The Current Discussion:A new poll finds widespread mistrust of world leaders. Are trustworthy national leaders a thing of the past? If not, who's an exception?
Over the past few decades there has been a dearth of world leaders. Perhaps that’s because we are not producing Statesmen, only people who want to lead on their own terms. Maybe it’s because our expectations of these leaders exceed their capabilities, or perhaps the divisive nature of the world political scene is such that you have to either be 'for or against' someone or something. I used to believe that people deserve the leaders they pick, but as time has gone by I have realized that not all leaders are chosen and those who are in some electoral system are often then result of well-contrived political machinery that can even manufacture consent (a la Bush).
It may be true that the era of true statesmen seems to have gone by, and now the myopia of political figures is astonishing, at times propelling themselves on the back of hate and anger to muster emotions which do not improve anyone’s quality of life. While the media has shrunk the world to fit within the screen of our laptop, it has also made us more aware of the world’s problems, and has made us acknowledge that human nature remains driven towards seeing hate just as easily as it sees love. Luckily, it would seem hate is not that widespread as it could be and thus there is hope things can get better. Perhaps this is what the 'leaders' do not see, and in some cases it’s easier for them to exploit fear and hate rather than marshal people to rise up.
The political system creates agendas, and these will eventually wear down the best intentions of any political leader, especially in assumed democracies where the benefits of the election choice are eroded by lobbyists and big business interests. While John F Kennedy is hailed as a great president, and perhaps rightly so, would he have survived the media’s intrusive nature as it exists today? Most likely not. Margaret Thatcher lead with a decisive bent of mind, even when she might have been wrong, but the Iron Lady did not hold the same stature as Winston Churchill.
If the question remains to seek 'national' leader, then the question of world leadership is contradictory, as sooner or later national interests will collide with the intent of world leadership. Will a leader seek a global consensus and manage to retain such a consensus throughout his tenure? Highly unlikely. Perhaps the world needs a truly global crisis to make people realize that humanity is at risk and thus a world view is more important than anything. Till then, sadly the case for trust in 'world leaders' remains a dismal tale of failure.
Please e-mail PostGlobal if you'd like to receive an email notification when PostGlobal sends out a new question.
Email This Post to a Friend | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook | Email the Author
