[Politics] Lula the Lion.
Lula Da Silva, Brazil's head of state, is a lion of a leader. He demonstrates a level of courage in dealing with difficult political situations that few leaders have ever done. Being Lula's neighbor, many of us South Americans take our tolerant and open perspective on inter-religious and ethnic relations for granted. There are lessons to be learned by the rest of the world who are still struggling with their ability to have civil relationships let alone healthy, productive, cross cultural, inter-religious relationships that are common place in Brazil and other Latin American countries.
I was so impressed by Lula's perspective, that I thought it warranted a re-posting of relevant snippets from a recent interview with Ha'aretz newspaper. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1155868.html
Importance of dialogue
"I was born into the politics of dialogue, I became president of this country through dialogue and I have conducted my entire presidency by means of dialogue. I believe that through dialogue we will succeed in solving all the conflicts which today appear to be unsolvable," he says.
Dialogue between leaders
"The importance of talks between third- and fourth-rank officials [does not hold] even 1 percent of the importance of tete-a-tete talks between leaders. Politics is mainly contact. People have to look at each other, sense each other. A leader has to look into the eyes of his interlocutor instead of communicating with him through lower-level individuals."
Rule with your head and your heart
"You cannot do politics with hate and resentment. Anyone who wants to do politics with hate and resentment should get out of politics. Nobody can rule a country through the liver. You have to rule a country with your head and your heart. Other than that, it's best to stay somewhere else other than in politics."
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Adaptive Democracy
[Political Science] I have been thinking about a particular concept for some time that I have termed "adaptive democracy", or a governance system of direct and/or indirect democratic mechanisms adapted to the indigenous culture and society.
I am a believer that there can be many models for democratic governance where each would have sufficient democratic mechanisms built in to allow their citizens and residents to have input into how their lives are governed. My travels to different parts of the world has reinforced this belief that governance models will vary from country to country based on cultural and societal norms. There cannot be a one sized fits all approach. There must be an adaptive approach to developing and introducing democratic mechanisms in a unique and evolutionary way.
As a Westerner conducting business in countries like Saudi Arabia and China one is confronted with the significant cultural differences between these old and deeply rooted cultures and the modern secular western democracies of North America and Western Europe. The mainstream media is filled with comparison and criticism with standard prescriptions of American style democracy as the solution. There must be a way to adapt the principles of democracy to meet the distinct requirements of each nation and culture. China is a great example of a country that in my humble opinion may not have achieved its relative success had it stayed on the course it was on prior to communism.
Saudi Arabia is continually under pressure to introduce democratic reforms. Its traditional tribal culture continues to thrive and play a significant role on the socio-economic affairs of the country. The House of Saud cemented ties and allegiances with the other tribes through marriage - a standard practice across much of Europe, Asia and Africa up until 100 years ago. In a country with such strong tribal roots, there is a requirement for a ruling tribe with governance mechanisms to work with and manage the relationships with the others. This model of the ruling tribe already exists and it just needs to be evolved rather than changed completely to keep pace with the requirements of modern Saudi society.
There is no question that such a traditional governance system must evolve along with the rest of the world. However, what is the evolutionary path forward? There can be different approaches and it is up to the current participants in the leadership roles to define the path that makes the most practical sense. A lack of clarity over the path forward, may present and manifest itself in negative ways. Nations and governments have never had an open discussion about a sustainable governance model that works best for their respective societies and cultures. If such a discussion were to take place, there would have to be a need for tolerance, understanding and flexibility in defining a customized governance system that contained sufficient democratic mechanisms to provide its society with the necessary checks and balances for sustaining a safe, just and prosperous nation.
I am a subscriber to the evolutionary versus the revolutionary approach for the simple fact that people change slowly and revolutionary change requires destructive shock therapy. Iraq is a sad example of a nation upon whom shock therapy has been imposed with catastrophic consequences.
I believe that we need to invest more thought into the concept of adaptive democracy that would define common mechanisms or components that can be combined in a model tailored to a people and culture. Every nation has a right to govern themselves according to their societal norms and the world is in danger of losing the many unique human cultures to the TV / fast food / shopping mall culture that can be destructive in so many ways.
This systems view of defining political governance systems may be idealistic but there must be reliable technical models that serve as a guide for those courageous leaders who take the high road of nation building and development. The resulting models would identify fungible democratic components that could be implemented in a unique, adaptive way.
