Making sense of the Perak "jump ship"

A thought snippet of jlvk.

Crazy enough! Had it been a switch the other way round I'd give my thumbs up. 99.9% of people favor perceived returns, and this builds up social latency that can lead to a foreseeably huge "social recession".

And such doing is no politics, its downright Machiavellianism! While we laugh ourselves silly with all those money burnt in stock options we can console ourselves that some people outdo us in risk-taking!

The incident sparked many thoughts: a friend of mine dislikes the current political developments in Perak, and asked "is loyalty that lacking?"

I think the lack could be in loyalty or in intrinsic motivation. I am more inclined to think in terms of the latter, inline with the observation that many of us are good executors of tasks and orders without actually taking delight in what we do. And when the real influence comes from not too remote externalities, chances are that a "natural switch" occurs.

Switching back is possible--with an equal or greater counter influence. I'm drawing parallel from the laissez-faire of job switching, especially for the top-ranking personnel.

So is the office mere work or labor of love? I am touched by Bro. Loh's innate commitment in his reply to me:

I believe somehow that an office of the state (government) has 'commitment' and 'loyalty' in it, based on ones prescribed principles. Not that you can embrace every single thing or agree with every single thing... but it epitomizes another type of relationship which I believe is very central to the way a government structure revolves around; a family. That said, a husband does not change spouse just because a person don't feel passionate about the wife anymore or disagrees with her. You just don't. You work together for the good of the family, together. Based on the vow you made in joining a party.

May we be single-minded in serving the people.