Those of you who follow international news know about two important events in global politics that are seemingly unrelated, but show similarities and dangers we should be aware of in democracies.
The elections in Russia are contentious, marred by protests and ripe for international criticism. However, the elections are still democratic in nature, even if the qualities elected give the elections a less than trust worthy reputation. Vladimir Putin is a tough guy. He trains with the national Judo team, rides horses and does every thing he can to show the public he is masculine, hard as nails and much like Teddy Roosevelt of the U.S. It is what the public wants in an elected official. It may not be the best kind of leader the Russian electorate can elect, but there are emotional factors in who we elect in any democracy and Putin is very good at exploiting these emotions. It is why he was so successful as a KGB agent and later in his presidency.... Wait.... economic reforms?.... growth?.... a Chechen war?.... Okay, maybe there is some good sense behind his tough guy exterior, but these factors are not highlighted by his political campaign. He is the head of a familiar term we hear more often further south.
On July 8th, 1994, Kim Il-sung died. A nation wept, a son took power. He was the first of an official personality cult in North Korea. His son took over where he left off and when Kim Jong-il died, a nation wept.... forcefully wept. No one liked Kim Jong-il. He ruled with fear. He also enforced the personality cult, which covered all the horrible qualities he had as a leader. Feeding the nation didn't seem that big of a deal compared to him shooting a perfect game of golf, being a ladies man in novels and so on. This is not so different from what we are seeing in Russia right now, except Putin is actually a pretty good leader. But what if he wasn't?
In the United States, when we elected Obama, we were thinking about health care and economic reforms. The fact he was black was novel, but not a fact in his favor. A lot of racists excluded him as a president off the bat and then there were many that were hesitant. There were many that voted for him because he is black too. On balance, I doubt it decided the election. So he didn't head a personality cult by being black. He headed a personality cult by selling hope. Not a bad product to sell. I think it is fair game too. He was however not ready for presidency. He had grand ideas of introducing the Swedish health care model to the U.S. and his advisers said no. He had plans for transport and his advisers said no. He had plans and his advisers said no. For all the insults we have for bosses and their yes men, it seems ironic when a president finally surrounds himself with no men, we have an ineffectual presidency.
When we elect our future leaders, we need to sit back a moment and ask ourselves if we are in love with a cult personality or if we are down to the brass tacks. It is something I will think about before I buy my next computer.
The elections in Russia are contentious, marred by protests and ripe for international criticism. However, the elections are still democratic in nature, even if the qualities elected give the elections a less than trust worthy reputation. Vladimir Putin is a tough guy. He trains with the national Judo team, rides horses and does every thing he can to show the public he is masculine, hard as nails and much like Teddy Roosevelt of the U.S. It is what the public wants in an elected official. It may not be the best kind of leader the Russian electorate can elect, but there are emotional factors in who we elect in any democracy and Putin is very good at exploiting these emotions. It is why he was so successful as a KGB agent and later in his presidency.... Wait.... economic reforms?.... growth?.... a Chechen war?.... Okay, maybe there is some good sense behind his tough guy exterior, but these factors are not highlighted by his political campaign. He is the head of a familiar term we hear more often further south.
On July 8th, 1994, Kim Il-sung died. A nation wept, a son took power. He was the first of an official personality cult in North Korea. His son took over where he left off and when Kim Jong-il died, a nation wept.... forcefully wept. No one liked Kim Jong-il. He ruled with fear. He also enforced the personality cult, which covered all the horrible qualities he had as a leader. Feeding the nation didn't seem that big of a deal compared to him shooting a perfect game of golf, being a ladies man in novels and so on. This is not so different from what we are seeing in Russia right now, except Putin is actually a pretty good leader. But what if he wasn't?
In the United States, when we elected Obama, we were thinking about health care and economic reforms. The fact he was black was novel, but not a fact in his favor. A lot of racists excluded him as a president off the bat and then there were many that were hesitant. There were many that voted for him because he is black too. On balance, I doubt it decided the election. So he didn't head a personality cult by being black. He headed a personality cult by selling hope. Not a bad product to sell. I think it is fair game too. He was however not ready for presidency. He had grand ideas of introducing the Swedish health care model to the U.S. and his advisers said no. He had plans for transport and his advisers said no. He had plans and his advisers said no. For all the insults we have for bosses and their yes men, it seems ironic when a president finally surrounds himself with no men, we have an ineffectual presidency.
When we elect our future leaders, we need to sit back a moment and ask ourselves if we are in love with a cult personality or if we are down to the brass tacks. It is something I will think about before I buy my next computer.
No comments:
Post a Comment