Posted by ESC on April 11, 2003
In Reply to: A matter of understanding posted by Miri Barak on April 11, 2003
: I have two sentences which I find difficult to understand. I'll appreciate any help.
: 1. "There has been a tendency to reduce political power to the actual application of force or at least to equate it with successful threats of force and with persuasion, *to the neglect of charisma*."
: I have a problem with the last part of the sentence "to the neglect of charism". Does it mean - to the point of ngelecting charism?
: 2. "That neglect accounts *in good measure for* the neglect of prestige as an independent element in international politics."
: I don't understant the phrase or idiom "in good measure for" and how it is connected to the sentence.
: Thank you so much
1. Yes, to the point of neglecting charisma. (Charisma: a personal magic of leadership arousing special popular loyalty or enthusiasm for a public figure, as a political leader. From http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary)
Bully boys who threaten people instead of trying to win them over. (Get them by the b*lls and their hearts and minds will follow. Was that LBJ speaking?)
2. RE: good measure. I am away from my library. But the way I've heard the expression is, "I gave him one more for good measure." It's the practice of giving a little extra to make sure you aren't cheating someone. (Along the lines of "baker's dozen" = 13. Giving a little extra.) "Good measure" is a fair share plus a little more. I would say that sentence No. 2 means that the "neglect of charisma" is hugely responsible for "the neglect of prestige."
Another expression that comes to mind is "lion's share" (The greater part of an allotment. "Dictionary of Cliches" by James Rogers.) The "neglect of charisma" bears the lion's share of responsible for "the neglect of prestige."