Atheism
Politics
Memes
Mind
Matters
String
Random
Interact
Feedback
Links
Debate
Home
The American Dream™
Ban it or Make it Compulsory: Isn't There Any Middle Way?
Libertarians: Why They Have it All Wrong
Macho Politics
Punk is Bunk
The Cedars of Lebanon
There's Nowt as Queer as Folk
The Ghosts of Puritanism
Palace Admits Prince Charles is Gay
The Big Lie
Sometimes customers come in to buy a feature and they are not sure why they want it. They demand a feature but when asked cannot justify that feature in terms of a benefit to themselves. When I ask them why they are looking for a washing machine with a 1300 rpm spin speed they do not know why they really want it. They have lost track of the benefit. It can be a high-risk strategy for a salesman to question the customer's motives, some will react badly and say I am being rude to question them, making them look stupid. Others will be glad to look into the matter in greater depth and find out why one machine is really better than another.
Many customers automatically assume that a 1300 rpm spin speed washing machine will do a better job than one that spins at 1000 rpm. If I am bold enough to point out that this is not necessarily the case I can sometimes reap an enormous benefit to myself, by gaining the customers trust, saving them money and so allowing me to explain the virtues of a more profitable machine or the massively more profitable extended warranty.
So, why does a customer ask for a 1300 rpm washing machine? Because they have been told to. Somebody has told them that a machine that spins at 1300 rpm will get their clothes drier. It does seem to make sense. However, the benefit to the customer is drier clothes, not higher spin speed. If I can point out that three machines built by the same manufacturer have the same motor in them, the same EC official spin performance and the same amount of residual water left in the clothes (54% of the dry weight of the clothes according to the manufacturer's own figures) is there any point whatsoever in paying more for a higher spin speed? No. Spin speed is a feature, dry clothes is the benefit, if the clothes come out just as dry from all three machines none offer any relative benefits. In fact the slower spinning machine may be a better buy as it could be more reliable to run the same motor at a slower speed.
A similar story happens with vacuum cleaners. Customers ask for the one with the biggest motor. Why? The job of a vacuum cleaner is not to consume power, not even to suck hard, the benefit comes in picking up dust. Don't buy the one that uses the most power or sucks the strongest, get the one that offers the true benefit: cleaner floors.
Liberty is not a benefit. It is a feature.
Choice is not a benefit, it is a feature.
Peace is not a benefit, it is a feature.
Prosperity is not a benefit, it is a feature.
Socialism is not a benefit, it is a feature.
National self-determination is not a benefit, it is a feature.
Democracy is not a benefit, it is a feature.
Politicians and political philosophers can learn something from salesmen. Always keep your eye on the ball. Understand what the real benefit is. Selling the sizzle not the sausage is a cliché but is a good idea to bear in mind at all times that what the public asks for, what they actually want and what would be best for them are often very different propositions. To really inspire the public to your vision you must talk of features but always link them to real benefits.
The benefits of peace are security and hope for the future that allows you to achieve longer term aims. People can and do live in poverty, despair and peace.
Democracy does not mean that you can get rid of the government if you disagree with it, only that the government knows that it is accountable to the majority. An accountable government will tend to be non-belligerent and focused on securing widespread fairness and prosperity. But only on the average. Democracy is not a panacea.
English history is full of descriptions of good and bad Kings, some lead the nation towards prosperity and security, others taxed too much and wasted the wealth of the nation in futile wars. The type of government does not determine the direction of the government, but on the whole the history of democratic nations has been better than those of Kingdoms and oligarchies. Gangsters can be popular. The Kray twins swaggered about East London in the sixties killing rival gangsters and being kind to their mum. They were treated as modern day heroes by many gullible people. They only sadistically murdered their own, and they kept the lesser villains in line. If gangsters can be popular then it is certainly possible for dictators and Kings to be popular too, but don't count on it.
Democracy is not a pure good thing, it is not a substitute for good government and decisive leadership. The ideal government is the popular strong, democratically elected leader and a watchful legislature that stays out of the way when not required but leaps to action when this is the best course of action.
Many politicians in democratic countries get the balance wrong. Members of Parliament and others in similar positions give too much emphasis to notions such as "National self-determination" and the "Sovereignty of Parliament" when really they are simply saying that they want the power in their hands for their reasons.
The common good does not always follow from any particular form of government.
 |
Winston S Churchill, 1947 |
Democracy is a feature, not a benefit. But on the whole I think it should be a feature you should demand whenever you get the chance to express your choice.
Whenever politicians make promises to you ask yourself if they have addressed the fundamentals, have they offered you a benefit, or simply described a feature? When a politician says that this treaty offers the prospect of peace in our time ask what is the value of that peace, what good does it bring? All too often people get caught up with the chain of consequences involved in politics and they forget what they are fighting for and why. They struggle for office, to retain power. They struggle to win votes, to gain the support of a particular group. During this process it is healthy to keep your eye on the fundamentals and to avoid the situation of supporting a decrease in the welfare of the people because it improves the chances of your party being elected so you can, err...what were we trying to achieve again? I forgot. Oh, wasn't it trying to improve the welfare of the people...?