The Anatomy of Problems

Wolf Pack Politics

    The Anatomy of Problems

 The Anatomy of Problems is my attempt to create a blue print that will give direction to those involved in the frustrating exercise of political empowerment. If the only thing I accomplish is to inspire people to look into a different approach to an issue, then I’ll feel that I’ve accomplished something. I strongly urge others to look at developing and sharing tactics and strategies that will allow for a more structured approach to politics. My hope is to create a political bible of these tactics and strategies that will give some direction to the politically frustrated and create a healthier political climate by forcing politics to work for power, not gain it by default.

 Political problems can be broken down into 4 parts, Problems, Solutions, Assets and Actions. This is a basic equation that needs a host of sub-sections added to it to make it workable, but it gives us a place to start. This may seem like an easy equation but it starts to gain complexity when you add in the one overriding rule. The rule is that you cannot divorce yourself from any aspect of the equation!

 Respect: The first hurdle, anyone talking to the general population will deal with, is the ability to respect people. If you expect the public to support you in your efforts then you have to treat your potential supporters with respect. This means that you have no right to expect support based on some vague idea of what you might do if you, your movement or your party gain power. It also means that you can’t just set yourself up as the person who points out problems while expecting others to come up with solutions. Politics are infested with those who feel that their only purpose in life is to point out problems while letting others do the heavy lifting of finding solutions.  These same people are usually dumb founded when the public don’t immediately unite in a coordinated action to charge the political ramparts and make things right. Politics is no place for the immature; You need to fully understand the problem and then you need to have well thought out solutions before you’ll get the support you need to implement those solutions. Furthermore, these solutions must be obtainable! Asking people to make unreasonable sacrifices’ or leaps of faith is the height of arrogance that is guaranteed to alienate the supporters you need. Worse is the fact that once you alienate people, you, your party or your cause will lose credibility.

Assets and actions: The most important part of this equation is the Assets and Actions, because it represents the involvement of the general public. Translation: “What can the average person do to bring about the solution?”  Assets are the supporters you need to obtain your solutions. Actions are what your supporters can do to bring about the results you seek. If there is one major problem with politics it’s the inability to put any thought process into this vital aspect of the political equation. If I have a group of people who want to help me, I had better have a clear idea of what they can do to help me, otherwise they will become disenchanted and drift away. There have been countless examples of movements that faded into obscurity simply because no one knew how to keep their supporters engaged. Stop thinking of the public as sheep when you need wolves, and don’t expect them to sit there placidly while the self-appointed elites of the movement casually come up with a way to use these wolves. There is a Princess attitude in politics that treats supporters as perpetual serfs who have nothing better to do than wait for someone to show some leadership. Before any movement begins, someone has to figure out what the long range goals are, what strategy is needed to obtain those goals and what tactics are needed to make your strategy work. You have to have a well thought out answer when a potential supporter asks that most important question “What can I do to help?”

 That brings us to the actions. If you’ve got the numbers then you need to know how to use them. The success of the entire movement depends on a coordinated and sustained approach involving the mass use of action. One of many problems is that your potential supporters may be saddled with limitations that can affect the way that they can support you. If a person lives 4 hours away from your home base then you can’t expect them to readily have a physical presence. If they have an issue with public speaking then you don’t throw them in front of a microphone. These people are all vital to success in any endeavour; therefore it’s equally vital to put much thought into working with their limitations to allow your supporters to realize their true potential. Put a proper effort into understanding your supporter’s comfort zone and find out where the best fit is for them. Get them engaged right from the beginning with actions that are tailored to their comfort zone. Phone calls, E-mails and/or letters to editors/politicians can all be part of a coordinated and sustained campaign, but someone has to provide the leadership and coordination.  If your supporters receive replies or see a result from their effort, then this will be seen as a personal victory that will elevate their sense of empowerment and confidence. The more feeling of achievement the supporter feels the more chance of gaining more supporters and momentum.

