To be true to your own nature, to be who you are, to be honest. — universeness

One of the main problems with this is that people frequently have no idea who they are or what they want. The really tough part is working that out. :smile:

Pretty much. I'd trust a social worker with an actual drug history more to solve drug issues than someone that read it in a book. There's no replacement for experience where it concerns social issues. One of the reasons poverty is such a pernicious problem. — Benkei

Agree with most of the points you made. Don't forget social work is generally a degree level discipline. When I recruit social workers for my organisation, they frequently have 4 years of university behind them. Sometimes several degrees. But yes, experience and aptitude is more important. When I hire someone with a lived experience of substance misuse, they still need a degree. Lots of terrible mistakes made by people who don't have some foundational education - professional boundaries, case formulation and planning, unconditional positive regard.

But not any person can manage such complex responsibility. How can we expect from the PM to solve inflation or unemployment if she is not responsible with herself? — javi2541997

I fully understand your view and I expect many people share it. I personally think that some of the best leaders are flawed people with problems. I don't expect leaders to be perfect or to role play sober righteousness. I like leaders to be human and complex. If that means a penchant for dancing and booze on occasions, great!
.

Agree with most of the points you made. Don't forget social work is generally a degree level discipline. When I recruit social workers for my organisation, they frequently have 4 years of university behind them. Sometimes several degrees. But yes, experience and aptitude is more important. When I hire someone with a lived experience of substance misuse, they still need a degree. Lots of terrible mistakes made by people who don't have some foundational education - professional boundaries, case formulation and planning, unconditional positive regard. — Tom Storm

:up:

to be honest. — universeness

Completely. You are approaching to my point then

:up: thanks Tom

I don't expect leaders to be perfect or to role play sober righteousness — Tom Storm

This is why I feel I was born in the wrong era. I see I am wrong but I literally expect from them righteousness, purity, honour, etc... more or less as samurai leaders were back then in Japan for example. The Bushido principle.

I respect that, Javi, and I have read how important this is for you. Bushido - new word for me. :up:

Suppose most finnish people would have cheered at her sitting in a Sauna drinking from a bottle of Lapin Kulta and burping, while being whipped with a birch branch.

Suppose that stuff in the OP is not what is considered Finnish...

But admittedly, there is probably no PM in the world that dances better?

I respect that, Javi, and I have read how important this is for you. Bushido - new word for me — Tom Storm

:up: :100:

Completely. You are approaching to my point then — javi2541997

No, not even near it. Displaying honesty in who you are involves deciding to dance at a private party if you want to as a human right when you have judged that to do so does not reflect on your ability to be a good leader of a country as dancing is an expression of personal joy. In this past it has only been suffocating religious dogma that has tried to restrict the joy of dancing. Do you wish to impose upon politicians that which is imposed by such horrors as Sharia law, which also restricts woman in such ridiculous ways based on theistic nonsense.

Do you wish to impose upon politician that which is imposed by such horrors as Sharia law, which also restricts woman in such ridiculous ways based on theistic nonsense. — universeness

Hmm... I guess I never quoted Sharia law or other "horrors" in this discussion. I only hope to have more decent and mature politicians. Simple.

One of the main problems with this is that people frequently have no idea who they are or what they want. The really tough part is working that out. — Tom Storm

Then finding such out should be the main priority of such people and until they do have a strong idea of who they are and what they want they must hope that those in power have their best interests at heart and those who are more self-assured must insist and enforce adequate checks and balances to make sure those in power behave appropriately and I don't think that needs to include making sure they don't dance (subjectively) provocatively at a party. If you are not self assured that you know who you are and you know what you want then you should not be leading a country. That is partly why I advocate that these two questions should be internally asked by all of us regularly.
1. Who are you?
2. What do you want?

I even include them in my thread Profundity

I only hope to have more decent and mature politicians. Simple. — javi2541997

Never forget how to dance Javi, that path leads towards the anti-life people.
Dancing freely (even if you are not great at it) should be a joyous act, a celebration of being alive.
Let the politicians dance, just insist they use their power for the good of those they represent.
Be suspicious of any system which discourages dancing!

Bushido - new word for me. :up: — Tom Storm

Bushido has been misused as well, consider the statement below:

In the lead-up to World War II, and throughout the war, the Japanese government pushed an ideology called "imperial bushido" on the citizens of Japan. It emphasized Japanese military spirit, honor, self-sacrifice, and unwavering, unquestioning loyalty to the nation and to the emperor.

Never forget how to dance Javi, — universeness

I hate dance and everything related to parties and music.

