There should be an entrance test to enter politics and only the passed persons should be allowed to contest elections. Entrance test have become a part of modern life. It is impossible to get into a professional course or career without clearing entrance test. The concept of entrance test has come as a wonderful tool in the hands of authorities to measure the ability of candidates. The purpose of entrance test is to separate the wheat from the chaff. The compound noun “Entrance Test” has great significance in our life in order to test, to verify, to judge and to certify certain facts. Entrance examination has very importance in education system because without entrance examination a person can not check his/her talent and knowledge in a particular field. So all education institutes and even now a days school are also taking entrance Exam for admissions. But our subject matter demands discussion on whether “An Entrance Test” would be essential to contest elections. It is ridiculous to hear that politicians have to qualify an Entrance test for contesting in election. Therefore “Politics” and “Politicians”, these two very awful words have to be defined before jumping into conclusion. It is better to have a brief idea about the two words. Let’s start it from the famous quote of Khuswant Singh, “A bad government is a government elected by good people who do not vote”. To have the meaning of this quote by heart we may have the literary concept of Politics and Politicians. Politics is the art or science of influencing peoples beliefs on a civic or individual level, when there are more than two people involved. And a political party is a political organization that typically seeks to attain and maintain political power within government, usually by participating in electoral campaigns, educational outreach or protest actions. Parties often take up an expressed ideology or vision bolstered by a written platform with specific goals, forming coalition among disparate interests. But Groucho Marx, an American comedian and film and television star severely criticizes the politicians saying - “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” Modern political discourse focuses on democracy and the relationship between people and politics. It is thought of as the way we choose government officials and make decisions about public policy. So a political party’s ultimate objective is to associate with the governance of a country or area. Khuswant Singh’s statement directly contradicts to the idealistic concept of Politics and Politicians. Don’t we have the right to elect a good one or it is our compulsion to select one? What are the characteristics of a good politician? I would like to present what I believe are some requisite skills for effective governance using a customer-focused philosophy. A leader must be or possess the following attributes: 1. A visionary - a nation without a vision is bound to perish. 2. Innovative - we need new approaches to old problems. Insanity is doing the same things the same way while expecting different results. 3. A facilitator. The role of the leader is not to dictate change, but rather mobilize resources to facilitate it. The locus and direction of change must be defined by the people. 4. Spiritual – It is not related to religion. Spirituality allows one to transcend human indignities and weaknesses and focus on people for who they are. It also allows for humility, respect for others, the ability to forgive and forget, and the development of a sense of collective purpose for one’s mortal existence. 5. The ability to inspire trust in the people through integrity. 6. An excellent listener of what is said in all quadrants of the society. 7. A charismatic preacher and motivator. Must be able to sell a vision and motivate people to buy into and participate in it. 8. A willingness to challenge the status quo. 9: A willingness to consult the potential enemy. 10. A team player - the governing body of any country body is a management team and must behave that way - not as a collection of agenda-bearing individuals. 11. A willingness to foster governance through strategic partnerships with all sectors of the society in an attempt to solve problems. 12. The ability to think globally. A country is an integrated complex system with all sectors tightly inter-linked. Myopic, ministerial thinking is doomed to fail. 13. Consistent in their actions, endeavors, and principles. 14. Unafraid to seek help. The leader must believe in collective leadership. This requires excellent delegation skills. 15. A profound knowledge and understanding or access to profound knowledge and understanding of the critical issues facing the country. 17. Open to ideas and open to critique of their own ideas. 17. Willing to lead by example. 18. Willing to communicate will all sectors of the society. 19. Willing to acknowledge mistakes. 20. A strong belief in justice, fairness, and equality. This is evidently a soaring order, and generally, no one person or party possesses all of these qualities. Let us have a glance to the famous comments of eminent politicians and others about politics to have an idea what is going on in these days. 1. “Politicians are same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river” – Nikita Khrushchev, Ex. Prime Minister of U.S.S.R. 2. “Illegal aliens have always been a problem in the United States. Ask any Indian.” - Robert Orben, an American professional comedy writer. Indians are accustomed to see this type of unholy alliance of political parties. 3. “I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.” – Charles de Gaulle, a French general and statesman 4. Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other”. Oscar Ameringer, an eminent social activist in America. What idea do we have from the above comments? The lofty idea about our leaders and politices has been completely distorted. The hard reality is far away from the idealism. It forecasts a dangerous future for us. Back to our subject - Hence the reason why collective government is so important. As we can see, there is no obvious correlation between these qualities and formal education, or between these qualities and good oratory, or between them and the school of hard knocks. These skills cannot be acquired through the formal pages of a book. They are nurtured, and ultimately define the character ethic of the leader (ship). At this juncture, I would like to emphasize the need for India to focus on the “Character Ethic” and not the “Personality Ethic” of those competing for power instead of Entrance Exam. We have several flamboyant politicians with strong personalities, but vile character ethics! Let us not be blind to the truth rather has a glance to the remarkable comment of Ex. President of U.S.A., eminent politicians – “Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to first one.” – Ronald Reagon. What should we do to come out of this catastrophic disappointment and situation? What would be the alternative of this state which can be compared to a pond full of harmful insects? Here we the common people are treated as vote banks not as human beings. Most of the politicians become corrupt, too much ambitious of power. The dismally low level of education and correspondingly great disparity in economic growth makes the common people gullible to mechanism of crafty politicians who have their own axe to grind. George Bernard Shaw rightly said that – “Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many, for appointment by the corrupt few.” This is exactly what we are witnessing in India today. It seems the whole political arena is dark. Therefore the most important question is – Is there no hope? I think, yes, there is still silver lining. Abraham Linkan, the Ex. President of U.S.A makes us aware of our right by his historic statement – “Government of the people, for the people and by the people.” I believe, there are still many leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Netaji, Lalbahadur Shastri, Sardar Ballav Bhai Patel, Dr. Bidhan Ch. Roy and so many who sacrificed their lives for their country. It is our duty to asses our leader whether they are apt to govern us or not. It may that we are befuddled by some of the discussion on what some people consider the mark of a potentially good political leader. How should we assess a leader? As many scholars note, it is important to appreciate the context in which leaders govern when making any judgment. However, many existing approaches used to assess leaders that have been imported from Presidential studies do not have a practical-analytical conceptual vocabulary to do this. The 67th United States Secretary of States ― Hillary Rodham Clinton clearly makes the difference between a politician and a statesman by saying, “The difference between a politician and a statesman is that a politician thinks about the next election while the statesman thinks about the next generation” It is not possible to asses the criteria as mentioned above through Entrance test. Still each politician has to be evaluated on their past achievements vis a vis the criteria listed above. I know it is hard to put aside party affiliations in making a leadership assessment, but for the sake of the country, do not tell us to vote your candidate, and then ask us to hope that they will develop these skills afterwards. If I may be allowed to twist an old cliché, you may not be able to teach old dog new tricks
Posted on: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 09:58:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015