To: Paul V. who wrote (112592 ) 9/10/2011 11:59:19 PM From: grusum 3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) | Respond to You are correct - they[people with financial resources] can use their immense money and position power to impose their will on others. A friend of mine who completed his dissertation on leadership styles of administrators found that over 80% of administrators were autocrats regarding their leadership style rather than a more participatory style of leader. From my experiences I learned in working with individuals the effective leader is one who provides leadership along with his employees/individuals using the employees personal skills to help the employees succeed and the organization succeed. There is no better feeling that seeing individuals succeed and become more confident in themselves and the organization . But, how many of us have worked for some individual administrator has used his/her position power to intimidate others verbally. I am sure no one on this site has ever encounter such a person. :)!!! Community organizers learn this very quickly - the organizer must stay within the realm of experience of the individuals he is organizing and outside the experiences of the enemy (opposition). The organizer is only as strong as the people and their "buy in" to the cause. The large the masses of people the greater the power and media coverage , ie. Michigan Again, we have the TEA PARTY carrying firearms!!! My fear was if that situation would have escalated. A saying learned of individuals living in the cities, "If a individual picks up a brickbat or bat, if the person picks up a brick then the individual picks up a knife, if the person picks up a knife the the individual picks up a gun." Therefore, carrying a firearm innocently or knowingly was escalating the situation. When, this occurs with the masses mobs and loss of control can occur. As indicated above position power is very common today in the work place and other situations. "Those who have the gold make the rules." Most individuals do not have the luxury, financial independence to fire their boss , especially in today economic environment. It is not what is right or wrong, it is what is perceived as right of wrong, in the "eye of the beholder." In a dispute, whether it is: a divorce, a war with another country, a labor or other dispute (informational picking, petitioning your government, strikes, etc.) it normally is to establish our position as 100% right and the enemy as 100% wrong. One side projects the position of motherhood, apple pie, the American flag and god, while the enemy is evil and anti motherhood, apple pie, the American flag and god. In politics, it is not the candidate who is packaged with his views, but, the public, voter who has their own bias. The politician is only to evoke the bias of the voters so that they will vote for them, the candidate. Voter manipulation - YES!!! Just think of the tone of Rush Limbaugh, Hannity's tone and even the various Presidents when the parties are manipulating the public thorough the media. All tactics are used to manipulate the public and voters. That is the purpose of campaign candidate discovery, discovery polling, marketing tactics, polling and media presentations. Not really, the issues is what, IMO, should influence the voter - the issues is what determines how I vote.