Problems: We live in a world often defined by its problems, and it has become a cottage industry to talk these problems to death while solving nothing. What is missing is any attempt to identify underlying problems that are not only creating the recognized Problem, but are a major impediment to finding any solutions. Issues like economics, communication, regional bias, cultural attitudes, education, political affiliations, mixed messages and political immaturity can all be underlying problems that will ensure failure to find solutions if they are not addressed. There has to be recognition that many problems have a complexity about them and that the general public recognizes this complexity. The golden rule of Assets and Actions is “The solutions must be obtainable”. There is no way you can hope to come up with a workable solution when you refuse to deal with the complexities of the problem. Many problems can seem to be overwhelming to the general public when they are trying to make a decision based on conflicting information and a limited course of action.  Once a problem is perceived as an overwhelming problem the general public will, quite rightly, become frustrated and tune it out. Pick your battles carefully and don’t become so enamoured with a perceived solution that you can’t see the road blocks to achieving that solution. Your first order of business might just be the removal of the roadblocks before you can deal with the main problem.

  A classic example of an Overwhelming Problem is the issue of “Global Warming”. This issue is in fact Global, but the solution never takes into consideration the non-involvement of the world’s worst offenders. India and China produce massive pollution, but because of politics, corruption, and a less than enlightened political cultural, are never part of the solution. Getting past the naive view of the world as one big happy family dedicated to the betterment of the planet, and you’re left with a world governed by corruption, greed and a disinterest not only of the planet, but mankind in general. It’s not a hopeless situation, but it’s a situation that needs a better understanding of what are in fact deep underlying issues.

 There can be no global solution when there is no global participation. Feel good speeches and shallow actions are geared to give the perception of solutions when in fact they ultimately produce a jaded view of the whole issue because the so called solutions seem to rely on unrealistic sacrifice and that sacrifice is never demanded of the worst offenders. It’s easier to scream at the oil sands, than to seriously confront China on their environmental record.

   The real damage done by the Global Warming issue is its crippling effect on other environmental issues whose solutions are attainable. We are doing incredible damage by allowing a very vocal minority to determine all aspects of the environmental issue.  Rather than wasting time on instant, self-serving solutions to complex problems, you’re better off to attack underlying problems first. There are a host of important environmental issues whose solutions are not only attainable, but could build the credibility of the environmental movement and make greater achievements possible.   

Solutions:  There has never been such a positive word with such negative consequences as the word solutions. Solutions have a nasty habit of creating more problems than they solve simply because they are too often geared toward the egos of their creators. Calling for others to make real sacrifices while making no real sacrifices yourself is like trying to buy your way into heaven with somebody else’s soul. Solutions, like problems, can take on the look of being unattainable. Once this happens, all solutions to the problem are tainted and the entire issue itself starts to fight an uphill battle for credibility. Solutions have to be well thought out before being put forward with a focus on how these solutions will affect the people who are going to make these solutions possible. No one is going to support a solution that creates hardship in their lives, but they will support the opponents of these solutions. Poorly thought out solutions has been a godsend to politicians and political parties whose only saving grace is that they oppose the unattainable solutions of their opponents.

 The only way to make a solution possible is to understand the people who can make it possible, the general public. Contrary to popular belief, the average member of the public is not stupid, lazy, uneducated or apathetic. They are trying to balance the realities of their everyday lives with a desire to make the society they live in a better place. These realities consist of balancing income with expenditures while suffering under a deluge of messages telling them they have to sacrifice more, and a decision making process that is geared toward hindering their efforts at empowerment. It gets down to the issues of economics and decision making process.

 Economics: When you’re concerned about car payments, mortgage payments and the host of other expenditures that come with life, there is limited room to think about idealistic issues. For the average person, thinking about future generations often means saving for a college fund, not sabotaging personnel or provincial economics. Solutions have to understand the one clear rule of politics “Economics is King”.  All social programs from health care to education depend on healthy economics, and the mental scars of recent economic downturns are still fresh in most minds. Solutions that involve economics have got to stop being all out confrontations whose only goal is to inflate the feeling of self-importance of the self-righteous while crushing any hope for those who work for a measured/obtainable solution. When the public asks “What is this going to cost me?” you better have an answer that doesn’t revolve around high ideals or wishful thinking.

