This concept has emerged as one of the key catchphrases. I suggest it’s watchful monitoring for egregious overusage. I have heard it countless times in genius circles like the TED conferences, on talk shows like Smart City and in the political realm on shows like On the Media and Slate’s Gabfest as the Presidential campaign season steamrolls full speed ahead.
Perhaps my daily media intake is comprised of people aiming at the same audiences and the recurrance of this idea speaks more to my limited exposure to a variety of ideas across the political spectrum than the actual wear and tear of this phrase. But I’m not sure.
What is enlightened self-interest, anyway? Is it whitewashing naked self-absorption? Or in a more benevolent read, is it merely a win-win situation? Or is it doing something that’s good for everyone second, only after you’ve put yourself first? It’s certainly a more preferable policy option than unabashed self-interest where only one person or group or corporation or country wins.
I’ve started taking note of every time I’ve heard it. I recommend you do the same. My objection overall is not to the concept but to its ubiquity, rendering it meaningless.
1 Comment
September 15, 2008 at 4:10 am
I’ll help you track “enlightened self-interest” if you help me track “world-class”.
Deal?