The views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Breaking Belize News.
What Really Qualifies a Person to Lead?
Nuri Muhammad: Belize is again in election season. Conventions are being held, candidates are presenting themselves, supporters are organizing, and men and women are asking us to choose them for leadership.
That is the democratic process. A candidate must step forward and persuade people that he or she is capable of serving.
But there is an important question we do not ask often enough:
Does wanting to be a leader qualify a person to lead?
There is an old idea, found across religious teaching, philosophy and political history, that the person best suited for power may actually be the person least hungry for it.
I call this person the reluctant leader.
Reluctant does not mean weak, timid or indecisive. It means the person understands that leadership is not a prize. It is a responsibility.
A Seismic Shift in Leadership
Something has changed in our understanding of leadership.
The language of an earlier generation of Belizean leaders tells us much about what motivated them.
George Price and his generation spoke about “serving the people.” Philip Goldson left us that unforgettable warning:
“The time to save your country is before you lose it.”
Those words reveal a particular understanding of leadership.
These men and women were involved in something larger than themselves. There was colonialism to overcome, a nation to build, independence to achieve, democracy to protect and a Belizean identity to establish.
Politics was connected to a cause.
You may have disagreed with Price. You may have disagreed with Goldson. Indeed, they disagreed profoundly with each other. But their politics represented competing ideas about what was best for Belize.
That is very different from entering politics primarily because politics appears to offer a pathway to personal advancement, contracts, connections, wealth, status and power.
There has been a seismic shift when the question changes from:
“What can I do for my country?”
to:
“What can political office do for me?”
That is where the idea of the reluctant leader becomes important.
The reluctant leader may want to accomplish something desperately, but he does not desperately need the position.
His cause is bigger than his title.
Leadership and the Hunger for Power
More than two thousand years ago, Plato warned about people who seek power for honor, wealth and status. His better ruler was the person who accepted the responsibility of governing because leaving government to worse people would be dangerous.
George Washington became another symbol of this tradition when, after leading the American Revolution, he surrendered his military command rather than converting military popularity into permanent personal power.
Africa also gives us examples. Jerry Rawlings of Ghana initially handed authority to an elected civilian government after taking power in 1979, although he later returned through another coup. Sudan’s Abdel Rahman Swar al-Dahab took charge during the overthrow of President Nimeiry, promised a transition, held elections and surrendered power to a civilian government the following year.
Che Guevara represents another dimension of the reluctant leader. He was not a man attracted to luxury, wealth or comfortable political office. He left positions of considerable authority in Cuba and returned to the hardships and dangers of revolutionary struggle.
The Prophet Muhammad also warned against giving authority to people who were excessively ambitious for it. The principle was simple: leadership is a trust, not something to be coveted.
These examples come from different civilizations, religions and political traditions, but they raise the same question:
What does power do to the person who possesses it?
Can he surrender it? Can he accept that his time has passed? Can he live without the title? Can he return to being an ordinary citizen?
Modern democracy, of course, requires candidates. There is nothing inherently wrong with someone saying:
“I am prepared to serve.”
But there is a great difference between saying I am prepared to serve and saying:
“I must have this position.”
That difference is character.
What was the candidate doing for people before election season?
Can he work without a title? Can she accept defeat? Can he recognize when someone else is better qualified? Can she surround herself with intelligent people who will challenge her? Can he distinguish public money from personal privilege?
And most important:
Can they walk away from power?
These questions may tell us more about leadership than speeches, motorcades, billboards and crowds.
We have developed a political culture in which candidates must advertise themselves aggressively. Consequently, we sometimes confuse visibility with ability, confidence with competence, popularity with character and ambition with leadership.
They are not the same.
The loudest person is not necessarily the wisest. The richest candidate is not necessarily the most capable. The person who promises the most may understand government the least.
And the person who wants the position most desperately may be the person we should examine most carefully.
Perhaps during this election season, we should stop asking only:
“Who wants to lead us?”
and begin asking:
“Who among them is actually qualified to lead us?”
A good leader builds institutions stronger than himself. A good leader develops other leaders. A good leader knows that the country, party or constituency does not belong to him. And a good leader knows when to stand in front—and when someone better qualified should stand there instead. Leadership is not a crown. It is not a reward for winning a convention. It is not ownership of a constituency.
Leadership is a trust temporarily placed in someone’s hands by the people.
Our earlier Belizean leaders spoke the language of cause, country and service. Perhaps we need to recover some of that spirit. Because ultimately the question is not simply:
Does Belize need this leader?
There is another question we should have the courage to ask:
Does the leader need Belize—or does the leader need the position?
The dangerous leader needs the office.
The reluctant leader accepts the office because the work needs to be done.
The post The Reluctant Leader appeared first on Belize News and Opinion on www.breakingbelizenews.com.
The views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Breaking Belize News. What Really Qualifies a Person to Lead? Nuri Muhammad: Belize is again in election season. Conventions are being held, candidates are presenting themselves, supporters are organizing, and men and women are asking us to choose them
The post The Reluctant Leader appeared first on Belize News and Opinion on www.breakingbelizenews.com.
