the actual process of politics is mostly about convincing people, making impressions, et cetera.
We may have different things in mind. What you described I would call “electioneering in a democracy”. The actual politics I would define as “acquisition and exercise of power in a society”.
a successful politician will be dishonest, will come to believe their own lies, will try to manipulate others instead of convincing them, and will be antagonistic instead of truth-seeking in debate.
I kinda agree, but would like to point out that being a cynical manipulator is likely to make you a more successful politician.
If someone doesn’t do any of that, they may be engaging in a political process, but they aren’t engaging in primate politics in the sociological sense of the word.
That looks awfully similar to a No True Scotsman argument :-/
What you described I would call “electioneering in a democracy”. The actual politics I would define as “acquisition and exercise of power in a society”.
That’s true, I described things involved in convincing or performing for non-politicians. Private negotiations between politicians are different. But still manipulative, dishonest, and performative.
being a cynical manipulator is likely to make you a more successful politician.
Yes it does: I listed ‘manipulation instead of [honest] convincing’ as one of the four characteristics of politicians.
That looks awfully similar to a No True Scotsman argument
No, it’s merely stressing the narrow meaning of ‘politics’ I was using. Like I said, let’s not argue over definitions.
We may have different things in mind. What you described I would call “electioneering in a democracy”. The actual politics I would define as “acquisition and exercise of power in a society”.
I kinda agree, but would like to point out that being a cynical manipulator is likely to make you a more successful politician.
That looks awfully similar to a No True Scotsman argument :-/
That’s true, I described things involved in convincing or performing for non-politicians. Private negotiations between politicians are different. But still manipulative, dishonest, and performative.
Yes it does: I listed ‘manipulation instead of [honest] convincing’ as one of the four characteristics of politicians.
No, it’s merely stressing the narrow meaning of ‘politics’ I was using. Like I said, let’s not argue over definitions.