2006.10.27
Change is Inevitable
It seems to me that how people deal with change is a key indicator in who they are in life. There are three primary ways of dealing with it that I can think of. Do not adapt to change (inert), adapt (reaction), or be the one causing the change (catalyst). These can be broken down and analyzed on many different levels, but for this thought experiment I’m only going to at positive and negative aspects to both.
positive negative
inert |
--------------------------------
reaction |
--------------------------------
catalyst |
Each of us uses all three at various points in our lives. Sometimes we react to a situation, sometimes we just don’t care (or don’t even notice), and sometimes we make things happen. However, most people have a prediliction for only one. These are the philosophies of our lives as we actually live them (not as we would wish to live them).
Change is a funny thing, and not always good. In those cases sometimes it’s positive to be inert to change, or to react in a way that alters the nature of the change. However, sometimes change might be good but some people are opposed to any sort of change. They might think that things are good enough now and are afraid of what is coming down the pike.
So there is something remarkable about the Bush administration’s insistence that we “hold the course” or “stay the course” in Iraq. Two years ago I would have agreed but times have changed and it’s time to adapt. They say they are adapting but if that were true we would have seen some positive change since the invasion. Bush was a catalyst for change in Iraq (whether positive or negative is open to debate) and has since been inert, opposing any change to the existing policy. The reaction will not be good for him or the Republican party.
Categorized: political thoughts
You can follow any responses to this entry with a RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
