Still, strength
Still, strength
Updated 10:41pm (Mla time) Oct 19, 2004
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the October 20, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
THE HERITAGE Foundation's assessment of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as the weakest leader in Asia Pacific raises some interesting questions about the nature of weakness and strength.
Heritage itself is confused about the concepts. Decades ago, it found Ferdinand Marcos a strong leader, at least when he did not strike the occasional pose of opposing the United States for local nationalist consumption. In fact, Marcos was a weak leader, notwithstanding that he ruled with an iron fist. The weakness did not lie in that his rule was being challenged from inside, by restive military officers, and outside, by the horde howling at the gates. Nor did it lie in that his kidneys were rotting away from lupus. It lay in the very nature of his rule. Dictatorial rule does not a strong leader make. But I'm getting ahead of my story.
President Arroyo herself uses the concept of a "strong republic." Much of it, of course, is just spin, which is the one thing she excels in. She came to Malacañang gratuitously, through the labors of others, and her claim to the throne being tenuous, she needed to project strength and authority. She surrounded herself with the accouterment of them. Not least rhetorically, "strong republic" being a chief phrase.
All this forces us to ask: What are the true properties of strength? What makes for a strong leader?
It helps to see what it is by seeing what it is not.
Strength is not stubbornness or pursuing things with a one-track mind. Strength is not refusing to apologize to a whistle-blower you falsely accuse of being part of the crime she has blown, and compounding the problem by ordering your police chief to make good your mistake. I remember writing several angry columns at the incredible suggestion of President Arroyo's aides that for her to apologize to Acsa Ramirez would be to show weakness and compromise national security. To this day, she hasn't. She has merely said let bygones be bygones.
Strength is not pursuing power with unyielding obsession. It is not making friends of enemies and enemies of friends to win votes. It is not transforming the one body tasked with ensuring clean elections into the one agency engineered for cheating. It is not ransacking the public treasury to buy an election. Strangely, I have heard people express admiration for this unscrupulous doggedness and describe it as strength. In fact, it is mere pettiness, one with disastrous consequences for the nation. Marcos showed that kind of doggedness, too, and look where it led us.
Strength is first of all strength of character. And strength of character is above all being able to admit mistakes and knowing when enough is enough. It is the ability to look power in the face and shun it. True strength, as "The Lord of the Rings" suggests, is not having the boldness to wear the ring of power and corrupting oneself, it is having the courage to throw the ring into the fires of hell and freeing oneself. As far as that goes, my hat's off to Cory Aquino who had the courage to say no to a second term notwithstanding that it was hers for the taking. That is strength.
Strength is not a martial posture or a predilection for war. Strength is not blindly following a superpower into thrashing about after being wounded and turning gung-ho for arms and war. A posture that can't be lived up to anyway, as President Arroyo's sudden retreat in the face of Angelo de la Cruz's kidnapping shows. The Heritage Foundation's view of President Arroyo as a strong leader during the height of her "war against terror" is an ironic one. The strength is an illusion, though one shared by her civilian and military aides, who gloated at the surplus warplanes that came their way and struck macho poses in the group picture. The only strong thing in all this was the odor it emitted.
Strength is morality, not pugnacity. Strength is reason, not brute force. Strength is the principle "right is might" and not "might is right." The real strength here, as in the United States, was shown by those who refused to be cowed into submission by the mob that howled in the streets and a government that led them on to a lynching. The real strength lay among those who asked why we were doing this and not among those who merely answered that that was what everybody else was doing.
And finally strength is not tyranny. That is the most dangerous illusion of all, the notion that authoritarianism, iron-fisted rule, dictatorship represents strength. "Strongman" is a misnomer, as is "strong republic." A strongman (or woman) is not a strong leader, he is a weak one. A "strong republic" is not a strong political order, it is a weak one. A strong leader does not impose her will on her people, she imposes the will of her people on her. A strong leader does not screw human rights and civil liberties to defend her nation's freedom, a strong leader defends human rights and civil liberties as the very essence of her nation's freedom.
The bigger and more dangerous illusion there is that democracy is a weak system and authoritarianism a strong one. The opposite is true. Democracy is the strongest system of all because it rests on a strong people. The aim of democracy is to make a strong people, not a strong government. The truth of democracy is that a republic is only as strong as its citizens. You can destroy a strong government, you cannot destroy a strong people.
Democracy is not unlike the strongest profession of all, which is teaching. The best teacher is not the one who makes himself indispensable, who will always be there to guide his pupil along. The best teacher is the one who makes himself superfluous, who makes sure his pupil will learn enough to go his own way someday.
President Arroyo is the weakest leader in all of Asia Pacific today. But that is so for reasons the Heritage Foundation will never understand.
