|| Satyameva Jayate ||

Dedicated to Bharat and Dharma

Will we get such a leader?

by · November 11, 2008

From “The Leader We Deserve” by Michael Kinsley…Although the article is about Obama, McCain and the US, it could have easily been written for India.

Peace and prosperity. During the last decade of the 20th century, Americans enjoyed more of both than any other people in history. Not all Americans, but most. Certainly most voters….Now both peace and prosperity seem uncertain.

…Through the fog of partisanship, we can acknowledge that both candidates are good men. But good isn’t enough. This time we need greatness.

Greatness is a compliment generally conferred in retrospect. We have lucked out several times in our history when implausible characters showed unexpected greatness when it was needed: a country lawyer from Illinois, a spoiled patrician in a wheelchair, to name two obvious examples. Even more miraculous (though troublesome for democracy), both Lincoln and F.D.R. were elected by promising more or less the opposite of what they did in office. Lincoln said he’d preserve the institution of slavery. F.D.R. said he’d balance the federal budget.

…unfortunately, our current political system seems designed to weed out precisely the qualities that are most needed at the moment.

One attribute we don’t need, although commonly associated with greatness in a leader, is empathy.

…What we need instead from a leader is astringency. Astringency means telling people what they don’t want to hear and leading them where they don’t want to go. It’s not comforting people about their current situation and reassuring them it will get better. It’s telling them that the situation is likely to get worse and that only their efforts can determine how soon it will start getting better.

…A second desirable quality of leadership, especially now, is toxic even to mention for its allegedly élitist overtones: intelligence. Not necessarily anything as crude as raw IQ scores…Call it intellectual curiosity, perhaps, or a willingness to engage with complicated ideas. …on balance it would be a plus to have a President who is smart. Maybe even really, really smart.

 Related Posts:

Do we deserve the politicians we get? 

Building a Freedom Team for India 

Will an Obama-style campaign work in India? 

Tags:

B Shantanu

Political Activist, Blogger, Advisor to start-ups, Seed investor. One time VC and ex-Diplomat. Failed mushroom farmer; ex Radio Jockey. Currently involved in Reclaiming India - One Step at a Time.

You may also like...

6 Responses

  1. AG says:
    November 11, 2008 at 2:01 pm

    Only one politician in the recent past meets this bar, Shantanu.
    Lee Kuan Yew

  2. B Shantanu says:
    November 12, 2008 at 1:37 pm

    While on this, some excerpts from “Brown man’s burden”
    http://in.news.yahoo.com/32/20081109/1050/top-brown-man-s-burden.html by Vir Sanghvi

    …But yes, there is something that we don’t talk about often enough. And that’s about how they conduct elections in America and how it shows up our own political system for the tawdry, ideologically bankrupt, family business that it really is.

    …Over the last ten years, politics in India have become increasingly about identity. People ask us to vote for them not because of what they’ve achieved or even what they’ll do but because of the families they were born into.

    At its simplest level, this is about dynasty. Vote for me, they say, because I am the daughter or the son of so-and-so. At a more complex level, it is about caste, ethnicity and religion: vote for me because like you, I am a Dalit/a Reddy/a Jat/a Yadav/ a Hindu etc.

    Dalits are expected to vote for Mayawati, not because she is a great politician, but because they are Dalits and they should vote for a Dalit leader. The backwards will vote for Mulayam Singh Yadav because he is one of them. And so on.

    … Issues are selected because of the appeal they will have to castes and communities. For instance, the BJP will focus on terrorism not necessarily because it is a serious problem but because the party hopes to capitalise on Hindu fears of violence from Muslims. Similarly Muslim leaders will go on about police brutality not necessarily because it is a genuine problem but because they want to make Muslims feel vulnerable and exposed.

    …Part of the significance of the Obama victory is that it marks the triumph of democracy over dynasty.

    …It wouldn’t happen here. And it couldn’t happen here. Indian politics is now largely a family affair. Nearly everybody who matters (including Mayawati, incidentally) is in politics because of a parent, a husband, a boy friend, or whatever. Such is the hold of dynasty that non-dynasts hardly get room to breathe, let alone grow.

    This is not to say that dynastic politicians are necessarily bad (nobody thinks Hillary was stupid; nor are many of our political sons and daughters) but only that they are dynastic politicians.

    …An Obama in India? Don’t see how: where’s the room?

  3. Dirt Digger says:
    November 13, 2008 at 5:25 am

    Shantanu,
    I’m not sure the contexts between India and US are similar. On one hand you have a nation with abundant resources, strong educational system, entrepreneurial individuals and strong financial system and on the other hand you have India (not to bash us, but we are at least 10-20 years behind on most counts). The literacy rate is quite poor and poverty is rampant. How would you expect people to choose the best possible leaders? Secondly, the people who are leaders like the FDR’s, Gandhi’s (Mohandas not Sonia, Rajiv), Sardar Patels of India today do not head into politics. Who else can people choose, but the Mayawatis, Thackerays and Karunanidhis?