Decision Making Process:  In the case of issues that are not linked to the economy, then the solution may rest with solving the underlying problems that are preventing the greater solution. When dealing with issues that concern the justice system, you are dealing with a system that has given itself immunity to interference from the public it’s supposed to serve by creating roadblocks to public input. These roadblocks indicate the more serious problem of the system feeling the public is not capable of governing its own morality. If you look at the official view of the Canadian you will hear words like law abiding, stability loving and unquestioning of the political system. With this image of a docile public, is it any wonder that our justice system feels itself to be the sole gate keeper of Canadian morality?

  The Meech Lake Accord was an example of politicians trying to make political changes without the participation of the average Canadian. This political maneuver was attempted because the Canadian people were seen as being unable, uninterested and unqualified to make far reaching political decisions. It failed because of a handful of politicians believed in the rights of citizens to be included in matters of the Constitution. Constitutional reforms, like Senate reform and Judicial Reform, have all been hamstrung by a political system that truly believes that the people must be protected from themselves. Furthermore, any attempt to create a dialogue for political empowerment is faced with a communication process that has been hijacked by those who don’t trust the judgement of Canadians. It has become impossible to change things using the political processes that are in place. The bottom line is that although the justice system does not reflect the will of the people, it does reflect the attitude of the political system to those same people. We are dealing with a deep problem that defies simple solutions because we do not wish to recognize the scope of the problems roots.    

 Now I would like to put this all together by showing an example of how this equation is needed when we deal with political issues. 

Surrey Six Murders:  A few years back when the infamous Surrey Six Murders were fresh in the public’s eye, a group of concerned citizens decided to put together a Town hall meeting to discuss everyone’s dissatisfaction with the justice system. There were over a hundred people in the audience and Global News was there to cover the event. The Guest speakers used up much of the time telling the audience what everyone already knew. The system is inadequate and it needs fundamental changes.

 At the end of the evening a woman, on camera, asked the most important question of the evening. “What can I do to bring about change?’ This is where the entire political exercise folded like a cheap tent. The organizers had the attention of all of British Columbia with a hundred participants eager to help, but the organizers had not planned that far ahead. The Assets were in place just waiting to be used but no one had thought how to use them. No doubt there was the usual lame suggestion to the audience about bringing the issue to the attention of their respective MPs, but this is like telling the fox that the chickens are missing. There was no attempt at organizing a collective, coordinated, sustained response using the willing help available.   Nor was there an attempt to use the media to give a massive audience any kind of direction that could help with a solution. The organizers fell into the common trap of thinking they could focus on the problem and someone else would take care of the solution. The flaw in this thinking was that they didn’t even have a clear understanding of the problem. If the laws don’t reflect the will of the people then you have to ask “Why Not?” In this situation the complexity of the problem requires a dialogue dealing with the deeper roots of the problem, this cannot be provided with one poorly thought out town-hall meeting. At the very least, the organizers should have recognized that they needed to create a movement with the long term focus. With the talent and opportunities in front of them, this town-hall needed to be more than be another rant-fest.

 A focused, long ranged, all-inclusive strategy is what is missing. A frustrated electorate is already in place and it is only a matter of time before the usual well-meaning individuals and groups will try to make a difference. They will use the same flawed, shallow strategies coupled with the usual childish tactics and suffer the same predictable let downs. Don’t just think about what you want, put more thought in how you can use all the assets at your disposal to accomplish it.    

 The various political parties, the media and the political elites have created a process that deliberately frustrates the average person from having anything but a minimum influence on the political system.  This process succeeds because of its sophistication.   Our greatest obstacle is this process, and in order to succeed we must respond with tactics and strategies that have an equal depth and sophistication. The organized marches and one off town halls belong to the era of juvenile politics. They are like fireworks that shoot into the sky, explode and then dissipate leaving a fading image in your retina. Canadian politics lacks a respect for the population, because it lacks fear. This is because all political movements organized by members of a well- meaning public, lack tactics, strategy and long range focus. Politicians just need to wait for the movement to fizzle out and then carry on as usual.

Look at my political equation. Add to it, subtract from it or come up with something new, but understand that we can’t keep using the same formula. If a formula fails, then it’s time for a new approach.  

Mark Nickel