Imlisanen Jamir
We are living in the age of the strong man.
The problem with strong man politics is that it is inherently divisive and infrequently violent. In this politics, there are few winners and many losers.
The strong man finds it difficult to consider alternative perspectives. The strong man’s hubris — a mix of charm and conceit — means he is the exclusive guardian of truth. He knows the facts. Everything else is fake news, and only he can tell the difference. This constitutes the engine, which drives him forward.
Traditionally, strongmen leaders were dictators who came to power through the barrel of the gun, through inheritance, or in a military coup. In the contemporary era, some strongmen leaders have risen to power through ‘free and fair’ elections in democracies.
This does not mean they are entitled to stay in power forever like their counterparts in authoritarian states. The powers that these leaders wield in democracies are circumscribed by law; they must subject themselves to the will of the people and exit office when they are voted out in the next election cycle or adhere to term limits enshrined in the constitution.
From what is going on in the far corners of the world to political machinations much closer, strength is being viewed as a more desired quality in our leaders. The respect for humility, compromise and empathy has seemingly disappeared from our public consciousness.
This change in, let’s say the zeitgeist, has been a concerning trend for about a decade now. Observers have predicted a change in how the people now view liberal democratic ideals.
Currently, all of these factors are apparently accelerating a demise of democracy. Despite this, democracy remains a valid and relevant governing principle and should be defended. A way to approach this is to focus on the concept of freedom. All cultures and peoples want to be free from want, to worship in their own tradition, to speak, and to be free from fear.
As a governing tool, democracies tend to foster these freedoms. Authoritarianism certainly does not and history shows this to be true. The idea of democratic peace was just that—an idea; yet the decades-old concept of the global paradigm under the rule of law is still a realistic and relevant framework where the democracies of the world can stand shoulder to shoulder and face down this dark incoming tide of authoritarianism.
Ultimately, freedom and democracy are stronger than fear and tyranny.
Comments can be sent to imlisanenjamir@gmail.com