In the lead-up to World War II, and throughout the war, the Japanese government pushed an ideology called "imperial bushido" on the citizens of Japan. It emphasized Japanese military spirit, honor, self-sacrifice, and unwavering, unquestioning loyalty to the nation and to the emperor. — universeness

Completely beautiful. This is how a nation should move and progress. That text explains perfectly what I expect from a regular politician or public representative.

Are you typing that you would have fought for the Japanese in WWII? Or merely that you advocate for a society which promotes

military spirit, honor, self-sacrifice, and unwavering, unquestioning loyalty to the nation and to the emperor. — universeness

?

Are you typing that you would have fought for the Japanese in WWII? — universeness

Completely, yes. If the nation of Bushido ever required me to do so.

Or merely that you advocate for a society which promotes — universeness

This too.

Then I hope you never gain any position of authority Javi.
I am glad Senna is a leader and you are not, but I hope one day you dance, dance, dance freely and all night, even if its just around your own coffee table cause your pissed!

Then I hope you never gain any position of authority Javi.
I am glad Senna is a leader and you are not — universeness

Don't worry. I am confident with myself that modern society doesn't understand me.
I will never get to an authority position. I don't like politics

:sweat: :fear: :up: :eyes:

Does this include alcohol?
— Fooloso4

Is that a rethorical question? If not, alcohol is also considered a drug yes. — Seeker

There is nothing in the video that is out of line with the behavior of people at an alcohol fueled party. She said she had been drinking. It that the end of it because it was alcohol, even though the outcome can be destabilizing? Or is it that drinking should be prohibited for those in public office? Or is it that drinking is okay as long as dancing the minuet?

That's what politicians are. Appearance... — javi2541997

As I said, you mistake appearance for statecraft.

My two cents:

I think the issue here is a bit over-intellectualized. That Marin danced with her friends means nothing to me, either in terms of it proving she is somehow unprofessional or in terms of proving she has that common touch so elusive in our representatives. I would suspect that there are highnesses and majesties in the House of Windsor who let loose and dance and sing, all the while being elitist icons of a bygone era. It's sort of like seeing the Queen eat and marveling at the fact that she eats too, having convinced ourselves that these people aren't people. So, it means nothing to me she dances, sleeps, eats bonbons, or watches TikTok while she has her morning coffee.

I also don't think the idea of trying to find the Regular Joe as our politician is anything new. It's a common schtick among politicians to tell us they are from the school of hard knocks as opposed to some elitist school. How that plays depends upon who they represent.

Trump's schtick is very much to be this plain spoken self-made person who can say things like they are without fear of reprisal. That the reality behind it isn't true nothwithstanding, that's his schtick, so none of this is new. We're just talking about PR and advertising and what does and doesn't get votes. Apparently Marin is worried that the latest event will hurt her, so she took a drug test so that we would know she just likes to dance but not to fully sedate herself.

As to whether I'd rather hire a prior drug user to deal with drug policy as opposed to someone who is more data driven, I'd go with the guy who actually has a handle on policy and data. That someone has struggled with drugs in the past might give them insight into how to deal with certain issues, but it might also be evidence of an underlying personality issue that has resulted in a resort to self-medication. I'm not excluding those who have had their personal struggles, but basing hiring decisions upon the fact that I think the person "knows what it's like" might not be the best way to go about staffing my office. Again, I tend to be data driven, so if you could actually show me that choosing former drug users to assist in determining drug treatment center protocol (for example) results in better outcomes than in hiring those with advanced degrees in drug addiction and treatment, I'd reconsider, but my initial thought would be to defer to those who have actually studied the problem and not just those how have been consumed by the problem.

If you are not self assured that you know who you are and you know what you want then you should not be leading a country. That is partly why I advocate that these two questions should be internally asked by all of us regularly.
1. Who are you?
2. What do you want? — universeness

I agree in theory, but many people are not even in a position to ask such questions. They are often unaware that they don't know who they are or what they want. They've been fooled into thinking they are what their parents/friends/school/therapist/culture/occupation tells them they are and they need to experience a profound shock, circuit breaker or ontological threat to leave this behind. I don't think it's to most people's tastes or in their interests to conduct such soul searching.

As to whether I'd rather hire a prior drug user to deal with drug policy — Hanover

Of course. Maybe off topic, but if you are dealing with providing services to people with problematic substance use - people who need support - policy matters little. It's all about how to connect and engage people in new ways of living without using. That can benefit from working with people who have 'been there' too. I've seen it work powerfully in practice, but it is not the only way. If it's policy and research you want, that's all about the nerds - who can take your data and skew it nicely to demonstrate that your hypothesis is correct, regardless of what the case may really be. :razz:

I know people who imo match your description and I try my best to nudge now and again to see if they are interested in talking about it. But yeah, its a serious judgement call as its possible you can do more harm than good in many situations that you do not have full information about.

