We might think that this is a joke but political leaders need to understand public sentiments. Here is the thing, if many more of them do, then there will not be such a crisis in governance as it is known today. I recall reading about one of the great leaders of this world who has been around for some time. He was a former president of the United States – the 32nd President: Franklin D. Roosevelt. In his inaugural speech, he was noted as saying this, “ the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” For many, there is a kind of fear that transcends logic. But if a political leader is to understand himself, he can understand public sentiments and use these to his/her benefit.
So, one of the qualities of a great leader is that if he doesn’t have the understanding, he must be brought to an appreciation of the political and economic climate or terrain over which he has campaigned. The example of President Franklin Roosevelt serves to remind us as to how he “might have wanted to bring the United States into World War Two earlier than he eventually did.” So a great leader’s views on a particular issue may not be the same as members of his ministerial staff at that particular time. In the 1940 election President Roosevelt did make this promise to American parents concerning their boys: “your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.” The objective was to retain the White House and to embrace the storm that was to come his way.
What promises are being currently made to our people? Or is it necessary for our political leaders in this country to make promises and if so, can they keep those promises? What is it about the political leadership of this country? What about the leaders who must curb their own selfish ambitions and views on a particular issue in order to maintain the reigns of Parliament? What is it that they must give up and shelve for a later date and time? How should they respond to the public on a particular matter?
A political leader must be a realist and one who would know how to turn the tide of public sentiments to his greatest advantage. Let us suppose that a humanitarian ordered a million dollars worth of clothing to fit the nation’s children. Public sentiment will be high of course. Parents will shower praises on this humanitarian of course. Now, it is not for the political leadership of the day to act in a confrontational manner and publicly embarrass the humanitarian for doing what that individual deemed best in a given time. What if such gifts are given at a time when it is needed most? What if the political leadership is unable or unwilling to offer the same or similar humanitarian efforts to constituents that are in great need? What if there is a disconnect in terms of how constituents are treated especially if there has been a man-made or natural disaster? What sentiments are expressed by those disadvantaged constituents? How should political leadership respond? Should they engage in public confrontational tactics to create a wrong impression of the humanitarian where none exists?
Political leadership has to appreciate the precise moment and time when it is possible to ‘swing the tide’, to use ‘public sentiments to its advantage’ or to ‘change public sentiment’ of a particular phenomenon towards a more positive outcome in the main. Words like, “ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, I wish to thank the humanitarian for his kind gesture today to all of us. I promise you that at this time, we must continue to accept all the gifts we are able to receive as your children, our nation’s children are in need. These gifts will never be forgotten by us here in the receiving state.”
Too often political leaders tend to lose focus and begin to think that constituents are their personal property or at best, that these same constituents who are in need owe their very existence to them (in leadership position). This notion of political leadership is erroneous at best.
Returning to the aforementioned scenario of the clothing donated by the humanitarian, at best, there is nothing wrong with the gifts of clothing. There was nothing alien or out of order with the humanitarian’s gift giving.
Politics as much as we may wish to ignore this thought, has become a ‘war’ for many. In small island developing states like St. Vincent and the Grenadines where resources are limited and limiting, the ‘fight’ for turf and the equally enabling fight to keep the specified territory is an ongoing political war. This is sad and our people must understand this – we cannot be bought by politicians. I am happy to report that many families are being brought to this realization on a daily basis. The man who is currently sleeping under the makeshift bed in the nearby village had this to say, “only the strongest survive in this small war torn “village! I am barely surviving in this place.”
Another President – Abraham Lincoln – the 16th President of the USA – became known as a supreme war leader. Others today call themselves World Boss. Are they really World Boss or was that some sort of a sick joke? Who are these people who walk around in the village and shout, “when I walk, the rest of you should tremble?” To whom do they owe their allegiance? Is it the devil that told them that they are World Bosses? I have heard the term being used by several political leaders and I am yet to see what exactly is a World Boss. Do they really understand the term? Like President Abraham Lincoln with his emphasis on his ‘almost preternatural sense of what the Union would be able to accept politically’, so too our politically astute leaders ought to have such knowledge of all things political and then, some.
In borrowing the term, ‘preternatural’, and not an overemphasis, the political leadership of this country ought to have an almost ‘preternatural sense’ of when it would accept public sentiments; of what it could ask for and what it simply could not at any particular time; and its willingness to ride political storms and to do necessary deals and sack underperforming or disloyal members of its own particular party. Public sentiments are quite useful and it is time that some political leaders listen, heed and hear the wailing of the widows! Political leadership should be able to employ those possessed with oratory qualities that will make itself heard since that will make them (political leaders) second to none when it comes to political war leaders in the Vincentian “pantheon”.
The call is now being made for political leadership in this country to rise to the many challenges (again) and take the ‘bull by the horn’. When political leaders understand public sentiments they are able to ‘turn the tide’ in their favor again and again. If political leaders conduct surveys among our nation’s youths and those who sit behind closed doors (and many can be reached), they will get positive insights into how people are thinking realistically. Political leaders must continue to utilize direct contact with their constituents. Don’t ignore the people until months and days before election day is called. Political leaders must continue to draw on information from the traditional news media in order to garner public opinion and understand the needs of the people who are in the know.
Social media cues and polls are gaining some grounds and in some instances it is quite useful. Let us continue to press towards a mark of such high calling.
We can’t forget that any conceptualization of what constitutes democracy implies that what elected representatives decide, at least to some extent, should match what the people want in the first place. So understanding of public sentiments are far more important that what others may think or desire. Until next time, remember, together we will.
