It occurred to me today, as I listened to an angry screed about Rod Blago…yavvv…oecvich? that the labeling of someone as an opportunist is not done in a loving manner, at least when I’d ever heard it. And yet, the simplest and most obvious definition of opportunistic is neutral in nature; taking advantage of opportunities as they arise.
In this article about John Kerry in the last election, people mention that they will vote for him “in spite of” his opportunistic nature.
Yet who among us would NOT take advantage of an opportunity? Isn’t the very notion of seizing on opportunity what makes a successful businessperson/entreprenuer/journalist?
What determines negative opportunism and positive opportunism?
Given that just about everyone thinks Blagojevich is a chucklehead doing his usual chuckleheaded stuff that no one actually wants him to do, it’s hard to say that seizing on opportunity is what makes a successful politican. At least as far as the love of the electorate goes.
Without having heard the screed you mention, my guess is that the real complaint is that an “opportunist” is someone who takes advantage of a situation to advance a position which couldn’t have been advanced otherwise. If something is incredibly unpopular, it’s doubtful that you’ll gain respect by pushing it through through the ‘luck’ of a bad situation.
Well, just to be clear, I didn’t overhear the whole Blogo Convo ™, but it made me consider the term opportunist and it’s connotations. Given the direct dictionary definition, I would consider someone calling me an opportunist a compliment, but clearly it isn’t.
You suggested
But if this were true, that means that if I have an uncle in the publishing industry and he agrees to publish my book, I’m advancing a situation that may not be advanced otherwise. Is that bad or good?
Well, because even after his success with the Manhattan Project, he dabbled in leftist causes after the war and lost his security clearance.
What the…WAIT A SECOND…I see what you did there.
I think Americans are particularly sensitive to rapid fire judgements of character because of the nature of our country. We are and have been for a while very mobile internally. We have a history of moving all across the country (going west, etc…) And in later days moving into communities in which we haven’t existed our entire lives. Our nation is too big in a sense.
We like to get a good feel of someone’s character. When a politician seems opportunistic, it makes you feel that he doesn’t stand for anything, but will do anything it takes. If he’s new, and I don’t know him, and he has the propensity to do anything it takes to get ahead, then how do I know he won’t hang me out to dry? I think if you know someone well then you don’t care about their opportunism as long as you have other criteria to judge them on.
So the thing is that we don’t like it when we sense fluctuations in character as Americans. This is the reason why Mitt Romney seems so terrible as a candidate. He is literally on both sides of nearly every issue. Not now, of course, but he has been. And maybe that is the bad thing that we don’t allow much in the way of room for changing one’s mind.
I’d also venture a guess and say that opportunism for the sake of power seems to be the worst trait ever. It’s a raw emotion that we all have a visceral emotion against for good reason. How many power-hungry people in the world have turned out that well? People whose ambition seems to be only about power means trouble.
The label “Opportunist” carries with it connotations of more then just taking advantage of a situation.
From the Oxford Essential Dictionary -
opportunism - adaption to circumstances, esp. regardless of principle.
It’s that “regardless of principle” part that you are seeing. Most of the times when I hear someone called an opportunist, it’s not because they took advantage of an opportunity, but because they do so in a way that is detrimental to someone else.
It depends on what kind of opportunity. If someone was going to hire me to kill the president and pay millions of dollars, well, I can do without that kind of opportunity. In a less extreme fashion, if an opportunity brings a lot of downsides (long commute, tiring work, annoying colleagues), then there’s nothing wrong with turning it down. Not all opportunities are created the same.
A person who discriminately takes advantage of opportunities is much more admirable than a person who jumps on every log that floats past him, damn the consequences. That person is just greedy and foolish.
I supervise someone who sometimes give me “opportunistic” vibes.
She’s the type who requests a condensed work schedule so that she doesn’t have to come in on Fridays and can come in late (like 10:30 am) on Mondays. Not because she has any reasonable at-home obligations (like kids), but because it’s in her power to do so and she knows her supervisor (me) doesn’t like saying no because she wants to keep everyone happy. This would be fine if we weren’t so understaffed, but we are and she knows this. Her ideal schedule means I have to be tied to my desk more often than I care to be. This doesn’t stop her from trying to take advantage of my easy-goingness so that she can sleep in late on Mondays.
“Opportunism” as it’s commonly seen is a negative thing because its often associated with selfishness and greed. You jump on opportunities to profit from something with little regard to other people or principles higher than yourself. You don’t do things because it’s the right thing to do or because you enjoy doing it, but because it makes you look good and advances you in some way.