Commonplace people have commonplace leaders It was quite thought-provoking for me. A current of thoughts began to flow in my mind.

I took out my pen and started jotting down the dictation of my mind when I saw both of them coming to blows in the office. Both are my acquaintances and both are teachers of good repute. I know that their ideologies are two distant ends. If one adores the sunrise, the other worships the sunset. Their grapple in the office was not a novel thing but two things made me thoughtful. First, both the individuals were ostensibly cultured still they took such an unpleasant step. Second, do the leaders of great stature who deserve admiration of such an elite class really exist in this part of the world? The bleeding noses of the two though cast a doubt on their status of being elite. In fact the two, before coming to blows, were debating their respective leaders. Their debate took an ugly turn when one of them called the opponent s leader a traitor. Well leaders are leaders and deserve admiration because there is a huge difference between the role and status of a leader and that of a common man. Moreover, it is after many sacrifices that one becomes a leader and more importantly every nation has a leader to follow. Good leaders remain calm, composed and steadfast to the main purpose. Storms, emotions, and crises come and go and a good leader takes these as part of the journey and keeps a cool head. Common people are prone to emotional misuse. They have common sense which can never help them in negotiating the nuisance of emotional blackmailing. However, the age-old custom of fan following still continues. Everyone this way or that way gets hypnotised by the leaders. One fails to understand as to why people get dragged in to the whirlpool of leader mania. It is quite ironical that people often criticise their own leaders. Why? And they have no sound answer. It has become everybody s cup of tea now to pass judgment on the leaders of various socio-religious-political parties and various other organisations or trade unions. Even the leaders who lead people at national level are not spared. Criticizing leaders every now and then suggests that the leaders are ordinary hence prone to criticism. We may agree this philosophy with this inquiry, If the leaders are ordinary and have lost their credibility, how credible the people are? The leaders are what the people around them are and the people are what their leaders are. We cannot excavate diamond from an iron ore. If the people are ordinary how can they expect that their leaders would be like that of Jinah s or Gandhi s stature? Nathu Ram Ghotsey did not accept Mahatma Gandhi as a leader because he himself was an ordinary man and people at present accept Modi or Advani as their leader because of obvious reasons. Actually people have become most unpredictable now and they do not stick to one position or posture but remain changing their outlook as frequently as one changes his costumes. As is the nation so are the leaders. Common place people have common place leaders whereas upright people have upright leaders. People make societies and the same societies put forth leaders. The stuff comes from the society not from the heavens therefore as are the people so are the leaders. In this case the people cannot allege their leaders of any short-coming or incapability. Similarly the leaders cannot justify their failure by reproaching their followers. Jinnah, Gandhi, Imam Khomeini, Nelson Mandela and the like won t emerge now because societies have degraded and the people have fallen to mental bankruptcy. It is basically a matter of introspection. Everyone must go for self-examination before evaluating himself or others. Isaar Kashmiri 1722004@gmail.com