If you want to earn a good name,
Then you will have to constantly revolve,
He who associates himself with the unreal,
will earn notoriety
(Lal Ded)
It is in the struggle for power that human wisdom generally withers to keep pace with the demands of history and collective aspirations of society. Unlike the leaders of Freedom Struggle the strugglers in power struggle remain largely infatuated and over obsessed with a burning desire for political office. In this pursuit they set in motion stratagems to hoodwink masses with whose support they come to power. They resort to puilling the wool over the public eye through vote bank politics; tricking the naive and the raw by building up mystique around themselves; making them ultimately pretty upset by the tricks of their trade. Smart and astute as they are, they succeed in becoming popular enough to ascend the peak. They dominate the scene as long as they are able to befool the public. By camouflaging their real intentions under the garb of “people’s uplift”, “emancipation”, freedom from want”. “self rule” etc, they do extremely well to lure a huge number of followers and supporters into mystifying them as “charismatic leaders”:
The significance of an objective debate and critical evaluation of Charismatic leadership cannot be underestimated especially in the context of Kashmir situ-ation. It is as important as understanding varied shades and the entire gamut of emotions, disgust and confusion associated with the Kashmir dispute. But it requires considerable patience, seriousness and thoughtfulness to appreciate the issue in all its dimensions; impatience and haste would result in far-fetched and unacceptable conclusions’. Implausible, incredible and unpalatable arguments and faulty conclusions which spring directly from our going to be hurried into any contemplation and deliberation, manifestly lead to many misconceptions and instigate us attribute to objective analysts what hasn’t been their forte. To prove them incorrect, metaphoric, implausible, biased, woolly and coward becomes the main thrust of such loop holed natter.
It is grossly untrue to publicise that Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah was the only charismatic leader Kashmir has produced in “the last 800 years”. Those who propagate so are obviously reflecting their ignorance of history and presenting a scary portrayal of medieval Kashmir; rejecting, thereby, the very existence and contributions of the outstanding, top ranking, charismatic leaders of the times like Bud Shah, Lal Ded and Nund Rishi. Also in their typical flamboyant way they attempt to mix up popular with charismatic leadership; more wittingly than unwittingly declining to differentiate the two less of morals than of expediency. The psyche and the social reality of a historically recognized conflict zone, immensely weighed down by unrelenting human rights violations, is totally different from that of a non-conflict zone characterized by independent, egalitarian settings, social security and Western outlook.
The two systems are poles apart. One is dependent, subservient, primitive and chained to a colonial system. The other is progressive, free, peaceful, democratic, independent and above all sovereign. Both throw up their own brand of leadership to resolve their peculiar problems and overcome tribulations: one yearns for freedom, independence, sovereignty and social justice and the other for economic reform, good governance, change and improvisation. A marked dissimilarity between the two is, therefore, but natural. This glaring difference between the two needs to be adequately recognized and appreciated before writing about Kashmir and evaluating its leadership.
The contention that I have based my definition of Charismatic leadership on the propositions put forth by Nadler and Tushan besides having used their idioms and phrases in my write-up is wholly untrue.
My premise, my arguments and my conclusions are entirely my own and well grounded in history; especially Kashmir history. They are, therefore, creatively original enough to be incompatible with those of these writers who have written Beyond the Charismatic Leader essentially for Business Executives to educate them how to win and influence their clients. There is no dearth of such books of alien origin; but the question is: are they really worthwhile in Kashmir context? The answer is no – a big no.
At the very outset I have made it amply clear that these books and their writers have simply endeavoured to recapitulate, reiterate and reinvent ‘what was formulated, devised and discussed by the great scholars of different Civilizations long, long ago in distant past. For the sake of historical accuracy and amplification let me reproduce here the relevant paragraph which the critics have skipped over — while going through my writings—to keep up their natter in a merry little tune:
The book Beyond the Charismatic Leader written by David A Nadler and Michael L Tushmun is “a product of painstaking research that speaks high of scholarly exertions of these political scientists, but is in no way the first of its kind on the subject. As a matter of fact it is a laudable and meaningful attempt to recapitulate systematically what the great scholars have already contemplated and marked out, long, long ago, as main components of unadulterated, stimulating and genuine leadership.”
There is no ambiguity in these words; nor are they in any way incomprehensible to lead readers astray and make them believe in fantasies and mundane gossip or rhetoric. These are lucidly intelligible enough to substantiate my point of view: that Kashmir leadership can best be evaluated through a local prism and native sources against the socio-political background obtaining in the Valley at the time of the leader we are writing about. They shed a flood of light on the subject which is as old as biblical times and vitally relevant in the Kashmir milieu burdened with a perennial conflict; a milieu that has been eagerly craving not for any democratic dispensation but for the restoration of its historical individuality that was compromised at the altar of political profit, power politics and shifting paradigms of social morality back in 1947 by those whose inanities and failures are historically too costly to be forgotten’.
Yesterday’s events become today’s history. Today’s history is a rude awakening that acquaints us with unpleasant facts that have contributed to our past failings, collective despairs, national sufferings and emotional disturbances. Unmistakably enough its impact is markedly so overpowering that the genuine leaders draw important lessons to become more conscious to shape the future of their societies charismatically and responsively in a befitting manner and in keeping with the necessities not only of history but of geography, sociology and culture as well.
…to be continued
Dr. Abdul Ahad is a well-known historian of Kashmir. He presents a perspective on the Kashmir issue and talks about Kashmir’s history and individuality and personality.
