grand role to play in the future of social-political sustainability.

An evocation of these challenges would not be complete without a consideration of the dynamic interactions the social-political domain engenders with other elements of sustainable development. Economics is the science of resource allocation, the study of the ways in which we satisfy human wants and needs. No human need is more fundamental than that of nourishment. In a revealing illustration of the interdependence of sustainable development’s three constituent parts, rising world food prices now pose a grave threat to social-political sustainability around the globe. One need only turn to recent social unrest and political instability in Haiti, Egypt and the Philippines to be assured of that. These rising prices stem from uncertainties regarding the sustainability of our agricultural processes. To be specific, some have very explicitly cited efforts in the West to subsidize and encourage biofuels production as a leading inflationary factor (though burgeoning middle classes in India and China seem surely to be responsible for other upward price pressures). And all this as the viability of biofuels falls under a penetrating scrutiny.

These challenges of social-political sustainability will remain inextricably bound to the future of sustainability as an enterprise.

Francis Githinji asked:


We love to chat about many things. People have different favorite topics to talk about. When you have a particular interest in mind, you look for those chats that will suit your needs best. If you like a mature chat, politics is definitely for you. Politics is a topic that many like to steer clear of. This is mainly because nothing conclusive emanates from it. It really does not matter where you are, politics will always spark different emotions. There are chats that have totally banned politics from discussions and there are those who specialize in political issues. There are very many chat forums which will host politics as their chosen topic of focus. Life is politics and, there is no way of avoiding it at some point in our lives. Therefore, the importance of politics cannot be underestimated. However, when you wish to engage in a political chat, there are several things that you need to consider. If you are chatting in chats where politics is common, there will be rules put in place to guide you. Therefore, the first thing before you engage in a political chat is to look at the rules.

Rules need to be followed for many reasons. It is through rules of a political chat forum that you will get to know what is acceptable and what is not. Just like a game, you need to know what to do so that you can gain as much as you can. In this case, rules will enable you know how to conduct it. Rules will also show you where trouble is and, you can avoid it. For example, you should never engage in personal attacks, you should never use insults to make your point heard and also you should never appear to demean any political figure or a figure in a different political context. In other words, rules are put in place to ensure that your conversations are mature. Criticism should be creative or constructive and, when you fully understand this, you are ready to conduct a political chat. Sometimes, politics seems to have no rules at all. It is difficult to establish the line which you should not cross. However, with proper adherence to rules, you should be in a position to chat appropriately.

A political chat should be based on honesty. You should avoid major propaganda. Also, you should not insight people or make people believe what you think. People you are chatting with will also have a keen interest in politics and chances are that they have their very own opinion. You should not be compelled to agree with anyone. Personal sentiments on politics will always differ to great degrees. You must know why you are chatting in the first place. Your aim might be to see what opinions of others are. You might also be looking for solutions. Also, chats will enable you understand some of the things you do not. Many minds have a way of dissecting issues and having a better or clearer understanding to issues. With the above tips on how to chat politically, you should have a mature chat.

M. Nadarajah asked:


Indian Malaysian Community and the New Politics

M. Nadarajah*

—————————————————————————-

The 12th general election is finally over. The people of Malaysia have delivered their wishes to the contending parties and their nominees. The people have given Barisan National yet another opportunity to continue to form the national government. However, they have decided to deny 2/3 majority to BN in the parliament. They have finally given the opposition the opportunity to play a more significant role in national politics. They have also, in trust, delivered 5 state governments to the opposition. Now the people of Malaysia will have to see if their country in fact becomes what they aspire it to be. It is an aspiration that includes fairness, freedom and social security for all.

These are plain facts. But the meanings of events of the socio-political drama that unfolded and burst into the public arena the last 6 months and in particular the last couple of weeks and on the 8th of March are far too rich. They would capture the imagination of many commentators, analysts, researchers and concerned citizens.

On the ground, the election results are (i) the product of history of what the BN government has actually done (or not done) for the people and this nation since independence, (ii) the political and campaign strategy of individuals, individual parties and/or their coalitions, (iii) the orientation of the voting system and constituencies and lastly, (iv) the easy access to new information and communication technologies by all political contenders (individuals and parties).

Recognising The Role of the Indian Malaysian Community

Among the factors, it is in the history of this nation that we need to look closely and to identify definite trends that have given us what we are experiencing today. A few centuries ago, an European social commentator and revolutionary once said that History moves forward qualitatively only on the side of and through the agency of the oppressed and marginalised. It is they who provide the social ground that offers History a new Future.

In a sense, History has thrust upon the Indian Malaysian community that special responsibility. This is not to suggest that others did not play an equally critical role but only to record the spirit, the contribution and the role played by Indian Malaysians as a community in the election, as many during the many election ceramahs acknowledged.

