philosophy
Senior Member
- Nov 11, 2012
- 104
- 42
It's still a long journey for this nation to satisfy at least at average on the development by depending on the whole political system of the country. When we say politics, automatically we refer to the system of leadership which social members decide to create in order for the supervision of their natural rights When referring to natural rights, it's directly means human life in general.
Citizen decide to put leaders in power, simply because, man by nature is a political animal(Aristotle). Being a political animal, men need to put their natural rights into the hands of a sovereign (government) under social contract through popular opinion law as Jonh Locke could argue. Men decide to vest power in the sovereign because there're controversies within men which could lead to the violation of rights.
As Hobbes suggests that due to the fact that men possess some bad characters which mold them corruptly, causing some incidents like constant wars, and violation of powerful people over less powerful people; so reasonably citizen decides to end those misunderstandings by agreeing to defend their freedom right by vesting all powers to the government.
But, the issue here, is to ask ourselves that, which kind of government do people need to defend their natural rights? which kind of people needed to head that government? and how far these figures are capable of leading the government in good way as citizens could need? are they able to lead in good way as people could satisfy?
Do these government leaders have virtues of leadership and are knowledgeable enough to be leaders? These figures of sovereign wise men to rule the society?
Such kind of questions have to be our point of references in making thorough analysis basing on our system of leadership in Tanzania. Being elected a political leader, is not enough to be a leader, rather it need extra- characters like being educated, well informed person about different things in your society and beyond your society. Furthermore, a leader must be golden man who possesses wisdom in himself, thus help him to know how to lead and what society need. Here, means that a political leaders should be critical reasoner, systematic person, one who depends on truth.
This will help him to lead in the base of truth without relying any side. This kind of leader is a wise man because he stands on truth, to stand on truth and seeking it is to be wise; therefore, being wise man is to be in truth, and being in truth is to know things in reality or in its real sense not knowing thing externally or in illusory situation. Plato and Socrates could support that in their treatise of politics. So, this kind of leader will lead a society in better way and reach at high success resulting into social perfection and social development.
As it has been analyzed on how a political leader should be, for, the case of Tanzania, the situation is of different kind. This is because the elected leaders most are not wise, are non educated and less informed.
Education here, does not mean formal education only, but beyond that, especially what intended here is kind of education that aim to liberate a person mentally. It seems that being elected a political leader in Tanzania is enough to declare you as wise person, something that's wrong! Being wise leader does not mean to be accepted by majority or does not necessarily mean that to be leader is already possessing an essence of wisdom. Addressing the mass and being congratulated or clap hands of the masses does not make a leader to be a wise person. But for, political leaders of this country feel wise by majority supports and that's why our nation is in worse situation in term of development.This is the fact that, this nation has got no wise man to lead it.
Proving this claims, recall on the electional campaigns that are always conducted in Tanzania.
Most political leaders in the country propagate citizen to vote for them under umbrella of their parties, aiming not to lead nation for development but to win more personnel of the party and form government. For me this is what make our country to be in trouble because leaders are not aim to development but aims to win election as members of certain political party. Wise leader will fight to lead a society aiming to initiate social development and not otherwise.
Philosophically, when we define politics, we reflect on social satisfactions in which social perfection reveals. Therefore, politics is about people life in a perfection side of social life- i.e social development, development in society is its perfection. And politics of a certain society must reflect on the development of the society.
This cannot exclude a political figure. Therefore, the task of leader is to drive a society into perfection not otherwise like Tanzanian politicians, who think on being in government position but nothing they do for the nation.
Tanzania politicians are of no difference with Machiavellian political leader, "The Prince". He's leader of double standard effects, who fight for his position but not for the benefit of the nation. This's leader of a character of pretender, so as to defend his position of leadership and getting what he/she need, but not the whole society. Machiavelli leader is one who uses any means regardless its effects but that means must take him to what he aims to achieve. Immoral means are suggested by price to lead a society. The effect of this leader is to take a society into troubles instead of alienating them.
Those characters possessed by Machiavellian leader are reflected vividly in Tanzanians leaders, they're likely to fight by any means to get into power and after acquiring that positions they do nothing for the nation rather than deceiving citizens and mislead them so as to save their position.
