In my last post, I wrote something about drag force, a concept in Physics. I used it more as a term of symbolism. The drag force is the resistance on something(object) as it flows through something else(the medium).
In fact, one can argue that if countries have drag coefficients, which measure the movement or flow of the object, ours could be 99. On a scale of 100. Nothing moves unless you hit it with the force of a thermonuclear blast.
Again, as a term of symbolism, we discover the thermonuclear blast. The force of a thermonuclear blast comes in the form of quality leadership. A leadership that forges the will, the cohesion, the stamina and discipline of its people. That’s the primary purpose of leadership.
Consider the leadership issues on the youths of
What are we then looking from the contenders? The answer so it seems, we are looking for leadership. What is the nature of the leadership are we looking for? The pattern or the quality?
Further it would seem to me, futile to debate the pattern of leadership but rather, it is more worthwhile instead, for us to look into the quality of leadership. That is more needed rather than posturing about leadership.
We want to know more for example, whether the man and his group assuming the high echelons of leadership later, have the ability, dedication and the executive drive to forge success. Thus busying ourselves on the vexed issues of pattern of leadership such as the return of Mahathirism and what not, leads us to round after round of tiresome debates. Mahathir’s style of leadership may be disliked by certain people, but the quality of his leadership is another matter. The executive drive, the ability and the dedication are there. Compare that pattern of leadership that is disliked with a leadership pattern that is apparently seen as more tolerant, more open and therefore, on those terms, is more likeable. We are pushed to ask where is the utility of such leadership pattern?
The utility of such leadership pattern stops there because such leadership pattern is insipid as there is no executive drive, no ability and infirmed dedication.
We come back again to the issue of articulation and then execution of vision. Dare to change? What are we changing? Esprit de corps- to what ideals do we bound ourselves to? from the wongjowo? Just the mission to win back lost states.
What about the medium? There’s no honour in leading an inarticulate and inchoate conglomeration of individuals. These young we are leading must be filled with the will and wherewithal to contribute meaningfully to the nation.
All the more reason, we must look through phony leadership that view the young merely as digits who formed a stepping stone for personal aggrandizement. I hate manipulative leadership which takes advantage of our malleable young.
Let us illustrate by taking a look at our young. Just like other people in the world, they want to live happy, active and eventful lives pursuing their chosen vacations. Tedium, boredom and a sense of emptiness creates a vacuum. Fill this vacuum with half past six purpose such as jumping into the arctic area or asking the mat and even minah rempits perform some ridiculous stunts so that the half past six sponsor can score political point, cannot bring us useful social results. The mat rempits will be left in the lurch, the sponsor gets his pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Indeed he will be hailed as a saviour for mat rempits.
Where, you ask is the idealism needed to fill the vacuum? A purpose? Formation of habits and values necessary to ready our young? Might as well train the mat rempits in the art of Muay Thai, Silat or any of the fighting arts, where you instil among other things, a martial spirit. Jumping from the plane over the arctic serves only to fortify a sense of having a good time and life is one dandy jolly ride.
Idealism is a desirable quality in the young, otherwise without it, the young becomes an intolerable cynic. A cynic’s mind is porous in the sense that he is impossible to convince of anything worth fighting for.