Mass support is essential for a political leader’s productivity

The methods, paradigms or approach used to solve a country’s problem can be different but all workable and successful if they follow a realistic, affordable and moral pattern.
Nelson Mandela is still an icon
Nelson Mandela is still an icon

The methods, paradigms or approach used to solve a country’s problem can be different but all workable and successful if they follow a realistic, affordable and moral pattern.

Different countries have tried out the available paradigms of development. Europe has largely depended on Capitalism and Laissez-faire whereas the Asian Tigers embarked on an acute Socialism revolution that has made them more developed than other countries that they were on the same levels with.

The unifying factor for all the different paradigms which have been successful is mass support for leaders. When a leader picks a strategy of how a country should slowly but surely develop its success can be sabotaged by sheer panic by the leader’s anticipation of mass reaction.

Most of the time, people forget that a leader is the most essential to the aspectual development of a state.

They are too quick to judge the leaders, they are always suspicious of the laid out projects. Sometimes even without enough research, they stage destructive rebellions whose costs may or may not outweigh the ones they were trying to demonstrate against.

We’ve seen or heard instances where mass demonstrations turn uglier than the supposed cause. We have to realize that we are all diverse in our thoughts and way of life. But we certainly can’t all be leaders.

The leaders are meant to bring us together, to help us achieve a common good which would otherwise have been impossible to get.

A free market economy or Nyerere’s Ujaama village, whichever it might be, as long as it is supported by the masses, it can’t be quenched even by the external power’s influence.

Cuba for instance, despite America’s endeavours to make it a Capitalist state, the people rallied behind Fidel Castro and his ideas of Socialism and they managed to develop. This means that it’s not all about the paradigm, but how it is implemented and people’s acceptability towards it. 

When leaders detect a far fetched support, they tend to become a nuisance. They act not for the good of the country but just so as to prove a point or to appease voters.

This makes them quite irrational, dictatorial and unresponsive to advice thus worsening the state of underdevelopment when they forcefully implement their ideas. This is by no means unjustifiable since we expect leaders to always act not for themselves but for the country.

However, we have to understand that they are people; women and men just like us and are capable of mishandling power when under pressure.

The reason why we vote people into power is so that they can serve us. We must learn to give them time to deliver so that if they fail, it’s them to blame and not our anger, wrong assumption or prejudice.

There is the other factor when the seemingly minority having the louder voice. Usually when some people are not content with the polling results of a presidential race, they do not do it the American way of “God bless America ” regardless of the outcome.

They instead embark on a smear campaign, mudslinging the elected president, ridiculing his proposed plans and even calling rallies to get followers against him.

This kind of opposition is one that is characterized by most opposition parties in Africa. They don’t serve as alternatives for unworkable principles but as blockages for whatever principle, good or bad from the current leaders.

When they get some money from the opposing Western nations, they in the long run attain power and instead of trying their best to develop the nation, they embark on deconstructing the former leader’s implementations and employ an appeasement policy of rewarding first those who helped them to achieve power.

Shortly after, they are tied to the aid they received from the West and before they realize it, they can’t bring about meaningful development because they are indebted to the wasteful and unrealistic programmes that the donors tied to the aid.

The cycle keeps on and on till everyone is fed up and in too deep.The positives for deliberately supporting the leaders regardless of our political affiliations and beliefs are numerous.

Leaders working under pressure bring little or no value at all. If we support our leaders, they will make less mistakes and will have a belief in the back of their minds that the people are supporting them and ready to congratulate them when they implement a plan that will lead to massive development.

This will also make it easy for them to perform in the faith that they will win another election rather than embarking on a filthy form of corruption meant to make them rich before they are ridden out of power.

Support will make the leaders enthusiastic about their work and will also increase their confidence.

The arrogance that the leaders sometimes portray is because they notice that the people they are working for are not appreciative. It isn’t true that all leaders are born leaders.

Some are simply elected because they are good orators whereas others are good at guerrilla warfare and not necessarily good at implementing winning formulas. When they are shown support, they are ready to listen to their advisers and constructive criticism, which is a paved way to development.

Lastly, a tip to our political leaders; a good leader is one who functions in a purposeful manner in times of uncertainty.

Crises, emotions and big headed oppositions come up always. A good leader is one who doesn’t get surprised when they do, but instead keeps a cool head and progresses towards his manageable goal of development.
 
Ivan Mugisha R
 
Kampala Uganda