This week we had local elections in Amsterdam, and it was the first time I've been allowed to vote in over 5 years.
I sympathise with voters, feeling un-inspired by the "leaders" they have to choose from, but I also sympathise with politicians.
On one hand, we romanticise strong leadership, Winston Churchill being the classic example. Churchill was someone everyone could rally behind. He was a charming and well spoken man who lead a country when there was a clear enemy and a clear direction to go. He was someone you wanted to follow, hold up on a pedestal, with un-tarnished integrity.
In modern days, we demand that our leaders be brought closer to our level and be accountable. We question what they do, we demand to participate more in the decision-making process. But we don't seem to quite know how to handle this new power of the people. The result is that people (citizens, press, other politicians) are so busy providing a constant stream of attack / defense (asking questions, demanding accountability and pointing fingers) that we no longer recognise the difference between a genuine scandal, simply poor accounting, and normal mistakes in responsible decision-making.
And the personalities that rise in this system are not the sort of leaders we identify with. To make it in this new political system, politicians need to be constantly pointing out the mistakes of their opponents, constantly highlighting their attempts to stop their opponents mistakes, asking tough questions, and not answering things in ways that can be held against them. If Churchill were alive today, he would either be an unsuccessful politician, or he would have become something else.
I have found no shortage of "leaders" who I would rather follow -- people with integrity, who work together for common benefit, moving forward, who give credit more than point fingers -- in business and work environments than I have found in politics.
Is it because everything's going well? Churchill (and Britain) had a clear enemy (Germany), and a clear economic goal (recovery from the depression). It's much easier to rally together against a common problem.
Maybe it's a bit of a bourgeois problem to be contemplating when many people in the world are still suffering under poverty and lack of security. But, when everyone is relatively prosperous, decisions are much more complex and difficult. How to fairly distribute wealth without dis-incentivising hard work? How to manage you country's resources now while prices are high, without leaving future generations resource-poor? How to provide everyone with a place to live, but still have mechanisms in place to allow for choice? Do you let everyone into your country, but expect them to fend for themselves when they arrive? Or be selective about who you let in, but better enable them to prosper?
These are tough questions to answer. So tough that I would almost be distrustful of a politician who thought s/he had all of the answers. But throwing your hands up in the air and saying "I don't vote. There is no one worth voting for" is not the solution either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
