On 24-9-2011 21:27, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:37:34 +0200, andrel wrote:
>
>> On 24-9-2011 11:10, andrel wrote:
>>
>>> It is also my experience that people who think of themselves as
>>> competitive are a disaster in any organization. Not the least by
>>> forcing more cooperative people out. It is in my opinion one of the
>>> main reasons there are not so many women in top positions. They,
>>> rightly, prefer a good working environment over one where people break
>>> their promises and tell you afterwards that it was just a game.
>>> Implying that you are not a good sport, even childish, if you complain
>>> about it. So I will speak out if someone is trying to pass on
>>> competitiveness as being part of being human.
>>
>> I knew I was looking for a metaphor here. I had the image, but could not
>> name the concept. Funny how a mind works. It is this: competitive people
>> are the tumors of society. They grow by extracting nutrients from others
>> and, if not treated, will kill the organisation they grow in.
>
> I agree with Darren - that is a bit harsh.

Sure, I know that.

> You are assuming all competition is harmful, but it isn't.

I know, but there is a general idea that all competition is beneficial. 
That is the implicit assumption under (neo)liberalism. Sometimes you 
have to exaggerate to get a message across.

Look at the disasters in the financial world, look at the industry and 
organizations for places that you might like to work in and those that 
you don't.

Is all competition always beneficial?

Look also at a cross section of a town or your family. How many are 
competing for resources or jobs just because they like it?

Then ask yourself the question, are all humans competitive by nature?


-- 
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per 
citizen per day.

Post a reply to this message