Does this include alcohol?
— Fooloso4

Is that a rethorical question? If not, alcohol is also considered a drug yes. — Seeker


There is nothing in the video that is out of line with the behavior of people at an alcohol fueled party. She said she had been drinking. It that the end of it because it was alcohol, even though the outcome can be destabilizing? Or is it that drinking should be prohibited for those in public office? Or is it that drinking is okay as long as dancing the minuet? — Fooloso4

You choose. After all this seems to be politics about politics. Should a minister of state, being an important example (role model) to a lot of (very) (young) people, take care not to present himself/herself (in public, via smartphone/internet) under the influence of an intoxicating substance which is known for its addictive (and destructive) properties? Or is it that such behavior shouldnt be made into an issue because the substance is legalized and (especially not) because the prime minister seems to be able to absorb certain quantities of the substance without any negative consequence (which could be considered an example in and of itself)?

Of course. Maybe off topic, but if you are dealing with providing services to people with problematic substance use - people who need support - policy matters little. It's all about how to connect and engage people in new ways of living without using. That can benefit from working with people who have 'been there' too. I've seen it work powerfully in practice, but it is not the only way. If it's policy and research you want, that's all about the nerds - who can take your data and skew it nicely to demonstrate that your hypothesis is correct, regardless of what the case may really be. :razz: — Tom Storm

I know little about drug treatments, so I guess I'd do whatever it is that I do when I'm asked to do something I don't know how to do, which is fairly often, and I'd hire the guy who looked best on paper so that when he fucked everything up, I could say, "Wow, but he looked so good on paper," and then no one would think it was my fault for hiring a fuck up, but that it was just the paper was deceiving.

As a general matter, I have given opportunities to those with checkered pasts because it makes me feel non-judgmental, which I'm not, but I like to feel that way sometimes, but that hasn't always worked out as planned. They'll be super appreciative for the chance, but then they start to not show up on Mondays and they always have a sick dog or broken furnace to tend to and then I'll find out they've been hooking up with everyone in the records department.

Most jobs require conscientiousness and a little enthusiasm, with the rest not being as important. I always hire the guy that seems like they're interested in the job, which, in this market, seems like there's not a whole lot of people like that. At least when I was younger I pretended like I wanted the job. It seemed better when people pretended for some reason.

After all this seems to be politics about politics. — Seeker

It seems to be a political attempt to embarrass or discredit her.

Should a minister of state, being an important example (role model) to a lot of (very) (young) people, take care not to present himself/herself (in public, via smartphone/internet) under the influence of an intoxicating substance which is known for its addictive (and destructive) properties? — Seeker

She was not presenting herself in public. It was a private party. The video was made public without her permission.

Why would "(very) (young) people" make of this something more than someone dancing, singing, and having a good time? Many of them have parents, who are their primary examples and role models, who drink and sing and dance.

Or is it that such behavior shouldnt be made into an issue because the substance is legalized and (especially not) because the prime minister seems to be able to absorb certain quantities of the substance without any negative consequence (which could be considered an example in and of itself)? — Seeker

No, it shouldn't be an issue because she was not doing anything wrong. Are you accusing her of not drinking responsibly? Or do you think someone in her position should not drink at all?

Or do you think someone in her position should not drink at all? — Fooloso4

The assumption by many seems to be 'politics is sober and serious, please don't have a life too.'

She was not presenting herself in public. It was a private party. The video was made public without her permission. — Fooloso4

Considering the profile(s) of her (media-exposure-hungry) companions at the time of the party it is without a doubt going public once such a companion starts filming or receives a copy of the footage.

Why would "(very) (young) people" make of this something more than someone dancing, singing, and having a good time — Fooloso4

Good times as such tend to end binge-party-style where it concerns the very young as young people are less limited by a sense of responsibility, for themselves and/or their peers, and will explore and exceed their limits easily, especially if provided 'exemplary behavior' of someone as succesful as the PM. If you cant see that, or perhaps do not want to see such, for whatever reason, there isnt anything more I can do or say to convince you otherwise.

You seem to be making this about me, what I think or feel, but it is about consequence of action, my personal opinion is of no value, I am merely stating facts rather than going on a crusade.

What a load of shit! Not even worthy of comment...