Getting Real

I just heard about a planned leadership training program that's destined to begin soon in New Albany, and I couldn't be more excited after hearing what I'll call "Principle One" of the program.

Permit me to "crib" directly from the training manual.

Working with people to build a grassroots organization is different from making friends. You are in the public arena. But when you are listening to someone who might have some influence on the success of your idea or issue, remember this guideline: You are in a public relationship now, not a private or personal relationship. If the person disagrees with you and you disagree with him or her on this issue, this disagreement is not with the person, but on the issue.

I've tried to internalize that advice in my own "public relationships," although I couldn't put it as succinctly as this: No permanent friends. No permanent enemies.

Distinguish Public and Private Relationships

The distinction between the public and private arenas is often hard to understand because there is little understanding in our media or educational system about public life. People in public life, including most elected officials, often act as if they want to be your friend. They kiss your babies, eat your food, and describe all the ways they are just like you, whoever you are. They want you to like them as people. That is because many people vote for the person they like, not necessarily for the person whose public policies meet their own needs.

Don't confuse or combine the person and the issue. Someone who disagrees with you on an issue is not an enemy. The disagreement is not personal. Don't hold grudges. Someone who disagrees with you on one issue may be helpful on another. Don't assume that people's economic self-interest will automatically put them on the side of an issue. Follow what they do - not who you guess they are.

Personally, I like that advice. Having had no small experience with people in public life, I'm long past trying to cultivate "friendships" when trying to effect change. Friendships are transient, and I've determined that "being helpful on" an issue is about all that can be expected. If a policy can be put into effect, who was involved is far less important to me than the end result.

In short, being liked isn't an objective, and cultivating allies whose principal objective is being liked is considerably less important than accomplishing common goals.

I would go so far as to say that far too many of the people with whom I share common goals have been slow to arrive at that same realization. Building strength in any organization will require its members to concentrate on the end goal and to recognize that any organization whose members have all their sharp edges cut off will be both brittle and blunted.

One City, One Destiny.

One City, One Destiny

You will most likely see a recurrence of that theme here over the next four years. One City. One Destiny.

Whether you like it or not, the fate of your neighbors is the fate of the neighborhood, the larger community, and New Albany as a whole. When the city progresses, we all share in that progress. When it falters, we all suffer.

New Albany is infamous for its grudges, its personality politics. And whether you choose to believe it or not, Shadow5 isn't interested in personalities. Rather, it is policy that matters.

As a quick aside, we believe it is perfectly legitimate to draw attention to individuals and institutions who lie, intentionally or ignorantly. We insist on the right, nay, the duty to question the credibility of those who play fast and loose with the truth. Those persons, those personalities, demonstrate their lack of credibility and will be challenged. But even that is "policy." It will be the policy of this blog to challenge inaccuracies and we will not shy from calling them what they are - lies.

But back to the issue at hand. Decisions, particularly by elected officials, have consequences. When we believe a decision is wrong, we'll say so. But in speaking out, we recognize a duty to explain the contra position and to explain why we believe those decisions deserve to be challenged.

We've recently been scolded for being "unfair" and overly pessimistic in our observations about this new city council. We are unapologetic. Every citizen has a role to play. If we can motivate our readers to look beneath the surface, if we can instigate a conversation about the path before us by being brusque, it's a small price to pay. It's all well and good to be liked. But it's not everything.

I recently had a conversation with a friend about the subject. We agreed that one of the definitions of friendship is that friends have the right to call "bullshit" on one another. In my attitude toward New Albany and its polity, I consider myself a friend. If someone beats up on my friend, I'll come to my friend's defense. If someone tries to rip off my friend, I'll do everything I can to prevent that. If someone is pulling a con job on my friend, I will speak out loud and say so. And if my "friend" is about to step into a hole, I'll haul my friend back from the brink if I can.

I guess what I'm saying is that sometimes I call "bullshit." Nobody invited me to do so - I simply assumed that my offer of friendship entitled me to do so.

Some may doubt my intentions. That is their right. I am serene in knowing that my intentions are to show nothing but friendship to New Albany and to all who are that city's friends. And if I see someone or some ones trying to do harm to my friend New Albany, I'll do everything in my power to sound the alarm, rally its friends, and defend New Albany from its enemies.

Yes, I know that using the "E" word will offend the sensibilities of some. Perhaps you find "foes" or "opponents" to be more politic. Maybe you would call on me to concede that all differences of opinion are honest differences.

Some are honest differences. Some are not. Some acts that harm my friend New Albany are unintended. And some are willful, spiteful, and long-lasting.

But acts that harm my friend New Albany do harm whether they are done from ignorance or malice.

We've made it fairly simple for you to disagree with our approach or our opinions. Registering as a blogger is not that big a burden. And it will never be our intention to argue anyone into the ground. Extended discussion, particularly on a blog, does not necessarily mean extended disagreement. We don't consider it a hostile act to extend our comments or even to defend them. The exchange of opinions can be edifying to our readership, especially when the comments section spotlights disagreements. And the initiating post can be polished by additional "rubbing" in the rock polisher that is the comments section.

As the prototypical local TV pundit might say, we invite responsible opposing comments.