[Politics] You Don't Need Experience

Day 756, 05:33 • Published in Canada Finland • by avec


I've read the same arguments time after time about political offices in eRepublik requiring experience. New players aren't let into ministries because they lack experience, and the same applies for some older players - they aren't qualified to be ministers or qualified to hold an office because they lack previous experience in the field. That's BS.

No political office requires experience. If, for example a president would have to have experience, then there would be no new presidents at all, as only the ones who have held the office before have experience on being a president. The same goes for ministries - if experience was needed, there would be no change in ministers, cabinets would remain the same regardless of terms because new candidates don't have the experience needed to be in the office.


Experience 😕= competence

Where this idea comes from is a logical fallacy, people mixing know-how with experience. What is needed to be a minister, is know-how, not experience. Previous experience in the field brings knowledge on the tasks of a minister, but it is not needed as such. The basic model of becoming a minister usually follows along the lines of first an applicant becoming an apprentice, maybe gather different titles for himself/herself, make new contacts, and then become a minister. This is falsely mixed with gathering experience, which is not the case. Apprenticeship brings know-how, it gives a picture on the tasks of a minister, but experience on them means nothing. You might think these two terms are synonyms, but they are not.

Anyone, who knows what belongs to the task of a, for example, Minister of Defence, can become one. It doesn't matter if the candidate lacks experience, if s/he knows what to do. That's the basis of minister selection in civilised countries in eRepublik.


Four realms of eRepublik?

”But that's not what others think!”

None of what I said before apply, if others, namely those currently in office deciding on next ministers, don't believe in it. The same arguments will be said again and again, about president needing to have experience on every ministry, if the previous president runs for office again, he/she is good because s/he has experience on it, etc etc. Bluntly put that's idiotic. Experience means nothing, as I explained above. No rotation in offices leads to stagnation, it's shooting in your own leg.

If you think there are no valid other candidates in the country for a certain task, then the fault is either in yourself as you haven't trained a follower for yourself, or you can't see competence over experience. Ask from yourself: What are the things that a minister needs to do and know? The answer inevitably is that it is nothing another, new person cannot learn. Any other answer is plain arrogance, based on upholding your own self-esteem (in a game, I might add). Psychology is a relevant factor for some people, thinking you're the only one competent enough for a task even in this game is sometimes an obstacle for recruiting new blood.

BUT:

Don't mix what I said with getting totally inexperienced people into office. Any ministry or office does need certain amount of experience in terms of doing things, as know-how cannot be got without doing things. Apprenticeship is the starting point, despite what I said about a minister not requiring experience, don't confuse it with you not needing any experience. You still need to learn what the minister's tasks are, and that you cannot learn alone.




Avec, eFinnish Minister of Defence and Public Relations

Former:
Minister of Public Relations, Commander of NTJ, Squad Leader, President of eFinland, Minister of Defence, Minister of Foreign Affairs, eBritish uMoFA for Nordic Countries, 4-time Congress member in eUK and eFinland, Paratrooper Platoon leader, ambassador to eFinland & eSweden, UKRP Head of Public Relations, plus something I forgot.

P.S. I'm not that far from Media Mogul, so if you liked, please vote and subscribe. Thank you 🙂