Do
not judge a book by its cover, the saying goes, and never has this
oft-quoted line been more apt than at this crucial moment in the
history of the US.
Today,
the American people faces a political spectacle never before seen in
this great land.
Today,
America is also awashed with reality shows, and interestingly, the
Republican presumptive nominee for presidential candidate is a former
reality star himself.
Reality
shows became popular in the 1990s, and they look bound to stay. They
have become so much integrated into pop culture that we now speak of
reality television.
Reality TV, according to Wikipedia, is a genre of television
programming that documents supposedly unscripted real-life
situations, and often features an otherwise unknown cast of
individuals who are typically not professional actors, although in
some shows celebrities may participate. It differs from documentary
television in that the focus tends to be on drama, personal conflict,
and entertainment rather than educating viewers.
Talking
Points:
On
the trending of reality shows, what does this reveal about people in
general, and specifically about the American people? Could the
success of reality shows reflect a need in our psyche to escape
life's harsher realities?
Can
watching too much reality TV create negative impacts on people
especially the young? When it comes to making important life
decisions, such as who to vote for, how can a people so conditioned
to believing what is fake is real, and what is real is bad, be able
to make a wise choice?
An
Examiner article
in 2012 looked into this and noted how most reality shows, at that
time, contained violence, and how violence on reality tv could
desensitize people, the
American people.
Even
today, one notes the biggest star in most reality shows is –
Violence.
But
not only violence in reality shows is a cause for concern. Just last
month, in April, a blog article
came out wherein the blogger decried how many shows are straight
out LYING!
Fake
vs. real. Which is which?
Even
before the advent of reality television, TV audiences were already
used to seeing singers lyp-syncing the songs they were supposed to be
singing live. People watching were being conditioned that the
entertainment they were watching was real, not fake.
TV/film
audiences usually respond to their entertainment idols in this way –
like how we all are so suckered into feeling what we want vs hearing
what they are really telling us.
Perceived
reality vs. the real. What you see is what you get?
On
the lighter side, Christian reality tv shows have also began to trend
in recent years, and these shows aim to highlight positive values and
the breaking of stereotypes, especially of women. But this is not
what this article is about.
We
talk of how the American people in this crucial election period can
discern the real vs. the fake in looking for a new president to
govern this great nation to loftier heights amid a world beset with
threats of global terrorism, refugee crisis, conflicts in different
regions and climate change.
This
moment is critical for us as a nation to be able to distinguish REAL
LEADERSHIP from among the presidential contenders because our future
and that of our children and of generations to come lies in whoever
is elected to takeover President Obama, and this is Our Reality we
cannot escape from.
Seeing
the Real Through the Fake: Authentic Leadership
Among
the presidential candidates, Donald Trump presents himself, and is
perceived by his supporters/followers, to be the strong leader
America needs today.
A
recent article by The Washington Post descibes Trump:
Donald
Trump is many things. He’s a business mogul, a real estate magnate,
a go-to punch line for jokes about bad hair. But before he got into
politics (and even before his adventures in skepticism about
President Obama’s birth certificate), many Americans knew him
primarily as the host/judge/boss of NBC’s “The Apprentice.”[...]
He was a quintessential reality star — and a senior Trump campaign
adviser, Paul Manafort, said this past week that the mogul is still
exactly that: “This is the ultimate reality show. It’s the
presidency of the United States.”
Is
Trump indeed the strong leader he projects himself to be? An
authentic leader, or is it only his public persona, the image he has
conjured to win his campaign?
Years
back, no one ever imagined Trump would take the limelight in the
national political stage; the kind of thing that “The Simpsons”
predicted years ago as a joke and that no one imagined would actually
happen, but now it is the
reality.
And
the big challenge for America today is being able to discern: is
Trump for real?
When
people say he is a great reality star, or that he is a great leader,
whose reality is it?
In
a news article, it is reported that Trump's daughter Ivanka praised
her father for elevating American politics with his honesty and
authenticity.
Hyperreality
There
is a phenomenon called hyperreality: an inability of
consciousness to distinguish reality from a simulation of reality,
especially in technologically advanced postmodern societies.
The
dangers of hyperreality in our present time? Confusing
celebrity worship with hero worship which Daniel J. Boorstin warned
us against; the term is synonymous to “"reality by proxy"
- an individual takes on someone else's version of reality and claims
it as his or her own.
Thus,
it can be assumed that Ivanka, having grown in the shadow of her
father's celebrity status and reality tv persona, could have created
a larger than life image of Trump for herself to believe in, and
projects this onto Trumps supporters.
Trump's
adoring fans could likewise be seeing in him a reality that is not
real. Hyperreality.
So
even with his brashness, lack of political correctness, and
incendiary remarks that his critics hate him for, his supporters see
in him the makings of a future American president. That's why he's
winning the race, so far.
It
is like his faithful followers see him as a great old book when he's
really not, or that they truly believe he's singing, when the reality
is he's just lip-syncing one of the great rock band Whitesnake's
popular songs.
But
many times too, diehard fans know that what they see is not what
they're really getting, yet they seem hooked, like most fanatics.
They see a larger than life persona they can relate to, feel
comfortable with, and who are often reflective of what they are not,
but would like/hope to be.
What
are the implications of such behavior? What factors drive the mass
following of a public figure almost devoid of critical thinking?
At
least, there are three factors that can help explain why masses
craving for a leader seem to override logic or the ability to see
between “lip-syncing” and “real singing,” and this goes true
as well for citizens who so much want to believe someone is Genuine,
even when they know he/she is just an Illusion.