Certainly, the 12th general election was the temporal space where History conspired to give us all the opportunity for that ‘an-other’ Malaysia that we many of us increasingly aspire for.

Along with so many others, the Indian Malaysian community has pushed the agenda of a new politics for Malaysia. On hindsight, the spirit behind Hindraf, and later Makkal Sakthi, is undeniably a critical turning point in recent Malaysian politics. Beyond organisational politics, they really represent the spirit of an economically marginalised, politically powerless, and culturally-battered community aspiring for fairness.

This development in the Indian Malaysian community and the new found orientation among the other Malaysian communities have now given us all an opportunity to break the hold of ethnocracy in Malaysia and dismantle the ethnic model of politics. We have an opportunity to look beyond that model, the limit of which was reached by the end of the last century.

One of the many icons of ethnic politics in Malaysia, the MIC and its head, Datuk Seri Samy Vellu, supposedly represented the Indians in BN, which is populated and controlled by strong ethnic parties. But the increasing problems of the Indian Malaysian community and the inability of the MIC leadership to deal with them adequately only led to the accumulation of disenchantment in the community.

People’s Power

The frustration, humiliation and disappointment Indians (in particular the Tamils) felt intensely was bound to become self-conscious and take a social form and it did. Makkal Sakthi (People’s Power) is that collective oppositional self-consciousness. A long view of this is that while it is Indian in form, it certainly is Malaysian in content. In fact, it did catch the imagination of many candidates and the term was used during their election ceramahs.

The mainstream media, BN national leaders and Samy Vellu dismissed all these critical developments. One of the main mainstream papers even trivialised the anger of the Indian/Tamil people expressed through Hindraf in their editorial. And Samy Vellu did not see what was coming his way. He even thought the 2008 Thaipusam in Batu Caves was a success when the community knew it was not. Probably he did not go to places like Kuala Selangor to see what was happening there. He thought the Indians/Tamils would vote the MIC leaders to power anyway, without carefully listening to the murmurings on the ground, even among once-staunch MIC supporters. But it is all too clear and loud now.

The angry Indian/Tamil Malaysians have removed Samy Vellu from power but have also, directly with the concerted help of other Malaysians, left the MIC in a disarray. (We can say that for MCA too.) The community does not want MIC to represent it. MIC cannot claim to represent Indian Malaysians in the BN and the government. There is simply no legitimacy to that claim. Whatever BN may do to include Indian Malaysians, the BN now cannot claim to run the often promoted and publicised but questionable ‘successful’ racial/ethnic consociational model of politics. The Indian Malaysian community has said it loud and clear that it does not want to be included as Indians but as Malaysians.

The Need for a New Political Language

A new political language needs to be framed. And the new young parliamentarians (and the ADUNS) who will now speak for all of us, including the Indian Malaysians, must frame it, by practice.

Along with many concerned citizens from all communities, the Indian Malaysian community has delivered to all Malaysians the opportunity for nurturing a new politics. And in this challenging interim period, they have done that at great risk and further marginalisation as a community, if those who have been elected to power i.e. the opposition, do not subscribe to a politics beyond the ethnic model and beyond ethnocracy or theocracy. The Indian Malaysian Community needs the active intervention of parties like the DAP, Keadilan and PAS (if it believes that the spirit of Islam and its protection is for all) to take up their cause as Malaysians.

There is an urgent need to subscribe to a politics that sees the problems and needs of Malaysians as common problems and needs of a people governed by a common destiny.

While needs and problems can be specific to definite Malaysian communities like the Malays, Kadazans, Penans, Mandailings, Chinese or Indians, they need to be framed as national problems or needs and addressed with national concern and sensitivity. Such an orientation will build us as a people and allow for equitable distribution of national resources. There is no room for ethnicisation of the problems of citizens, particularly when they involve access to basic goods and services, like water and housing. Addressing the needs of citizens must become colour-blind.

The ‘opposition to the Opposition’ will hold on to the old order and political language with great tenacity, pulling (or pooling) all its resources to actively discredit and delegitimise the gains of the forces of change, of the New Order. To counteract it, we need a new political language of dialogue, inclusiveness and all-round sustainability, knowing very well that it is going to take some time and challenges to institutionalise it. But a language names the world, shapes our dream, influences our imagination and helps build the society we want.

It is the responsibility of the Opposition and the new set of young parliamentarians (and ADUNS) to give us this as soon as possible. They have to balance their social commitment, the demands of their parties and arrive at a workable minimum programme for inter-party relationship and co-operation. They must be seen as representative of all the communities, of all the people.

