Perversions: Case of Leadership, statesmanship and politics

[Published in Bogota Free Planet, South America, on 2 August 2015 and on 27 August 2016 in Dhaka Courier, Bangladesh]

Let me at the start make it clear that this very write-up is a lean-to with a diversity and dimension of the article ‘Capitalizership: Also as perverted form of Leadership’ published in Dhaka Courier, Bangladesh on 11 August 2016. Markedly it needs to be noted too with due care and candor that I first I uttered this during a talk-show on Tritiomatra, the leading Talk-show program (of Chanel-I) in Bangladesh, on 01 August 2016 followed by its publication as well. Instantly before and after, hundreds of positive responses from think-tanks, political scientists, activists and leaders of various shades and backgrounds at home and abroad supporting the very concept started coming in and the process is on in full swing. All these encouraged me to go further to invest efforts in case of other relevant concepts in politics and political science such as statesmanship and politics, which are organically tied to leadership indeed.

Therefore, as an overhauling mood and mode asking at the beginning are there any perverted forms/ugly cover-ups of the lexicons ‘Leadership’, Statesmanship and Politics? It may at the outset sound a little problematic or beside the point in its entirety but its standing and necessity can hardly be gainsaid in conclusion. For analytical purposes, focus on the one may conclusively reveal the overall standing of others as a whole. From such standpoints, focus on leadership may be chosen as a priori. On all counts, veracity unfolds that the practice of leadership(s) from the very days of civilizations till date on earth under countless circumstances, conforming or not, is indeed mostly not in tune with its very spirit and vein. Caprices, disregards, connivances, deviations and so forth are on in full swing for which real taste and smell of leadership(s) aimed at the well-being of people/organization is a recurring asking for all. One may readily jump to a conclusion that such phenomenon of leadership(s) amounts to perversion of leadership(s). Therefore, arises a pertinent query what should be the befitting taxonomy for branding such perversion of leadership(s)? Of course, there is nothing to be worried at all, although attempts are on to suit the very purpose. Yes, in social sciences and in particular in politics and political science, we meet with various forms of government having analogous terminologies (antonyms) for perversions therein.

Till date, history carries record that It was Aristotle who in his epoch-making book ‘Politics’ written nearly 2500 years ago, presented three forms of government depending on numerical standing showing at the same time their perverted forms. In natural form, they are called Monarchy/Dictatorship Rule of One. Here the dictator with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, works as a whole for the well-being of the people, Aristocracy i.e. Rule of Few. Here the few with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, work as a whole for the well-being of the people and Polity i.e. Rule of Many. Here the Many with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, work as a whole for the well-being of the people. In perverted form they are named Tyranny, Plutocracy and Democracy. Differences between natural form and perverted form imply that in the former interests and well-fare of the people are primarily ensured, defended and protected while in the latter form interests and welfare of those who wield power are essentially ensured, defended and protected.

And applying this very understanding, logic and formula of the forms of government set by Aristotle, there no denying the fact that Leadership(s) can as well be tasted and understood in a perverted mood and mode in today’s perspectives. In simple terms Leadership denotes art/practice of guiding group/people or organization. When a leader exercises his/her leadership to reach at the targeted vision and mission taking his followers/subordinates/people into confidence in proper mood and mode then his/her leadership(s) merits to be counted and weighed as leadership in natural form. Conversely, when such leadership(s) attaches priority to self/vested interests disregarding the targeting vision and mission then s/he definitely takes resorts to deviations, which must be treated as perversions leading to ‘perverted form of leadership’. And it is also true that political scientists, sociologists, political analysts and thinkers of various shades, colors and backgrounds stretching from East to West to North to South have been on for a long to devise/coin a seemly lingo of leadership. Even political activists, past and/or presents, are not far away from such pursuits. Lexes such as bad leadership, corrupt leadership, deviated leadership, selfish leadership, ill-leadership etc. came into lights but none of them meaningfully represent the perversion of leadership in positive manner.  

Consequently, at this moment, it is almost a kind of profound satisfaction and relaxation for us all that we are certainly in a position to reach at the coveted goal/station. Yes, such perverted form of leadership pointedly in politics and statecraft may be equated with capitalization in economics. For the reason that in economics, certainly in a broader sense, capitalization means using something as capital to earn/gain/enhance more. And one who capitalizes [money, reputation etc.) is called capitalizer and such act of capitalization by the capitalizer is titled ‘Capitalizership’.

Alike, in politics and statecraft, such capitilizership ascends when one/leader(s) capitalizes people’s supports either through election or otherwise for attaining his/her gains at the disregard/negligence of common interests/gains, which s/he is committed to do necessarily. And so, in line with the perverted forms of government here ‘capitalizership’ may rightly be branded as ‘perverted form of leadership’. Let us see how capitalizership(s) under the mask of leadership(s) are moving fast in today’s world. Let political scientists, thinkers, observers and social think-tanks feel free to welcome this newly coined taxonomy to understand the real theme of leadership(s) in today’s perspectives as well. This notion may also be used in other relevant areas.

By the same token in the end, questions crop up readily, what are about Statesmanship and Politics? Convincingly enough, yes, these two areas are not away from the blasts of pervasions and that’s why the jargon ‘Steasmeanship’(being used for the first time) can be applied as perverted form of ‘statesmanship’ while for ‘Politics’ such lexis is ‘Politrics’(mostly a known vocabulary), granting the nature of statesmanship and politics fluctuate depending on time, space and dimension. Let political scientists, thinkers, observers and social think-tanks feel free to welcome these newly coined expressions to understand the real theme of leadership(s), statesmanship(s) and politics in today’s perspectives as well. These notions may also be used in other relevant areas.

Needless here to repeat that ‘any practice of these words as perverted form of leadership, statesmanship and politics henceforward should bear reference to this article as it upholds the memo of intellectual property’.