World politics is undergoing a reshape in the kind of leaders that people (or representatives) of leading states and sovereigns are electing these days. Reshape, not just in variety of opinions and mandates but also a reshaped version of how did a leader come across or look, traditionally.
Leaders have often been equated with a series of abilities, most of which are people-related. Some leaders have the advantage of wordplay, and their oration and alacrity in speech wins hearts. Others have sharp minds for policies and mandates while few choose ignition of closeted malice as a crutch for lameness in wisdom.
So, what is driving this reshape and how will these leaders perform?
While people need change, suffrage comes with responsibilities, and turns out that these younger, inexperienced, sometimes, orange-haired champions of (selling-the-idea-of) change have succeeded in making an impression. But how well can they perform as true people leaders with panache for policies? While that is yet to be seen for Johnson until English get their choice of Brexit, but for reference purposes we can talk about Trump.
To a liberal few, Trump’s tenure may still feel like a horror movie that skipped post production editing. But for the non-American bourgeois Trump has been the cornerstone of the vulnerabilities of the western world. The partisan politics that has seen recent success is something alike lurking greys underneath a sheath of beautiful facade of the lustrous American dream. The conservative view point has been equally alienated because believing in something does not translate into raising guns against the ones across that belief. Therefore, Trump’s divisive politics has only inspired the ones bearing malice. Liberals are appalled, and conservatives continue to hope.
In this mayhem of real-life world political drama, what drives Trump?
Dostoevsky in his Crime and Punishment told us that to sentence a man is to take away his hope, and there is nothing more cruel than taking away hope. Hope binds one to purpose and positivity, and absence of it creates a lacuna that is then filled with indifference leading to actions that can be construed as lying outside of societal premise of the good.
A bad performer or an ‘outsider’ should always be treated with immediate gratification of his actions so habits can be formed early. A delayed punishment simulates a sentence with no action. It generates malice and sucks away hope. In this state of non-hope the performer starts to isolate their actions towards, what they believe is necessary retaliation. This is unhealthy for everyone involved.
To improve performance we should keep building our hope-capital, and help others do the same by way of providing quick and data-based feedback. This saves time and energy of the system that can then choose between either repair or change.
While Trump may need more self-awareness to seek honest feedback, how is your hope-capital?