Signs are so expressive that you can read inaction, lethargy, and deceitfulness and/or agility, intensity, and honesty by merely looking at our leaders, their actions and behaviors, the way they walk, wipe their faces, and shrug their heavy shoulders. You do not have to be an expert all the time, and certainly when you have to read faces of our politicians who have been revealing themselves effortlessly.
I know a teacher who also is member of a political party. He wants to be a leader in the future. I have always noticed that his lips are dry and blotchy. The science of personology indicates that such a person has poor digestion. I gather, if he has poor digestion, he is irritable in nature. He is. If you advice him twice, he becomes cranky. He eats a lot when he sees delicious food but eats and constantly complains. He cannot be a good leader by the color of his lips (do not worry about my poor reasoning). There is a famous Nepali politician who has smiling eyes, which can reveal honesty, impishness, as well as slyness. I still have to decide.
According to legends, the ancient Indian philosopher Chanakya had animalistic magnetism and immense prudence in his eyes. Gandhi had a soulful face. How does Barack Obama look? He has a long face, Gandhi-like long ears, and full eyebrows. According to Faceology (arguably though), they express the qualities of leadership.
Many of us must have followed the news covering Obama’s visit to India. Does he reveal the signs of leadership? Since there are multiple meanings of leadership, I need to limit its connotations by refereeing to two words ‘control’ and ‘influence’ among connotations like manage, guide, direct, and so on. Does he control and influence?
What are the most visible signs of a leader in front of us in person or in media? Some decades ago, the virtual visibility did not reach door to door due to the inaccessibility of television, internet, i-phone, and android-phone. There still were people who influenced and even ruled the mind of the people by their leadership. They may have led their countries but they influenced people globally. I am talking about those leaders who reached beyond borders.
There are many such global leaders in South Asia too but unfortunately none in Nepal. We tried hard to make some but such leaders are not made out of sycophancy and group ideology. The present Nepali leadership is a matter of political positioning. Some leaders evolved out of conflict but they remained enigmatic till they were visible. Moreover, none have more than national identity. They may be known outside, but that is not due to their leadership qualities. Thus, looking for an ideal leader here is wasting your time.
Obama may not be a charismatic leader but he speaks intellectually. Some of his speeches are memorable, especially his 2008 Acceptance Speech and 2009 Cairo Speech. He influenced many in and outside the United States by his rhetoric and ideas. Recently in Mumbai and New Delhi, he talked and behaved both intelligently and attractively while addressing the students and delivering a speech in parliament.
The present Nepali leadership is a matter of political positioning. Some leaders evolved out of conflict but they remained enigmatic till they were visible.
I read an inflexible personality in his face, which leads me to propose that he has a clear social conscience. I am not relating to his political position as the president of the United States because conscience at times is directed by political structure he belongs to for which he is vehemently criticized in some Asian countries. One of my colleagues says that we do not want intelligent leaders (Obama certainly is) but want tricksters these days. He says that Eestern media does not get comic masala for talk shows and sitcoms as they used to get out of Bush. Bush fed a wealth of masala to television hosts, but Obama is too serious for to be used.
Obama is influenced by Gandhi, many of us are. Do you think you would have been influenced by Gandhi when he was a young lawyer? Looking at the pictures of Gandhi as an attorney in England, his famous biographer Louis Fisher writes that there was a little similarity between “mediocre, unimpressive, handicapped, floundering M. K. Gandhi, attorney at law, who left England in 1891 and the Mahatma leader of millions.” I do not have to write what transformed him and what people saw in him, but out of ordinariness of his personality he has phenomenal hold upon others.
We still have to find leaders in Nepal who can exercise hold upon us. Or such charisma is not possible in Nepali socio-political locations. First, let them draw the lines of constitution. We will write about them. It is primitively too early now.
orungupto@gmail.com
Related story
Great Leadership: A Road Less Traveled