  4. B Shantanu says:
    November 14, 2008 at 11:53 am

    @ Dirt Digger: You have hit the nail on the head…There is absolutely NO incentive for anyone who is clear thinking, sensible and committed to join politics today…unless they don’t mind the risk of going bankrupt, having their bones broken and their family lives destroyed…

    🙁

    On a more positive note though, I do really feel that there is at least the beginning of change…in the mindsets of people, in the way these things are bring discussed and addressed..

    I dont think all is lost…but it is not going to be easy…

  5. PS says:
    November 14, 2008 at 1:19 pm

    Buck up Shantanu!!! 🙂

    Who says it is easy? If it was as easy as changing a light bulb, perhaps there wouldn’t have been a call for “Change India”…Right?

    Am sure you have read this poem by Robert Frost..there are times when going is not so easy:

    “The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And miles to go before I sleep,
    And miles to go before I sleep. ”

    And don’t say there is absolutely no incentive…am sure there are a lot of folks working with you and supporting/willing to support unconditionally…

  6. Pragya says:
    November 14, 2008 at 5:58 pm

    शान्तनु, आपकी इस पोस्ट से मुझे दैनिक जागरण में प्रकाशित एक लेख “बडे़ बदलाव की आकांक्षा” याद आया। लेखक स्वप्न दासगुप्ता हैं। कुछ अन्श इस प्रकार हैं:

    आप पूछ सकते हैं कि नाम में क्या रखा है, लेकिन कभी-कभी नाम ही महत्वपूर्ण हो जाता है। अमेरिकी और भारतीय इलेक्ट्रानिक मीडिया पर अमेरिकी चुनाव परिणाम के प्रसारण के दौरान नव निर्वाचित राष्ट्रपति का नाम अलग-अलग तरह से लिया गया। अमेरिकी मीडिया में विजयी डेमोक्रेट उम्मीदवार बस बराक ओबामा थे। उनके साथ या तो सीनेटर या फिर निर्वाचित राष्ट्रपति जोड़ा जा रहा था, जबकि भारतीय चैनलों के लिए वह बराक हुसैन ओबामा थे। चैनलों का मध्य नाम पर विशेष जोर रहा।

    किसी अन्य देश के चुनाव को व्यक्तिगत राजनीतिक रुचि के संदर्भ में देखने का प्रलोभन अत्यंत सम्मोहक होता है-भले ही इसमें यथार्थ को दफन कर दिया गया हो।

    ओबामा के पक्ष में अश्वेत मतदाताओं की चौंकाने वाली जबरदस्त गोलबंदी तथा श्वेत समुदाय का बहुमत अपने पक्ष में खींचने में उनकी असफलता के बावजूद यह स्पष्ट है कि अमेरिकी राष्ट्रपति चुनाव का आधार न तो नस्लीय था और न ही मध्य नाम विजेता रहा। यदि ऐसा होता तो इस पर संदेह है कि ओबामा इतने निर्णायक तरीके से जीतने में सफल रहते। वास्तव में अमेरिकी चुनाव का एक गौण पहलू यह है कि न नस्ल और न ही व्यक्ति का मूल स्थान इस शीर्ष पद के लिए उपयुक्तता का निर्धारण कर सकता है। इस मामले में अमेरिकी मतदाताओं ने आदर्श स्थापित किया और उस सपने को साकार किया जिसके लिए अब्राहम लिंकन और मार्टिन लूथर किंग ने अपने जीवन का बलिदान कर दिया था।

    ओबामा अमेरिकी मायावती नहीं हैं, जो जाति अनुक्रम को उल्टा कर दें। वह मुख्यधारा के अमेरिकी राजनेता हैं, जिन्होंने बड़ी बुद्धिमत्तापूर्ण और चतुराई के साथ चुनाव प्रचार को अंजाम दिया। यह विश्व के सर्वश्रेष्ठ चुनाव प्रचारों में से एक था। उन्होंने सार्थक विचारों और प्रतिबद्ध समर्थकों के बल पर मात्र व्यक्तिगत करिश्मे के जरिए पूर्व प्रचलित पूर्वाग्रहों को आगे बढ़ाया है।

    अपने दृढ़ निश्चय से ओबामा ने अब तक सबसे अधिक संख्या में उदासीन अश्वेत मतदाताओं के वोट हासिल किए हैं। साथ ही उन्हें परंपरागत रूप से युवा डेमोक्रेटिक समर्थकों के वोट मिले।…

    लिन्क: http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/news/opinion/general/6_3_4975301.html

    It took me some time to search the find the link on the internet. But as you say it is time for change –
    बडे़ बदलाव की आकांक्षा.. in India too.

    Pragya