2 of 5
edited tags
uhoh
  • 5.9k
  • 21
  • 55

Scholarly work advising politicians how to decide when to speak up, and for whom to speak exactly?

An elected member of some congressional or parliamentary body may be faced with a situation where they need to choose between different options. Here are some examples only:

  • Say that the jury is still out on anthropogenic climate change, advise we embrace science, or keep quiet.
  • Say that a highly influential and political powerful is wrong or being destructive, side with them, or give tacit approval through mostly science and non-statement.
  • Say that the Junior Senator from Wisconsin is a true patriot, or that they are the opposite, or give tacit approval through mostly science and non-statement.

Examples of optimization criteria that might be used in order to choose from various possible options include

  1. What's best for my country?
  2. What's best for those whom I represent?
  3. Whats best for those who voted and/or may vote for me?
  4. How to best hold on to this incredibly powerful microphone which is so personally rewarding to use?
  5. How best to pay for my kids' education in expensive schools, several hoses and cars, etc...

Are there scholarly works (books, monographs, memoirs) by those who study this conundrum or have faced it personally that provide guidance to others who may face it?

uhoh
  • 5.9k
  • 21
  • 55