The Must Vote in 2006: A Blueprint for Voters

Choosing competent leaders has never been a strong attribute for us Guyanese. We have the best of intentions, yet something always seems to obstruct our view of the most qualified candidates until it's too late. We also have a bad habit of getting caught up in the hype of the moment every time a politician plays the race card. It's all such a blur sometimes and one can barely determine whether we are being lethargic or just hoodwinked. Either way, no one is to blame but us.

Just for fun, shall we do a test? Which leader would you choose: Machiavelli with his heavy hand and harsh words for those whom he leads? Or Plato's Philosopher King who seeks knowledge and rules with paternalistic concern over his subjects? The most obvious answer would be Plato's version of a kindly King, of course. However, if that was indeed your answer, you have chosen the wrong one.

Machiavelli is always the wrong choice for understandable reasons. Mankind has long outgrown its desire to be led by men who have nothing but their own interests at heart, and have little more than contempt and disgust for the rest of us peons who have historically laboured to the bone to quench the insatiable thirst for power and money in such leaders.

Yet, there are some who still follow the ideology of Machiavelli, though they often mask their evil intentions until they are well within the reach of obtaining their dastardly goals of power and wealth.

However, if they are truly a proper student of Machiavelli, they offer no explanation or apology for their cruel and haughty ways, since they feel they are more than entitled to the degree of adoration and fear they expect from others. Consequently, this means the humiliation and exploitation of anyone within ten feet of the wanna-be-Machiavellian when deep-seated insecurity requires the subjugation of another human being.

However, it is fairly easy to spot such a person, since they typically wear their narcissism as a badge of honour. These treacherous “leaders” tout their egocentrism as self-confidence and are generally oblivious to the spectacle they make of themselves in the process. If one is astute enough to pick up on the telltale signs of a Machiavellian, common sense alone steers us far from the destructive hands of such tyranny and would forbid us from ever casting one single vote in favour of such leadership.

Our other choice of a benevolent King who is charitable and wise, stands in sharp contrast to Machiavelli. Plato, himself a legendary philosopher, envisioned a utopian society under such a reign. How could the people desire anything more than a generous ruler? However, Plato neglected to acknowledge the one aspect of human nature that has never been quelled – the need for freedom.

Though a warm Philosopher King is most certainly more desirable than the harsh and cold Machiavelli, the human drive for freedom is stronger than any other force on the planet. So strong is this drive that fathers have sacrificed their own lives so their children could live in freedom. Men and women alike have taken up arms to fight against a foe who would rob them of their freedom. Therefore, since the title “King” implies the subjection of others, thereby requiring the recognition of the interests of one single man over the interests of the people as a whole, Plato's assertion on this issue is myopic.

Plato's short sighted position barred him from the most advantageous answer to his query of which type of ruler would be the best for the people. His approach was too simple in that it only presented an either/or solution, much like the one presented to you at the start of this column. However, there is at least one more answer availing itself upon those who seek democracy today – the right answer, the most desirable answer is neither. Neither Machiavelli nor the Philosopher King are righteous rulers since the people do not want to be ruled.

Having established this much, it is now necessary to remind the people of Guyana of one very important point – if the people do not choose the leader, they will likely end up with one of the rulers we have discussed, both of which are less than desirable. In fact, the potential outcome is a myriad of such rulers from one extreme to the other and everything in between.

With such an outcome, it is quite clear that there will be no room for a democratic leader for the people, but instead a mix of sovereigns who have either clawed their way to the top by ridding themselves of competition through any means necessary, or by slyly filing their way past the deserving leaders with the nod of head from a nepotistic royal. Either way, the people and their freedom are at grave risk.

In Guyana , we are complacent with our vote and apathetic concerning our freedom. We are docile in regards to politics to the point that our very independence is at risk.

We have created a situation ripe for a Machiavelli or Philosopher King. Indeed, some even reminisce of our monarchical days and long for the return of a benevolent King to take charge of the country and restore its former glory. This is a sad condition - that we would rather relinquish our independence than act upon our responsibilities as informed voters of a free and democratic country. Heaven forbid!

What are the guidelines by which the people should consider any leader worthy of a vote? Such guidelines differ from person to person, though there are some mainstays, a blueprint, if you will, that almost every well-informed voter employs.

Here is a set of leadership qualities to consider when deciding who will get your vote:

• Competency is a must in leadership
  
  Everyone makes mistakes, but when it comes to running a nation, it is vital to choose those who have demonstrated a clear ability to get the job done. Mistakes in government can have a long-standing impact on thousands of people. Guyana simply cannot afford any more of these kinds of mistakes.
  
• Diplomacy is standard practice
  
  Choose only leaders who are capable of being diplomatic and willing to work with others to accomplish the greatest good for all interested parties. There will be times when occasional issues deserve an uncompromising stance, but 99 percent of being a good leader is knowing how to be diplomatic.
  
• A good leader has proven himself/herself in the community
  
  Whether it is through business, academia or community service - a good leader has a proven track record for being trustworthy and accessible. One good rule of thumb is to dismiss all consideration regarding any politician caught in a compromising position. Guyana should demand only those with the highest integrity to lead our country.
  
• A good leader knows he is a servant of the people
  
  A good way to weed out the Machiavellians is to listen to their speeches. If they talk more about themselves than about the people they intend to serve, this is a sure way to gauge where their interests will lie once in office. Humility is a quality often in want in politicians, but good leaders have it in abundance.
  
• A good leader knows where to place his alliance
  
  If a leader is seeking re-election, check his/her voting record to see if party lines were more important than the best interests of the people. Never vote for those who are puppets of back room politicians.

You will also find your own important issues to add to this list as you carefully weigh the decision of who gets your vote. Please take note of one significant factor missing in the listed qualities of a good leader – race. Race is not, nor has it ever been, a determining factor for good leadership. In fact, I would go so far as to say that any leader who makes such a claim is not only a bad leader, but also a despot. Guyana, for heaven's sake, no – for your children's sake, choose your conscience over your race when electing a leader!

It is vital to the preservation of our country and our independence that we vote. By opening the door to political apathy and blind racism, we have also opened the door to Machiavellians. Your vote, and mine, can slam that door shut forever. Will you refuse power-hungry rulers their claim on your independence? How far will you go to protect your freedom?

All the way to the voting booth with your conscience intact? Fair Guyana, your Guyana, awaits your reply.