necessarily interact with the and with have an obligation to make themselves accessible to of established . This interaction exposes to temptation.
Given the aim is to getwith a desired bias, it naturally seems to powerful groups that engaging the of government officials ) might be easier and surer than depending on due process and ( ).
Every Channel in this Tree is about political influence, but when people use the term «politicization», they are generally referring to the influence of special interests on government choices. Taking this further, politicization is a phenomenon that involves several Channels: relating to ( ) and ( ). The result of politicization is that rational considerations and formal obligations are rendered largely irrelevant.
Because «politicization» disturbs government's capacity to consider society's well-being, the influences are divided into those that are necessary and those that are damaging.
Governmental responses to the needs of society should be neutral and unaffected by the of of all sorts. Whether elected or appointed, should listen carefully, assess independently and choose impartially.
Development of in accord with official , including consultation with representatives, should be handled in a documented and formal way.
Government choices are the source of societal laws and regulations administered by . Solutions must be found that accord with the law, or else reasonable legislation must be introduced.
The re-shaping of choices due to an direct (e.g. re-election), or indirect interests associated with inducements or pressures from . The result is never in the best interests of society as a whole.
A powerful group… with much to gain or lose can contact and pressure government officials privately. Alternatively, the group may enter into public debates with misinformation and scare tactics. The sabotaging group is often a political party. However, may forcibly distort and undermine a satisfactory solution through pressuring politicians.
Government officials have that engage, or often consume them, to a degree that leads to them use their duties improperly in shaping the .
Money is the universal solvent… but each official will have certain desires and interests, even weaknesses, that may be used as levers. A darker method is to threaten to expose an official’s previous improper or socially unacceptable activities—i.e. blackmail. Politicians usually like financial contributions to be provided in the form of generous campaign donations, which supports one of their principal preoccupations in life—getting re-elected.
The may proscribe a . So the aggressive political response is to use bureaucratic procedures that render the judgement futile. A common resort is legislation to prevent undesired but valid legal rulings.
Government officials often… attempt to act illegally when pandering to public opinion, pursuing the so-called national interest, or protecting their own personal dishonesty. Historically, politicians in developed democracies like the UK and USA have been more than willing to ride roughshod over the rights of a few individuals. When the seems likely to invalidate politicians withhold evidence, pressure witnesses, replace uncooperative officials and even judges. The most authoritative and aggressive response is to pass new legislation, even making it retrospective.
This Channel, or rather the absence of this Channel, is of paramount significance in understanding and how things go awry.
Nocan impact directly on . The best it can do is ensure that its get access to government officials or give evidence at inquiries.
So all to-and-fro interaction between government and a group or organization takes place between Individuals in Politics & Government.- who are acting both in accord with the inherent in their role, and to some degree from the perspective of their own (both of which are affected by their own groups)—as described earlier under
No. Not really. Individuals do things in the name of government (or under its cover).
NEVER FORGET: Everything - in - social - life - is - pursued - and - achieved - by - individual - persons. Whenever a politician or spokesman reassures the public that "we will do something" or "the government will act", questions arise:
Example: After one recent UK Government fiasco, the senior post assigned responsibility for delivering a remedy was held by no less than 14 people over the subsequent 18 months. The public was never kept abreast of changes.
The mechanics of government are utterly dependent on the integrity, capabilities and frailties of individuals who commonly remain faceless—combined with the natural incompetence, inefficiency and corruption endemic within politically-influenced state bureaucracies and public agencies.
Originally posted: July 2009; Last updated: 27 Jan 2010