So poor political situation in Tanzania is the result of vesting Machiavellian politicians who're very poor in leadership.
Citizen decide to put leaders in power, simply because, man by nature is a political animal(Aristotle). Being a political animal, men need to put their natural rights into the hands of a sovereign (government) under social contract through popular opinion law as Jonh Locke could argue. Men decide to vest power in the sovereign because there're controversies within men which could lead to the violation of rights.
As Hobbes suggests that due to the fact that men possess some bad characters which mold them corruptly, causing some incidents like constant wars, and violation of powerful people over less powerful people; so reasonably citizen decides to end those misunderstandings by agreeing to defend their freedom right by vesting all powers to the government.
But, the issue here, is to ask ourselves that, which kind of government do people need to defend their natural rights? which kind of people needed to head that government? and how far these figures are capable of leading the government in good way as citizens could need? are they able to lead in good way as people could satisfy?
Do these government leaders have virtues of leadership and are knowledgeable enough to be leaders? These figures of sovereign wise men to rule the society?
Such kind of questions have to be our point of references in making thorough analysis basing on our system of leadership in Tanzania. Being elected a political leader, is not enough to be a leader, rather it need extra- characters like being educated, well informed person about different things in your society and beyond your society. Furthermore, a leader must be golden man who possesses wisdom in himself, thus help him to know how to lead and what society need. Here, means that a political leaders should be critical reasoner, systematic person, one who depends on truth.
This will help him to lead in the base of truth without relying any side. This kind of leader is a wise man because he stands on truth, to stand on truth and seeking it is to be wise; therefore, being wise man is to be in truth, and being in truth is to know things in reality or in its real sense not knowing thing externally or in illusory situation. Plato and Socrates could support that in their treatise of politics. So, this kind of leader will lead a society in better way and reach at high success resulting into social perfection and social development.
As it has been analyzed on how a political leader should be, for, the case of Tanzania, the situation is of different kind. This is because the elected leaders most are not wise, are non educated and less informed.
Education here, does not mean formal education only, but beyond that, especially what intended here is kind of education that aim to liberate a person mentally. It seems that being elected a political leader in Tanzania is enough to declare you as wise person, something that's wrong! Being wise leader does not mean to be accepted by majority or does not necessarily mean that to be leader is already possessing an essence of wisdom. Addressing the mass and being congratulated or clap hands of the masses does not make a leader to be a wise person. But for, political leaders of this country feel wise by majority supports and that's why our nation is in worse situation in term of development.This is the fact that, this nation has got no wise man to lead it.
Proving this claims, recall on the electional campaigns that are always conducted in Tanzania.
Most political leaders in the country propagate citizen to vote for them under umbrella of their parties, aiming not to lead nation for development but to win more personnel of the party and form government. For me this is what make our country to be in trouble because leaders are not aim to development but aims to win election as members of certain political party. Wise leader will fight to lead a society aiming to initiate social development and not otherwise.
Philosophically, when we define politics, we reflect on social satisfactions in which social perfection reveals. Therefore, politics is about people life in a perfection side of social life- i.e social development, development in society is its perfection. And politics of a certain society must reflect on the development of the society.
This cannot exclude a political figure. Therefore, the task of leader is to drive a society into perfection not otherwise like Tanzanian politicians, who think on being in government position but nothing they do for the nation.
Tanzania politicians are of no difference with Machiavellian political leader, "The Prince". He's leader of double standard effects, who fight for his position but not for the benefit of the nation. This's leader of a character of pretender, so as to defend his position of leadership and getting what he/she need, but not the whole society. Machiavelli leader is one who uses any means regardless its effects but that means must take him to what he aims to achieve. Immoral means are suggested by price to lead a society. The effect of this leader is to take a society into troubles instead of alienating them.
Those characters possessed by Machiavellian leader are reflected vividly in Tanzanians leaders, they're likely to fight by any means to get into power and after acquiring that positions they do nothing for the nation rather than deceiving citizens and mislead them so as to save their position.
So poor political situation in Tanzania is the result of vesting Machiavellian politicians who're very poor in leadership.