Emotions,
Hero Worship and Charisma
Emotions
Here
is an excerpt from an article
explaining how emotions, rather than reason or logic, play a great
part in people's chooosing someone to vote for:
In
recent years, an increasing amount of evidence has been produced that
suggests that our political behavior is governed mainly by emotion,
with fairly little of it governed by rationality.[...]American
political scientists Peter Hatemi and Rose McDermott edited an
anthology of articles in 2011 that reviewed numerous research studies
conducted during the previous decade on the connection between
genetics and political orientation. Although no one among us is a
Likudnik or a leftist from birth, certain combinations of gene types
can trigger behavioral tendencies, which in combination with social
factors can help predict an individual’s political orientation.
Hero
Worship
The
special sentimentality of the public toward a popular
hero includes a certain endearment, a tremendous loyalty,
a reluctance to admit critical reflection, and a faith and veneration
which verge upon superstition. Once a public figure
acquires the status of a popular hereo, he is to be specially
reckoned with as a social force. If an entertainer, he bcomes “box
office.” If a political leader, he acquires generic appeal: he
draws crowds, fills statdiums, makes money, gets votes, and gathers
his following from all walks of life. His name and image act as an
inspiration to organize large masses of people. (Hero Worship in
America, Orrin E. Klapp, published in American Sociological Review) –
See this:
Charisma
A
dictionary definition of the term charisma is a compelling
attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others.
Even
with these limited excerpts, one can understand more or less why
there are public figures, like Donald Trump, who can hold sway over
large groups of people, whether they deserve such adulation or not.
Blast
from the Past
Some
figures from history can serve as examples of this kind of fanatic
adoration, fake leaders who made their way to national/international
prominence and brought about untold sufferings to their
people/country. One such example is Joseph Stalin, USSR's dictator,
from 1929 to 1953.
To
be clear, this article's definition of a fake leader is one who can
gather a mass following through sheer charisma, and/or fear, as
opposed to an authentic leader, one whose intention to lead derives
from a desire to serve others, and create positive changes.
Joseph
Stalin
Here's
an excerpt from, “How Stalin Fooled the World and Why It Matters
Today,” by Daniel
Greenfield:
History
concerns itself with dry facts, but has less to say about human
minds, and so it is difficult to know whether FDR and Churchill were
fooled or whether they chose to be fooled. When FDR and Churchill
praised Stalin’s integrity and sincerity, had they been deceived by
the world’s greatest actor or did they allow themselves to be
deceived so that the terrible compromises they made seemed more
palatable?
This
question, like so many of the others in Stalin’s
Curse,
remains applicable today. While Stalin is dead, there are many lesser
Stalins like Morsi, small vicious men with an unlimited capacity for
bloodshed and an even more unlimited ability to fool Western leaders
into believing in their sincerity and goodness.
- Read more here:
Another
article,
“Joseph Stalin: National hero or cold-blooded murderer?” depicts him to be
a cold murderer more than a national hero. Stalin
promotes an image of himself as a great benevolent leader and hero of
the Soviet Union. Yet he is increasingly paranoid and purges the
Communist party and Army of anyone who might oppose him.
OTHER
HISTORICAL FIGURES
Other
past leaders in Stalin's league include
Hitler (1878-1945), Lenin (1870-1924), Pol Pot (1928-1998), a leader
of Red Khmers in Cambodia; Benito Mussolini (1883-1945), fascist
dictator of Italy; and Mao Zedong (1893-1976), the father of
communist China.
These
are extreme examples of fake leaders, who ruled with a sheer force of
their charsima, intimidation and fear. These historical figures are
examples of evil leaders. The world
knows what happened to their respective nations under their helm.
Other
kinds of fake leaders use manipulation, brainwashing, deception,
and other negative, diminishing ways. Read this article that
differentiates the fake from real leaders.
Franklin
D. Roosevelt once said, “Democracy cannot succeed unless those
who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real
safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.”
Indeed,
voting wisely is paramount, for a country's future and of its
generations to come lies in the leaders the people elect, especially
in the one who will hold the reins. Thus, a nation cannot run the
risk of consigning their future to a despotic, or manipulative
character in the making.
“When
we don’t care about what our government is doing, we are also
saying to the next generation that we are not interested in the
possible burdens that we are passing on to them.”
― Rob Parker
― Rob Parker
"God
forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The
people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the
facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such
misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public
liberty. …” – Thomas Jefferson
“The
great achievements of civilization have not come from government
bureaus. Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a
bureaucrat. Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry
that way.” – Milton Friedman
“Power
tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are
almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and
authority...” – Lord Acton (1887)
The
present crop of presidential aspirants, including those who bowed out
of the race, perhaps
may have used and manipulated their respective groups of voters, as
their critics say:
Hillary's pandering to women and people of color, Trump's playing up
the anger of conservatives,
Sanders'
backroom deals, deceptive ads and political manipulation Ted Cruz's using his Hispanic roots to connect with Hispanic/LatinAmericans.
Voter
manipulation is often, and
will always be, part of many
a political candidate's campaign strategy.
But
this is democracy in action. There is diversity
of political views and persuasions, and a diversity of political
personalities.
It is up to its citizenry
to separate the grain from
the chaff, to discern the authentic leaders from the fake, in
choosing who to hand over their future and that of the country.
1 comment:
Very interesting and insightful!
Post a Comment