Politics and Politicians, The Insidious Stories You Never Knew Behind The Façades.
Politics. In the 1950s, a fledgling journalist asked Harold Macmillan, the then Prime Minister of England, what it would take to derail his government.
In a very joyful, nonchalant tone, he replied, Events, my dear boy, Events.
Indeed, if you take it as literally as he did, he did give the correct answer. It is events after all that change governments and lives, from a tax scandal to having more affairs than they should. The politicians have been guilty of this and more. Some admit to it quite openly, and some act like a rabbit caught in headlights, but the guilty label remains affixed.
Of course, all can be hidden under a colourful biography and personality, but voters’ tolerance is limited. The public sets the tone, and the politician decides the words.
It also depends on what type of world you live in: the First World, the world that identifies itself as modern, has a term for everything it does and swears by everything latest, or the Third World, the world that thinks there is no difference in shamelessness and modernity, swears by time-tested traditions, superstitions, and whatnot. However, how they treat their leaders is a stupendous difference, putting everything into a new perspective.
America, the long-dominating example of popular politics.
Let us take America, for instance, the peak of soft power; if you were to look at its 250-plus years of independence, you would find that it produced many phenomenal personalities, from the Founding Fathers to John F Kennedy, who was so popular that a derivation of his name, Kenndeyesque was included in the dictionary. Not many have since been able to enjoy that level of grace, Nixon resigned after the Watergate scandal, which was led by two journalists, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein who later on got immortalized in the form of a Pulitzer prize and a movie, All the President’s Men.
It was the same modernity that helped impeach Donald Trump, the 45th President of the United States and the first-ever President to be impeached formally.
You ask about third-world countries. Let us use three case studies as examples of how they treat their leaders.
Pakistan’s Zulfi, aka Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
Take the example of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the founder of the Bhutto political dynasty. He had a gift of the gab, he could mobilise lakhs of common men in rousing, socialist speeches but in flagrant irony, he was not averse to wearing the most expensive suits and gold studded watches, he walked around as if he owned the town and he actually did, the people that took offence on his irony were chanting Long Live Bhutto, after he was hanged by General Zia, there was no love lost between the two.
Libya’s Muammar Al Gaddafi
Another example of hero worshipping popularity, he in a bloodless coup, at the age of 27 in a short, to the point speech seized power in a bloodless coup, convincing the entire of Libya that he was the charismatic saviour they had been waiting for and ruled well over 40 years in a reign marked by delusions of grandeur, bloodshed, long winded speeches and a bullet to the head in the end.
India’s very own Indira Gandhi
India does not lag behind in this race at least, India produced Indira Gandhi, who is debated till date, her son Sanjay Gandhi inherited the same dominating, disciplinarian attitude but in his trademark recklessness died in a plane crash at the age of 34.
The doting mother son duo was cut short but not Indira Gandhi’s resolve, she did not want to be in the shadow of her father, the legendary Jawaharlal Nehru so she did not borrow his trademark soft spoken, rosy charm but instead the fierce demeanour of a headmaster. Of course, Delhi was altered forever twice in her reign, 1975’s Emergency and her assassination in 1984, topics that still invite discussion today. Still, no one dares to question the authorities of these examples.
The Difference Between How First and Third-World Leaders Are Treated
In the third world, leaders are treated as nothing short of gods, for they embody the dreams of the public. In the first world, they are not the dreams of the public; they are the informed choices of the voters, who can be swiftly elected and removed if they do not walk the talk.
To conclude, the third world can finally learn one lesson of modernity; it does not have to be so timid.
