We live nowadays an uncertain panorama, conflicts, wars, ballots and agreements. What is politics about, leading, reaching a consensus or both? Also at work?
Politics should not be only about command, dictatorships and arbitrary actions are not part of formal democracy, and as we already know, democracy means the power of the people. Well, the people usually have different views and opinions, but it is necessary to agree on the basic and important for a society to be viable, stable and can look to the future with some peace and hope.
Image source (Unsplash.com by Rock Staar)
To achieve this, you have to speak, but not simply speak for the sake of talking, which is what many do ... they speak but say nothing. Its objective: to convince, exacerbate or dizzy? Already in the creator Greece of the old democracy there were the sophists, who raised the art of rhetoric to excellence to technical perfection and to maximum efficiency in convincing the masses. They were structured, coherent and well-planned speeches, giving value to each of the words, with the idea of hiding a message, that was his great talent, hiding what was not said, convincing with everything else.
Today's speeches seem like sophisticated speeches but less professional, more popular, empty and basically focused on alienating marketing techniques. But leaving aside campaigns, electoral events and promotions, we come to the crucial moment: when the people have spoken, they have voted. It is the moment to make decisions, and in many cases to agree on future plans and programs (if there are any).
But we the real people, we also often have to reach a consensus in our day: from deciding which television channel to put on or our weekend plans with family or friends, to the conditions of a contract when we have certain bargaining power. And now, we must be aware of defending our rights in order to keep our freedom and integrity, our life and own society. We decide, we have that power but we need to be united more than ever.
Consensus is "a generally accepted opinion or decision among a group of people". Therefore, an agreement is necessary, and to reach it there will be several ways of balancing the different interests: yielding, maintaining, imposing... The Argentine writer Gabriel Rolón says that “knowing how to agree is also being able to tolerate that the other does not complete us and not claim such a thing from him”.
But it is also a question of empathy and knowing how to listen.
For example, in conflictive situations, it is normal for the figure of the international mediator to exist, who must listen to the different parties, understand their requirements and make the other party understand that they will also present their demands. Although there is also the question of power, who has more power rules and there are those who say that consensus is the lack of leadership. But can you lead by consensus?
Currently, leadership comprises much more than directing a group to achieve certain set objectives, but on many occasions it is understood that such decisions are imposed, but it has been seen that leadership is not incompatible with consensus, specifically, as in the field of work and teamwork. A leader must really facilitate consensus, that is, not always impose but facilitate, for this there are certain actions that must be taken into account.
There is a point that is not talked about as much, and on which perhaps we should reflect more, especially if we think about the consensus among several, is the trust and commitment between those parties. It seems obvious but is it that easy? I leave it there...
What seems clear is that as they say, unity is strength, and involving all parties, if done well, will make it work better to achieve what we propose. And we all can be leaders.
The text is mine ©Duvinca and the photos are from Unsplash.com
I'M ALSO HERE:
Noise.cash / Read.cash / Publish0x / Odysee
