Yes to this. Too many people complain about politics as if it is some “outside” force and not simply implicit in the way that human beings organize diversified interests. Since each of us can only embody our own world view, politics is inevitable.

I understand that what people typically mean is people who are “too political” where the pushing for interests stops being in service of some goal and starts to become its own point. But in trying to avoid the appearance of that, too many people fail to engage in any politics and in doing so actually cause more harm than good to what is important to them by missing the important point that it’s incumbent to speak up for things you need and believe in because people who allocate resources may have insufficient knowledge or insufficient time to dedicate to knowing your work that intimately.

Politics would be less of a shit show if people had intro textbook level knowledge about political science and/or didn’t approach it like a sport.

> I understand that what people typically mean is people who are “too political” where the pushing for interests stops being in service of some goal and starts to become its own point.

It typically doesn’t stop being in service of some goal, but rather becomes entirely self-serving.

That’s the good side of politics, and I agree: it is everywhere humans are trying to accomplish things together.

But when I say gravitate away from hard work towards playing politics it refers to something else of course. Getting others to do your work while still claiming credit is one example.

It’s not the good side of politics, it’s how it’s defined in textbooks.

I don’t think those textbooks attempt to define the concept in this context. Like it or not, “corporate politics” is a well established term.

Consider whether the stuff you’re thinking about is “politics” or merely “stupidity” or “malice” (or some combination of these). I see no need to mix up the words.

This is the grown-up answer that this thread is clearly lacking

But why then is it used as a pejorative? What you described is "engineering".

That's not at all what engineering is. Engineering is the application of science (including mathematics) to solve technical problems and/or optimize processes.

An engineer also has to eat lunch in order to function, but engineering is not the same thing as professional food critiquing.

---

To answer your question, it's pejorative because politics is about allocating resources one way or another, towards and away from particular social groups. It's inherently going to be making some of the people unhappy, 100% of the time. Real life politics also tends to not be done smartly and honestly at all times and in all places, and this can make some people upset as well.

Most people associate all of that together, and most people don't take an academic (or particularly analytical) approach to the subject.