WITH the elections just a few days away, I would share with you one guide that I use in choosing the candidates I would vote for at the local and national levels. I say it’s basic: character. I don’t really know why voters have strayed from that guide, lured by false promises and shaky claims.
Know the true character of the candidate and you will never be wrong in your choice.
On this, one can be led astray by illusions. A candidate, especially a neophyte, can put up a front of integrity and competence and get your vote but when already in the coveted position show their true colors.
That is why one should go deeper than what a candidate shows in public, but that is difficult. That requires inside info, especially from relatives, friends and aides.
You probably have heard of that candidate for a national position in a previous election who would go out in the campaign willingly and smilingly shaking the hands of people but rush to the washroom after to cleanse the hand of dirt. During the campaign, candidates become what they are really not, just to get the votes. They become pro-people when they actually disdain them.
On character, integrity is tops for me. Government officials need that because they are responsible for resources that are not theirs, but are the taxpayers’ own. And integrity can easily be weighed, especially if a candidate is an incumbent.
Many voters put less premium on integrity and more on, say, a candidate being friendly when they judge character. This is why a known plunderer can rate high in surveys. A smile or a shake of a hand, or being on first-name relation with a candidate can make voters forget that the official once plundered government resources.
But I would place being friendly next to integrity. And friendliness is one sign of humility. Which means that I like my government official not only to have integrity but also humility. When one is humble, one listens--to the opinions or suggestions of others. A consensus-builder is humble. And many good decisions and actions are arrived at through consensus.
Which means I don’t like government officials with messianic complex no matter how charismatic they are. In a way, charisma can be synonymous with illusion. It prevents people from seeing the real nature of a person, or a candidate. Consider Hitler.
But humility should not lead to its extreme, like meekness. Obviously, I like my candidate to be humble but uncompromising especially when implementing what has been arrived at via consensus. It’s what people call political will. Great ideas are lost because of the lack of it.
Of course, we have seen how the arrogance of leaders has been the bane of leadership. It destroys unity among leaders and unity among the leaders and the led. It also prevents great ideas from surfacing. The saying that a leader does not have a monopoly of great ideas can also be the definition of democracy.
Good character, more often than not, produces good leadership. That is what I would remember when I go to the polling precincts on Monday.