Prescription for Politics

Political parties ~ the crucial link between citizens and government ~ have so far prioritised winnability alone, for reasons obvious in a democracy, while giving scant regard to what is equally obvious ~ if not more vital ~ political credibility. Since the quality of the legislature is crucial to a healthy political culture, the larger question is whether parties will have the courage to deny tickets to unscrupulous candidates, however electable they may appear, and instead field those who embody integrity and bring fresh perspectives to public life

- DEBASISH BHATTACHARYYA

In an age when political discourse permeates nearly every aspect of daily life, genuine political leadership has become one of the scarcest resources across much of the world. Yet a stubborn myth persists ~ that the mere assumption of power automatically bestows the right, wisdom, or capacity to lead. This fallacy continues to shape our nation, often at the expense of substance, service, and vision.

In Enlightened Leadership, chronicling Bhutan’s inspiring transition from monarchy to democracy, the country’s current Prime Minister, Tshering Tobgay, recalls a defining moment from the 2008 coronation address of the fifth and present King of Bhutan, His Majesty Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck. Laying down the ethical foundations of his reign, the King declared:

“Throughout my reign I will never rule you as a King. I will protect you as a parent, care for you as a brother and serve you as a son. I shall give you everything and keep nothing; I shall live such a life as a good human being that you may find it worthy to serve as an example for your children. I have no personal goals other than to fulfil your hopes and aspirations. I shall always serve you, day and night, in the spirit of kindness, justice and equality.”

The King’s words, most would agree, offer a succinct ~ almost poetical ~ summation of how leadership ought to serve the people.

As one navigates the Indian political landscape, the question inevitably arises: how many political leaders truly subscribe to such ideals? In principle, most readily profess allegiance to these values; in inner conviction and lived practice, far fewer do. Nothing silences a debate of this nature more swiftly than the reflexive act of slapping an ideological label on those who merely articulate inconvenient truths.