3) waiting as long as possible to signal any imminent action and then moving swiftly and devastatingly to accomplish specific outcomes which increase your access to resources (financial, political, or whatever you’re competing over) /9
-
Show this thread
-
Ideally #3 is done in secret and/or followed immediately by a disinformation campaign to confuse the facts in service of #1 /10
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
You can also accomplish #3 by carefully and quietly moving over a period of time but risk increases the longer your actions continue and can be observed; you lose control of the narrative when people can see what you’re doing and draw their own conclusions /12
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
These seem to be characteristics of strategies rather than specific strategies or tactics—the medium and messaging and channels that you use to accomplish these things vary tremendously depending on who you are and what your arena is but they are consistent /13
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
And you see this play out in everything from Mean Girls to PTA to International Affairs on a global stage /14
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
I guess you could say that this just like strategy and tactics 1001 because it sometimes seems SO OBVIOUS to me now that I’m looking for it but I both don’t remember it being so obvious earlier in my life and no one really talks about it /15
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
My real question is WHY no one discusses this pattern very much in day to day to life because it seems like a pretty decent model for understanding who is trying to manipulate you or increase their own power and why they might want to do so /16
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
Also once you see it it becomes easier to block or counter the actions and motivations of people trying to make it happen. What gives? Why don’t people talk about actions in these terms? I feel like I’m missing or misunderstanding something or maybe being too cynical /17
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
Or maybe just tons of people implicitly get this and I’m over here having a “whoa” blindingly obvious moment? Why aren’t we analyzing the actions of political opponents openly in these terms more? Is this what polisci people sit and talk about? /end
6 replies 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @liminal_warmth
For corporate, most people are aware to some degree but a) refuse to participate in power games b) lack the skillset to work at that level The catch is you have to somehow participate to gain those skills and the discourse is restricted to closed networks
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
The first couple chapters of Gervais Principle seems to get at this with the sociopath-clueless-losers dynamic Once you’re able to recognize power games, it’s still unclear whether it’s ‘worth it’ to go sociopath and develop your skill at playing themhttps://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ …
-
-
Replying to @choosy_mom @noguchilamp
Totally depends on your goals I guess I found it to be financially “worth it” but it reaaaaally burned me out and made me dislike myself and my job
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @liminal_warmth @noguchilamp
chad donkey from shrek 2 Retweeted QC
winning the game is lucrative—but heavy lies the crown, lonely at the top, etc. best case scenario you can exit the game and cultivate a non-sociopath self again, but a lot of people don’t give themselves the option https://twitter.com/qiaochuyuan/status/1217225460737691648?s=21 …https://twitter.com/QiaochuYuan/status/1217225460737691648 …
chad donkey from shrek 2 added,
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes - 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
