The question it raises is: why would anyone want to be president, or more generally, who in their right mind would seek political office? The way our elected officials behave and are treated seems horrible! Who would willingly subject themselves to that?
They are constantly seeking reelection. All politicians must raise money, lots and lots of money. Politicians and their families are under the most unforgiving microscope and have no real privacy of any kind.
It might all be worth it if they could make a real difference in people’s lives – and they can. Sometimes. Our political system has always been slow and labor-intensive. One could argue that is a feature, not a bug. However, recently, good legislation seems less important than partisan power. Making a difference in people’s lives is secondary to ideology, grandstanding, and poll points.
Why would any reasonable and bright person want to play this game, especially when there are so many other ways to do real good? The answer "to save us from the evil politicians" smacks of savior syndrome.
Maybe those we really need to serve in government have the reaction: there is no way I would want to do that! The converse may also be true. Has our hyper-partisan political landscape attracted power and attention seekers who thrive on conflict?
Who wants to debate facts? Who wants to get mired in cults of personality? Who would choose to be insulted and berated? Who wants to collect sound bites and headlines in order to spin public opinion? Being a public servant sounds like submitting oneself to abuse!
This may at least partially explain why we have a never-ending string of politicians who abuse their power. Lord Acton’s statement applies to more than absolute power. Power can be addictive and inebriating. It can trick a person into believing their actions are always justifiable and that consequences are only for the powerless.
Of course, there are public servants who are dismayed about the state of our political landscape and wield their power responsibly and reasonably. Thus the question becomes, how do we encourage more people like them and fewer Macbeths! I don’t have a good answer.
Changing the rules of the political game has been a windmill at which many idealistic Don Quixotes have tilted. The system is so complex and intricate, and the stakeholders are so invested and entrenched, that the task seems impossible. It might be.
Campaign finance reform might be a starting point. It is difficult to ignore the interests of big donors when your reelection campaign depends on them. Having more money to spend on ads is required to run for office. Wealthier individuals and those who raise more money have a greater chance of winning. And the relationship between power and wealth is far from healthy.
What are the characteristics that we would like in our elected officials? Honesty, integrity, intelligence, empathy, thoughtfulness, collaboration, perceptiveness, and being a good listener are traits that would be beneficial. We want people with specific knowledge and skills. We want responsive communicators who have experience solving problems like ours and are experts in making the system function well. Is that what we see in congress now?
We have a few, but they are being shouted down by those who, if we judge their motives from their actions, place the power of their party before the needs of our country; who worry more about how to gain an advantage over their opponents than solving the nation’s problems. Would you hire these people if they applied for a job at your workplace!
We all know what it is like to have a destructive co-worker. I hope few of us have worked at places where we felt the culture was toxic. While there are some people who thrive in a hyper-competitive, cutthroat, and self-serving atmosphere, most of us would prefer a workplace that is collaborative, positive, and supportive. Remember those ball hogs who ignored the rest of the squad? Most of us want to be part of an interdependent team – and deplore the player who sees the rest of us simply as means to their individual success.
Good organizations have systems to encourage and train upcoming leaders. Businesses work hard to identify and nurture those who are likely to make their future successful. Imagine a workplace that promoted those who were the loudest, most aggressive, and self-promoting – not those who brought in business, helped the company thrive, or were good at building successful teams. Other than government, where do we reward traits that would make a person a pariah?
Why do people vote for power-hungry want-to-be dictators who produce nothing more than sound, static, and struggle? For now, let’s consider how we can support the positive leaders and encourage negative ones to try something more suited to their temperaments, like reality television, perhaps.
No comments:
Post a Comment