As you can tell, the leader taking ‘tough decisions’, hiding behind layers of security, endangers everyone, but himself, no?
Vladimir Putin is a leader who takes ‘tough decisions’ but hides behind layers of security cover, as opposed to his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy (R) who stayed put with the soldiers. Pic/AFP
In the 2015 Ukrainian TV show, Servant of the People (available on YouTube), the lead character Vasiliy, who teaches history in high school, breaks into a rant, before an election—firstly about how people think maths is great, but history is shit.
ADVERTISEMENT
This is why, Vasiliy says, we repeat history. There is a grain of truth there, when you consider how we might be among the first generation of global leaders with no practical experience of WWII; likewise the Partition in India, for that matter.
The personally lived horrors of both would’ve restrained politicians who took on leadership positions in the decades right thereafter. No such frightening memories anymore, apparently. Surely the citizens must know better?
But Vasiliy’s rant is more specifically about how voters repeatedly elect the same kinda political leaders—“all they know is divide (people), and multiply their wealth.” A fellow casually recording this rant on the phone posts it online.
It goes viral. So much so that lay Ukrainians decide to crowd-fund history teacher Vasiliy’s nomination for national elections. Literally, overnight, Vasiliy, played by actor Volodymyr Zelenskyy, becomes the President of Ukraine.
In a pop-culture meta moment with no parallels in history, this TV show itself—mainly about the comical pageantry of being ‘presidential’; also that rant video within—convinced people so much that they, in fact, elected producer-actor Zelenskyy, 41, with no political experience, as the actual President of Ukraine in 2019.
When this happened, I remember friends laughing about how a stand-up comedian (top artiste, in my books), had become head of state in Ukraine. As against what sort of leader, you may ask.
The serious, ‘strongman leader’, I guess? That millions across geographies seem to prefer? The sorts usually 70 and plus—with fragile male egos to match potential physique—a snarl on their face, perennially trying to look like they’re in command, incessantly roaring to pose as the ‘strongman’?
Except, a modern government’s job would be to ensure an equitable and just implementation/distribution of law and opportunities. That future generations could outsource to Artificial Intelligence—devoid of ‘geostrategic’ jargon, blind to bigotry—and perhaps realise better results.
Strongmen leaders take ‘tough decisions’, apparently. Only that they hide behind layers after layers of security cover; fully bullet-proof. Who are these ‘tough calls’ directed against anyway?
By their actions, and silence sometimes, they expose in particular the young on the streets, putting their future/lives at stake, to injure, kill, or get killed (often in the strongman’s name). Endangering unsuspecting citizens overall, as if everything was some sorta video game; people merely collateral damage.
Vladimir Putin, 69-plus, ex-KGB, and the Ukrainian former stand-up comedian Zelenskyy’s Russian counterpart, would qualify as ‘strongman’ leader. As do several across the globe. It’s a thing—this fascination for men with God complex. Some of whom don’t look/talk thus, which is marginally better.
For, that’s a sign of civilization anyway, that you at least pretend to do the right thing, rather than scarily claim to be unhinged altogether. Empathy is all one may look for in a leader—be that the office boss, or the school teacher/principal. Other skills can presumably be learnt.
As Jon Ronson’s journalistically proves in his book, The Psychopath Test, the opposite is the case. More top leaders than you’d imagine, across the spectrum, actually pass the psychopath’s test; starting with an inherent absence of empathy, of course.
Maybe, just maybe, from this complete lack of empathy—mistaking meanness for honesty; expressing hate in bulk as bravery—emerge people who are plainly evil? Unsure.
Or as the African proverb puts it mildly: “The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth.” Who knows, we’re mentally trained to ascribe motives to all crimes; and an insatiable greed for unbridled power to certain leaders.
Some could place nuclear weapons on high-alert or stand-by, as Putin did. As he went to war against Ukraine—except that he didn’t. He sat home. Like all leaders do.
Wars are inevitably about feisty old men talking, and unrelated young men dying, isn’t it? All Ukrainian men between 18 and 60 have been forced to stay within the country since—to fire rifles handed to them, hit the road, learn to make Molotov cocktails, and fight their Russian ‘cousins’.
It’s definitely not what they dreamt of—a better professional/personal/love life is what might have constituted their reverie, now that they had even survived the goddamn virus.
It’s time to survive humans. This is the big news from Central Europe. Similar episodes from North Africa or the Middle East aren’t as much. The entire Afghan government, under the protection of Americans, fled the very second the Taliban took control of Kabul.
Of course, situations are different—stand-up comic Prez Zelenskyy, a rare head of state, at least pretended to be in the war, stayed put with his helmet on, shoulder to shoulder with his compatriots-turned-soldiers, against Putin’s army.
The singular fear is that among everything we’ve come to accept as the ‘new normal’, this isn’t yet another. Or will it portend the end of a fascination for delusional ‘strong-men leaders’—examining the price of their power. No clue. Sorry for this rant though—can’t help, no?
Mayank Shekhar attempts to make sense of mass culture. He tweets @mayankw14
Send your feedback to mailbag@mid-day.com
The views expressed in this column are the individual’s and don’t represent those of the paper.
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