We are at a threshold of a new future for the future generations and us. Can we nurture, shape and sustain it together … with single-mindedness and vision?

——————————————————————————–

*See http://votecharles.wordpress.com/2008/03/21/indian-malaysian-community-and-the-new-politics/

Groshan Fabiola asked:


How powerful is politics in business? The connection between the two is often hard to explain, but somehow they are closely connected. Did you ever happen to lose a job or a promotion in favor of a person who hadn’t worked harder than you, or made more significant contributions that you? Was it that person’s character that got him/her the job, the fact that he/she knew everyone around there, or could it be that you simply did not understand the politics going on around that business?

When we hear the word ‘politics’, we naturally think of politicians, political parties, political strategies, and so forth. But have you ever considered the term ‘politics’ from a business point of view? When it comes to politics in business, the former means the difference between failure and success in the latter. And, more often than not, politics can define one’s personal career. You can enjoy benefits or suffer penalties as a result of the way politics influences every business. If you happen to be among the most appreciated employees, decisions may go your way, but if you are ‘invisible’ to your bosses or they have nothing but ill feelings for you, some penalties may be coming your way.

When it comes to business decisions or work environments, we often hear expressions such as ‘it was nothing but politics’ or ‘that place is very political’. What do these expressions mean? And how can you be part of the game, and know how to play your politics? When you have managed to build a strong relationship with your customers, you understand the business thoroughly, and you are respected throughout the organization, but your superiors still think that you’re not doing well enough, this could be a clear example of people using politics to drive their own personal agenda.

It’s only fair to say that there’s no business without politics, and that its level of sophistication depends on the size of the organization. It’s understandable that the complexity of politics is proportional with the size of the company, because, after all, politics means power, and the more players are involved in the game, the more there is at stake.

Like everywhere else, we can speak of bad politics and good politics in business. Good politics refer to building strong networks at all the levels of that company or organization, spending time with employees from all levels, having a solid understanding of the keys to the success of the organization, and so forth. Good politics in business is about sharing information and encouraging other people to do the same thing. Bad politics refers to exactly the opposite. In the end it all comes down to driving your own agenda, as mentioned before. However, deft leadership should not be confused with bad politics in business. The two are very different.

Unfortunately, it seems that bad politics has got its share of businesses, and we see more of that than of good politics, because there are more bad politicians than there are good, and the former still continue to make the rule. But, in the end, it is up to you how you play the game.

If you want to find more information on different business or politics subjects please visit http://www.articletimesonline.com

Amos Aharoni asked:


From skillful caricaturists to passionate crusaders for political causes, Israeli artists have throughout history in one form or another created a political work of art. Whether biblical stories of Jewish bravery and martyrdom, the birth of Zionism or more modern examples of courage, political art has always played a part in the soul of Israeli creations of art. At the same time, even in modern times of today artists are often scared to link their creations to history and politics.

In the following, this article examines four aspects analyzing the issue of art & politics.

Artists & Politics

The first aspect addressing the subject of artists and politics examines the extent of public involvement by Israeli artists in taking a political standpoint expressed through their art paintings.

From a democratic point of view which seeks to protect freedom of expression, it is important that art work tackle political issues and influence public debate

However, the problem in Israel for artists who want to express an anti-establishment view is the concern over the fact that the establishment represents their main source of support and financing. While those who want to back up the establishment are not doing so out of fear of being accused by their artist friends that their creative work is influenced by economic reasons. As such it can be concluded that in our time the majority of Israeli artists are “fearful” when it comes to touching upon political issues.

Politicians & Art

In the second aspect addressing politicians and art, I examine the involvement and understanding of political leaders in the creations of art. There is no doubt, that an artistic point of perspective opens horizons contributing to the development of a more open-minded way of thinking.

For this reason, Israeli leaders - whose personalities are often channeled through the security and/or party platform – should show interest in the arts as a tool for personal development which can widen their world view.

From a public point of view, a politician, who has knowledge and proven interest in cultural issues, will be considered as having preferable characteristics of experience and knowledge.

Politics in Art

Addressing the third aspect of politics in art, the following questions I believe are at the heart of the issue: To what extent does the political and public activity of the artist influence the artistic evaluation of his creations in the present and the future? If the official establishment wants the prestige of a particular artist can it increase or decrease the value of his art?

Art in Politics

In the fourth aspect of art in politics I raise the question if to a certain extent there is an artist at work in the political making? Can we make the assertion that certain people have a political-artistic talent which makes it easier for them to succeed in the political arena?

In this context, I very much believe, that in order to be a player in the political arena winning public opinion, a leader needs to be creative and have strong interpersonal skills combining artistic elements.