politician

The term politician can be traced back to the Greek and Roman Empire days. The word itself comes from a Greek word “polis”. The definition itself is someone who is involved in influencing public policy and decision making. However, what is actually the essence of a politician one may ask.

Lots of us normal citizens can see these politicians rising up to the podiums during election year and try to convince the voters to vote them into office. Some are seasoned veterans while some are young idealistic people hoping to make a change. No matter how different they are in terms of ideals and political stand, they always pursue the same reason to vote for them; they will help the rakyat to live a better life. Most of these politicians always refer to themselves as the servant of the rakyat. They are the servant while the rakyat are the master. How true this is? Let’s find out.

Ask a politician why we should vote for him. He will tell you by voting for him, he will be able to change the political demographic of a country and even to the extent of passing legislations and laws that govern the country. For the benefit of a doubt that sounds good if all are done in the best interest of the rakyat. However, if we analyze it further, no matter how noble their intentions are, deep down it is just a form of illusion of grandeur whereby they feel they are so powerful that they can control and change another person’s life in a whim, in this case the rakyat. Rights to vote might be a democratic practice but at the end of the day we are still voting an emperor to govern us. In this case, the only difference we get to choose our emperor very five years.

An aspiring politician therefore can be construed as an individual that actually wanted to control and dictate the life of many more human beings deemed not-able-to-function-without-being-lead. To prove this point, look at political parties and their rhetoric “we must be voted into power to ensure the best are given back to the people” and “to enable us to help the people, we must be given absolute majority to pass legislation”. The question we should ask as a rakyat, “what makes you better than us that we should vote you into office to control us?” and “why can’t we lead ourselves and need you to sacrifice your precious time to do it for us?”

To drive the nail to the coffin, just take a look at the politicians in Malaysia and find one that can take constructive criticism and do not act with holier than thou mentality. And also maybe a poor politician living in a hut and grows vegetables for a living. Sad to say, all new aspiring idealistic politicians started out noble but end up power crazy to the point of thinking himself among the immortals in the end. All they do is to rally the rakyat behind them to show their might and trounce their detractors to submission. Power really corrupts and that is a proven fact.

In conclusion, it would be better if every rakyat register themselves as a voter and vote their own self. God bless our politician’s soul.

roadblock

Once we hear the word “illegal rally” the nightmarish vision of roadblocks that cause tremendous traffic comes into mind for the average road users. This seems to be the standard operating procedure of the authorities in their reasoning that only by doing so they will be able to protect the rakyat at large from violence and danger. How far this is true, one may wonder.

Let’s take a look at a roadblock as an example. The roadblock is set right in front of a traffic light of a busy intersection famous for being congested during rush hour. A road of about 5 lanes being transformed into a single lane “miraculously” by police checkpoints. The check involved, the police just stand there and look at the motorists trying to outdo one another to move into the single lane to pass. Well, we heard about how we mild mannered Malaysians can instantly turn into road monsters in the blink of an eye once behind the wheel and wouldn’t this event spur their anger more? For us average Joe not only has to be saved from “violent demonstrators”, we have to be contented with extra-fueled-rage of road bullies as well!

It can’t be denied that the rallies sometimes do cause inconvenience to the public at large judging from the rallies we see on television happening in other countries. Most of us actually don’t know what the rallies’ objectives are all about to be frank but since the authorities are going to this length to squash the rallies, it just spark a curiosity in our mind that does this mean the authorities have something to hide from the public? Since the rally organizers did propose to hold the rally in a confined location, wouldn’t that be better since the authorities can keep them in check while not having to set up roadblocks that virtually put a siege to the city. But on a strategy side, it seems like a good idea to paint the organizers as public enemy number one for causing the massive traffic to the average Joe.

No matter what’s the reasoning for this nightmarish event, hopefully the criminals don’t get funny ideas of thinking that in future illegal rallies, they will be able to carry out their “operation” since police manpower are virtually used to the optimum at roadblocks, looking at motorists trying to out-maneuver one another to get into the moving single lane. This will be the biggest roadblock to nation development. God bless Malaysian motorists.

iron fist or sugar plums

Leaders are the driving force for every organizations ranging from a company to a country. A leader has the innate ability to make or break an organization. Different leaders exude different styles of leadership. Some rule with fear while others rule with compassion and diplomacy. Which leader will have the best chances of success then, one may ask.

A leader that rules with an iron fist always hammer their subordinates into submission. He will always ensure that those following him will not question his authority in any way. His favorite saying “My way or the highway” will always be ringing in his subordinates’ ears. This kind of leadership might sound harsh but it is certainly not without its merits. In certain situations, dissent sometimes can cause havoc. For instance in the military, the chain of command must be adhered to at all cost no matter what. Any conflict or effort to be diplomatic can bring about severe repercussions to the extent of loss of lives. On the other hand, the iron fist way might not be beneficial in different conditions. For instance in office environment especially in projects, dissents can sometimes breed creativity. If this is curtailed, there will not be any added value ideas within the projects. For this kind of situation, the leader that rules with sugar plums can perform a better job then.

It is therefore quite a headache to engage a suitable leader in certain conditions as the analysis done above clearly shows that in different scenarios warrant a different kind of leadership. It is therefore not right to say that certain kind of leadership is better than the others as well. All kinds of leadership do have its merits and sometimes weaknesses. The next question is why do some projects or certain situations considered as total failures then? Could it be that the wrong kind of leadership is in place there? That would be difficult to determine but one thing is for certain, a leader that fails has nothing to do with his leadership style but just the plain fact that he is incompetent as a leader.

It has been shown that all leadership styles can work. Thus the only explanation is failures could be due to the leader’s own incompetent ways. A leader can adopt a leadership style but to execute it perfectly is a different story altogether. In hindsight, there could be no such excuses of contrast leadership styles that cause failures but the incompetency nature of the leader himself that is the cause of failures. How true can this be, one may wonder?