|New Civilization News: Negotiating Style - Observations from a Political Convention|
4 comments24 Mar 2004 @ 20:52 by martha : win-win
I agree with what you have written Craig but of course the larger picture is what does one agree to and still have integrity. It's one thing to be a yes person but quite another to stand up for one's convictions. is this really winning at any cost?
I have also read both books (quite a few years ago) and I agree with the basic premise but I think it has gone crazy in politics right now. Most of the win-win is with the corporations and those with money...not the common person. This is where the disconnect is occuring. Where is the integrity?
25 Mar 2004 @ 09:31 by craiglang : The question is win-win with whom?
...is probably the biggest question.
Most of what I saw was within the party - with the primary objective of keeping the machinery moving. When we get to the outside world, dealing with the dark side, that's a different question.
In some cases, I think you're right - the best course of action is to stand and fight(!) I think that gets to alot of big questions that have bedeviled pacifists for most of the modern era. What do you do when confronted with intractible evil.
This probably is dependent upon the question of whether the situation calls for negotiation, or for battle... (!)
When there really is no common objective - when one interest is mutually exclusive with another, then the question is whether there really is a win-win objective. And probably what you are referring to falls into that category. Then what I was describing might not apply.
But then again...
At least when looking at it from the perspective of the eastern tradition, we are actually all one unity - there is really only one consciousness of which we are each one aspect. So in that sense, perhaps we can think of having a common interest - even with "them".
25 Mar 2004 @ 10:25 by martha : In the long run
we have to answer to our soul of the life we live is with integrity or not. There is also no escaping the fact then when we die the only thing we take with us is soul/spirit and how we have used our energy...and yes we are all connected...LOL
So in fact I do not believe in win-win unless integrity is connected.
25 Mar 2004 @ 15:15 by craiglang : Agreed
I think I understand what you're saying.
To me, one of the hall marks of whether I lived with integrity was whether in that situation I both stood for what was right, and what was fair to all. If I kept integrity by doing the right thing, while helping someone else, then IMHO that is the best for all concerned. And to me, that is win-win.
If what I achieve is at someone else's expense, then have I really won?
Unless, of course, the objectives are mutually exclusive - perhaps the other party is fundamentally evil - for example, taking the world political situation in late 1941. I don't think there really was any win-win solution there. The only way out was war, a purely win-lose proposition.
Where I find the Covey philosophy really works best, is in the smaller picture. Examples are in business, and making the basic machinery of the political party work.
I think that your thoughts about integrity are fully compatible, and I really like them.
Thanx for the observations,
Other entries in Politics
1 Jul 2010 @ 02:21: PHILIPPINES’ NEW PRESIDENT: AKBAR OR NERO?
4 Jun 2010 @ 08:30: SCUTTLE EU NOW, BEFORE 4TH REICH OPTION AWAKENS!
17 Nov 2008 @ 10:11: My 'story' I just uploaded to change.gov
8 Nov 2008 @ 16:06: A Boy Named Sue and the False American Dream
7 Nov 2008 @ 16:01: No He Can't...
6 Nov 2008 @ 09:16: History is NOW
5 Nov 2008 @ 16:58: Obamas World - Africa and the World beyond Poverty !? - but how? - what world?
5 Nov 2008 @ 14:02: Proud to be An American
26 Oct 2008 @ 15:26: Systemic Intelligence: How to teach Systemic Thinking effectively
26 Oct 2008 @ 10:27: OBAMA IS AMERICA’S MAN OF THE HOUR