A Leader or A Representative?

It is a world of uncertainities. Just after a distant country decided to leave a distant union which it had joined on its terms because of the financial and military clout it enjoys, it is not known anymore where the future of world's history lies. Many speculating the rise of "parochial" and "right wing forces" will lead to de-globalization. Some commentators questioning the practice of democracy for not choosing the correct path. The "nationalism" victories across Asia (of Japan and India), the fast paced rise of "protectionist" politics in Europe and support of such "isolationism" in the beacon and citadel of world's free market-US lacks a clear visible explanation. Though it is widely acknowledged politics is the art of "demagoguery" in however subtle form it could be , the drivers of politics continue to be pure simple economics. No one likes to lose a job now,in the hope of leaders promising future prosperity.In this context, it is worth recalling what a Luxembourg leader said when asked about Euro crisis, he remarked "we all know what to do, but what we dont know is how do we get re-elected after that! " . It is this stunning deficiency of creative leadership that seems to have brought about this confounding situation. 

"we all know what to do, but what we dont know is how do we get re-elected after that! " 

Referenda are very rare event in modern democratic structure. It should be a rare event. In very layman terms, democracy is people electing their representatives to govern them since they are too busy to devote time to be actively involved in matters of national importance. the representatives so chosen have a dual role to play. On one hand they represent the will of people in law making-by contributing the views of their constituents and on the other simultaneously moulding and directing public opinions therefore performing the functions of a people' s leader. This dichotomy is ever present in a democracy. If the representative is not able to mould or direct she/he could be at the receiving end in elections and lose power. On the other hand representing views of "public will" in toto might sometimes be very dangerous like in the case of anti-immigration. It is here that a representative's job becomes crucial. The balancing of interests, the use of carrot and stick among constituents and of hope and results are prudent instruments that needs to be wielded to keep the flock intact. Not hurting the core interests yet not yielding so much that interests acquire virulent forms. A classic example of this virulent and often venomous turn of demands is found in Indian freedom struggle. In the course of it, the Muslim league leaders were worried about the loss of their power and prestige in the event British left the shores. They slowly demanded for safeguarding of their rights inside the constitutional framework of India. The demand for reservation of seats and separate electorate were made in this context. To perhaps even to their astonishment, these demands were granted by the government in quick time to keep the communal flame burning and not objected to by Congress in the hope that this would quieten the communal temper and be the proof that congress is a truly secular body accommodating all interests of the society. With most of their demands having been conceded and left with nothing to agitate for, the leaders particularly Jinnah took it to the only next orbit available-the demand for a separate nation. For Jinnah to stay relevant in politics he was forced to take the plunge into the rabid communalism that appealed to a section of people but it is such a subject that could easily be scaled up to vast majority. As Bipin Chandra notes, his transformation from secular nationalist to a communalist was complete. And thus began the bloody saga of separation and partition, the fruits of which we still suffer. That ,of course, is for another day, but the larger point is here the tackling of interests by their representatives. If for every thing a referendum is called for then what would be the use of representatives. The chosen ones need to understand this and desist from falling into that vicious circle. When the incumbents fail to gauge this and adopt an "extreme liberalism", the field is left open for reactionary elements to occupy. This is what is being witnessed in politics of world making communism look like it is the only hope. 

If in part, reason being chosen ones are incompetent as glimpsed above on the other hand these effects are in part, responses to that great event called "global financial meltdown" in the latter half of last decade. The world reeling under recession , less jobs, less consumption, increasing reliance on China for manufacturing, thus undermining industries domestically, all these factors took time to manifest and still is in various forms. With this there is increasing migration to the perceived well of countries with sound "fundamentals". Visible migration causing perception that a native's job is not safe anymore or infact it is stolen from him and given to a migrant. This is a perception. And politics is all about perception. And that perception is used by "extremists" to propound the more vitriol and acerbic to capture on this sentiment. Were the situation to have been comfortable and stable with economy providing jobs to majority, could such thoughts gather steam? History tells us about the events leading into second world war. The trigger having been the collapse of trade and economy through the "Great Depression" in 1929, from there it took a mere six years for a massive war to begin. Since then, after having learnt about the horrific war in great details, populations were afraid to get into another. That is where the object of cold war came in. Statecraft was as its best. Both US and USSR knew any miscalculation could lead to a catastrophe. In public to satisfy their constituents they whipped the "anti" flavour but in diplomacy they played staid. UN could have been violated with impunity by both parties but continued to be held it in stead. And soon one of them folded up,slipping the world into deadlier forms of radicalism. It is to be acknowledged in present times that history being repeated is a persistent possibility.But then it is not democracy that needs to be questioned, it is the quality of representatives that need to be. All said about morality, the art of governance does not adhere to forms of morality of binary. Even Gandhi, the apostle of non violence and authority on morals, when questioned about the possibility of violence in an agitation replied that "it could be", when questioned about "fair compensation to landowners, whose lands were being taken and redistributed", replied" it is impossible to compensate", pointing to the sophistication of art of politics that he possessed which could serve well to elected representatives and leaders everywhere in present times.