Updated 10:41pm (Mla time) Oct 19, 2004
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer News Service
Editor's Note: Published on page A14 of the October 20, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
THE HERITAGE Foundation's assessment of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as the weakest leader in Asia Pacific raises some interesting questions about the nature of weakness and strength.
Heritage itself is confused about the concepts. Decades ago, it found Ferdinand Marcos a strong leader, at least when he did not strike the occasional pose of opposing the United States for local nationalist consumption. In fact, Marcos was a weak leader, notwithstanding that he ruled with an iron fist. The weakness did not lie in that his rule was being challenged from inside, by restive military officers, and outside, by the horde howling at the gates. Nor did it lie in that his kidneys were rotting away from lupus. It lay in the very nature of his rule. Dictatorial rule does not a strong leader make. But I'm getting ahead of my story.
President Arroyo herself uses the concept of a "strong republic." Much of it, of course, is just spin, which is the one thing she excels in. She came to Malacañang gratuitously, through the labors of others, and her claim to the throne being tenuous, she needed to project strength and authority. She surrounded herself with the accouterment of them. Not least rhetorically, "strong republic" being a chief phrase.
All this forces us to ask: What are the true properties of strength? What makes for a strong leader?
It helps to see what it is by seeing what it is not.
Strength is not stubbornness or pursuing things with a one-track mind. Strength is not refusing to apologize to a whistle-blower you falsely accuse of being part of the crime she has blown, and compounding the problem by ordering your police chief to make good your mistake. I remember writing several angry columns at the incredible suggestion of President Arroyo's aides that for her to apologize to Acsa Ramirez would be to show weakness and compromise national security. To this day, she hasn't. She has merely said let bygones be bygones.
Strength is not pursuing power with unyielding obsession. It is not making friends of enemies and enemies of friends to win votes. It is not transforming the one body tasked with ensuring clean elections into the one agency engineered for cheating. It is not ransacking the public treasury to buy an election. Strangely, I have heard people express admiration for this unscrupulous doggedness and describe it as strength. In fact, it is mere pettiness, one with disastrous consequences for the nation. Marcos showed that kind of doggedness, too, and look where it led us.
Strength is first of all strength of character. And strength of character is above all being able to admit mistakes and knowing when enough is enough. It is the ability to look power in the face and shun it. True strength, as "The Lord of the Rings" suggests, is not having the boldness to wear the ring of power and corrupting oneself, it is having the courage to throw the ring into the fires of hell and freeing oneself. As far as that goes, my hat's off to Cory Aquino who had the courage to say no to a second term notwithstanding that it was hers for the taking. That is strength.
Strength is not a martial posture or a predilection for war. Strength is not blindly following a superpower into thrashing about after being wounded and turning gung-ho for arms and war. A posture that can't be lived up to anyway, as President Arroyo's sudden retreat in the face of Angelo de la Cruz's kidnapping shows. The Heritage Foundation's view of President Arroyo as a strong leader during the height of her "war against terror" is an ironic one. The strength is an illusion, though one shared by her civilian and military aides, who gloated at the surplus warplanes that came their way and struck macho poses in the group picture. The only strong thing in all this was the odor it emitted.
Strength is morality, not pugnacity. Strength is reason, not brute force. Strength is the principle "right is might" and not "might is right." The real strength here, as in the United States, was shown by those who refused to be cowed into submission by the mob that howled in the streets and a government that led them on to a lynching. The real strength lay among those who asked why we were doing this and not among those who merely answered that that was what everybody else was doing.
And finally strength is not tyranny. That is the most dangerous illusion of all, the notion that authoritarianism, iron-fisted rule, dictatorship represents strength. "Strongman" is a misnomer, as is "strong republic." A strongman (or woman) is not a strong leader, he is a weak one. A "strong republic" is not a strong political order, it is a weak one. A strong leader does not impose her will on her people, she imposes the will of her people on her. A strong leader does not screw human rights and civil liberties to defend her nation's freedom, a strong leader defends human rights and civil liberties as the very essence of her nation's freedom.
The bigger and more dangerous illusion there is that democracy is a weak system and authoritarianism a strong one. The opposite is true. Democracy is the strongest system of all because it rests on a strong people. The aim of democracy is to make a strong people, not a strong government. The truth of democracy is that a republic is only as strong as its citizens. You can destroy a strong government, you cannot destroy a strong people.
Democracy is not unlike the strongest profession of all, which is teaching. The best teacher is not the one who makes himself indispensable, who will always be there to guide his pupil along. The best teacher is the one who makes himself superfluous, who makes sure his pupil will learn enough to go his own way someday.
President Arroyo is the weakest leader in all of Asia Pacific today. But that is so for reasons the Heritage Foundation will never understand.
posted by Dante at 12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home