I am a believer that there can be many models for democratic governance where each would have sufficient democratic mechanisms built in to allow their citizens and residents to have input into how their lives are governed. My travels to different parts of the world has reinforced this belief that governance models will vary from country to country based on cultural and societal norms. There cannot be a one sized fits all approach. There must be an adaptive approach to developing and introducing democratic mechanisms in a unique and evolutionary way.
As a Westerner conducting business in countries like Saudi Arabia and China one is confronted with the significant cultural differences between these old and deeply rooted cultures and the modern secular western democracies of North America and Western Europe. The mainstream media is filled with comparison and criticism with standard prescriptions of American style democracy as the solution. There must be a way to adapt the principles of democracy to meet the distinct requirements of each nation and culture. China is a great example of a country that in my humble opinion may not have achieved its relative success had it stayed on the course it was on prior to communism.
Saudi Arabia is continually under pressure to introduce democratic reforms. Its traditional tribal culture continues to thrive and play a significant role on the socio-economic affairs of the country. The House of Saud cemented ties and allegiances with the other tribes through marriage - a standard practice across much of Europe, Asia and Africa up until 100 years ago. In a country with such strong tribal roots, there is a requirement for a ruling tribe with governance mechanisms to work with and manage the relationships with the others. This model of the ruling tribe already exists and it just needs to be evolved rather than changed completely to keep pace with the requirements of modern Saudi society.
There is no question that such a traditional governance system must evolve along with the rest of the world. However, what is the evolutionary path forward? There can be different approaches and it is up to the current participants in the leadership roles to define the path that makes the most practical sense. A lack of clarity over the path forward, may present and manifest itself in negative ways. Nations and governments have never had an open discussion about a sustainable governance model that works best for their respective societies and cultures. If such a discussion were to take place, there would have to be a need for tolerance, understanding and flexibility in defining a customized governance system that contained sufficient democratic mechanisms to provide its society with the necessary checks and balances for sustaining a safe, just and prosperous nation.
I am a subscriber to the evolutionary versus the revolutionary approach for the simple fact that people change slowly and revolutionary change requires destructive shock therapy. Iraq is a sad example of a nation upon whom shock therapy has been imposed with catastrophic consequences.
I believe that we need to invest more thought into the concept of adaptive democracy that would define common mechanisms or components that can be combined in a model tailored to a people and culture. Every nation has a right to govern themselves according to their societal norms and the world is in danger of losing the many unique human cultures to the TV / fast food / shopping mall culture that can be destructive in so many ways.
This systems view of defining political governance systems may be idealistic but there must be reliable technical models that serve as a guide for those courageous leaders who take the high road of nation building and development. The resulting models would identify fungible democratic components that could be implemented in a unique, adaptive way.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Just started using Twitter and wondered what all the big deal is about. Still not sure but everyone keeps telling me that after a while the utility of the service becomes apparent. I would expect to see Facebook or Google integrate this feature into their platforms. Check out the Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/kjuman
Friday, January 1, 2010
Introduction
Hi Everyone,
I finally decided to make the leap and launch a personal blog. Yes, many who know me will say its about time after years of espousing the virtues of blogging. Its 2010 and the world continues to be an interesting place to live in.
As a forewarning to readers, there will be very little focus in terms of topics. I am interested and passionate about a diverse spectrum of issues in the areas of Technology, Media, Business, Finance, Politics, Religion, amongst others.
For the most part, I'm not going to allow folks to post comments...the blog will be a one directional communications piece for now. For those who want to provide feedback on any topic, I encourage you to send me an email.
All for now and I look forward to speaking with you soon.
I finally decided to make the leap and launch a personal blog. Yes, many who know me will say its about time after years of espousing the virtues of blogging. Its 2010 and the world continues to be an interesting place to live in.
As a forewarning to readers, there will be very little focus in terms of topics. I am interested and passionate about a diverse spectrum of issues in the areas of Technology, Media, Business, Finance, Politics, Religion, amongst others.
For the most part, I'm not going to allow folks to post comments...the blog will be a one directional communications piece for now. For those who want to provide feedback on any topic, I encourage you to send me an email.
All for now and I look forward to speaking with you soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
