IT’S ABOUT the time of year again when job applicants line up for openings, for elective positions. Often, the very lack of qualification (I’ve never held any public office) is touted as an advantage in having an open mind and no history of wrongdoing — yet. Does this candidate even have an advocacy or program to promote? (I’ll have to win first and think about what to do afterwards.)
The lack of experience in a political job is not an obstacle, especially in ruling dynasties in the local setting. It is not clear whether those serving coffee and drinks or driving for their principals are also privy to the master’s and mistress’ discussions on dynastic governance. (Should we pressure the local business groups to support us?) So far, only relatives count in this situation.
Dynasties flourish because they have access to the levers of power and wealth. Qualification for the job is not a consideration. Only age and citizenship matter. (Sometimes, the latter isn’t even checked.) Dynastic candidates don’t apologize for belonging to a political family — we get elected by the people. Just because we have amassed resources to thwart any outsiders from contesting our seats doesn’t mean that we are not qualified to run. Anyway, dynasties can sometimes lose too.
How can a lack of experience for any job even be acceptable?
The newly elected (and raw) politician is afforded the benefit of a “honeymoon period,” a hiatus from harsh criticism allowing him to check the fire exits and discover which water closets in the building don’t flush properly. There is an “onboarding” workshop to brief the newbie on his job, the committees available to the members, and the need to recruit staff. The latter are expected to be more experienced than their boss in the ways of the new office. (Sir, don’t trim your moustache at the hearing.)
After raising hopes of change on the campaign trail, the rookie just wants to belong and get his share of the pork. (Who’s handing it out?)
Critics in social media may bash unqualified candidates whose only claim to fame is being a celebrity in another field. But that’s not the way it works. Even legal experience which seems to be an advantage for the job is seen as “not connecting to the people.” Can education even seem to be a disqualifier for a candidate? Spouting off one’s academic and work qualifications as advocates of public causes can put off the majority of voters.
The pining for an “intelligent vote” does not always translate into voting for an intelligent candidate. Should the only concern for electoral reform be limited to the honest counting of votes, rather than a general voters’ education program?
What is an intelligent vote after all if not the accumulated mutterings of people who put a premium on academic credentials, purity of heart (usually untested by temptation), and a point of view that coincides with one’s own? The flipside of this is that the “qualified candidates” keep getting rejected. Maybe they’re not cut out for public service?
Nostalgia for those days when the legislators were highly educated and principled members of the social elite does not seem to resonate with the voting public anymore.
If we believe in democracy as the rule of the people, shouldn’t we accept celebrities, entertainers, hard-nosed advocates of the complainers who need champions to do the cursing for them? They always top the polls.
A lack of experience for public office seems to have become an advantage. Popularity from sports, show business, and media have trumped any skills one may be able to bring to the public discourse.
It is certainly not in the elective offices that qualifications seem to matter. In the appointive positions even in the public sector, there is more scrutiny of work experience, academic credentials, and even public advocacy. Such criteria come closest to the private sector’s screening mechanism for employment.
Corporate recruitment views a lack of knowledge or work experience as an immediate disqualifier. Even in the succession planning of family corporations, some kind of apprenticeship is undergone by the eventual CEO. This token nod to “experience” is accepted as sufficient to assume corporate leadership at a young age.
Still, even the most experienced and knowledgeable corporate recruit can fail in his job when confronted by an entrenched corporate culture — which he may not be able to change in time.
Tony Samson is chairman and CEO of TOUCH xda
