(Jan 5, 2008) Power games: an inescapable truth or a sign of unimaginativeness

[dragonsigh]

Politics has come to be a dirty word but is it something we can live without? History appears to demonstrate that those who've mastered the intricacies of political maneuvering get ahead, while those who refuse to stoop to that level end up unsuccessful, if not totally despised or forgotten.

Robert Greene's The 48 Laws of Power lays down 48 rules

Comments

[heavenlysign]

When asked whether corruption was positive or negative in lieu of politics, our argument became quite unique and we generally convinced everyone that corruption was positive. Why? Because corruption is a means of gaining more power. While generally abiding to the system may get you some power, it will still hinder your progress. Who makes all the rules? Is it not those with power? And most, if not all of these rules are designed to keep these people in their position of power for quite some time (or until they tire of it, or have an epiphany).

Looking at a person's intent is surely one way to ascertain whether or not the person is immoral or not. But, I wonder, is it not the same when asked whether or not a poor man is doing the right thing when he steals some medicine (which he can't afford) for his sick wife? One can say his actions were justified but did he do the right thing?

On a sidenote, where do we draw the line when considering whether or not what a person is doing is right or wrong?