Ad code

Three (3) things that are overrated and cannot sustainably develop any country (on their own)


1. Money. 
Money is important, great and desirable. But money on its own cannot develop any country no matter its volume. In the wrong hand, money can in fact ironically lead to widespread poverty.

2. Fight against corruption
Fight against corruption is important, great and desirable. But fight against corruption on its own cannot develop any country. In the wrong hand, it can however ironically protect corruption, institutionalize corruption and entrench by-the-book corruption and poverty in the polity.

3. Foreign Partnerships
Foreign countries can never develop your country to serve your interest. It is impossible. Only you can develop your country to serve your interest. I like the USA. They are very direct. If the USA intends giving you a development loan, the US would insist that a US company must implement or execute the project. Simply put - the support you are getting is actually so you could buy a US product on loan over a period of time with adequate and substantial profit margin for the US economy. See that as a strategic extension of the US credit system to mugu nations. Remember that in the US, if you are in good financial standing as an individual, you can buy most things on credit and you then spend years paying back as a dutiful citizen. Your repayment represents a guaranteed micro-economic revenue assurance source. So who is more credit worthy than a nation whose debt could be settled at will and from source by say the Paris club?  

So what can develop a country?

The most important factor that can develop a country is LEADERSHIP.

Not just any kind of leadership but the type anchored by a head that sits on a clear mind that is seized by unalloyed desires driven by passion for the development of her or his country in manners that compares to global definition of development (this definition thingy is important because there are 'developments' that do not constitute developments) - even at the risk of his personal interests (yes, a leader is human. His interest will most likely at some point(s) clash with the interest of the collective). The right leaders will correctly allocate money to serve specific development objective. The correct leader will deploy institutions of state to make corruption a poignant abnormality that everyone cannot associate with (at least in the open). The correct leader will promote equity and egalitarianism. The correct leader will allocate state resources to addressing state priorities that attend to the present and future needs of the people. The people will see it and experience it - they don't have to be told. The correct leader will promote education. An educated mind is a liberated mind and can function as a citizen with the benefit of a thinking mind. A citizen that cannot think is a development liability. The correct leader will inspire the citizens to love the country. The correct leader would inspire the citizens to think they can fly!

Some would say followership. But that is just wrong. Followers are as described - followers. Period. Followers are to follow. I agree that it feels good to also blame followers when things become so awful. But that is just as a convenient feel-good recourse. That very follower that voted an evil leader only voted the viable option presented to him. You may shout 'why didn't he vote the rookie that has the sterling CV?'. But the answer is in your question - he didn't vote for him because he is a rookie! The human mind is wired not to lose. Even in voting, the follower would subliminally desire to 'win' in the excercise of his franchise. So, he would cast his vote where he thinks chances of victory look plausible. 

There is nothing that can be achieved sustainably without a plan - not just any plan, but a good plan. A clever plan. This means you have to be a wise leader. And whilst you must be wise, your plan must be wiser still. You would need a plan which implementation would grant your country a strategic advantage over global competitors. Your plan must be capable of negotiating strategic political and development relationships and objectives in the interest of the collective. Your plan must be DELIBERATE towards specific GOALS. Yes, that is why your plan has to be a clever one. Every other country on earth is your competitor. There is no country on earth that wishes you to succeed except if it serves that other country's strategic goals. If a country is building your road, you are its market. You provide needed revenue assurance for its future. That country would never wish you learn how to build good roads. If a country is building your railway system, you are its market. That country would never wish you become self-reliant and began to build your own railway line. In fact, the country building your road, your railway line or your power infrastructure is actually your strategic enemy. Write that down somewhere. Never forget.

You need grit determination to transform great plans to street credible realities. You need positive stiff-neck stubbornness to stay focused with mind and soul on development objectives. Moreover, global competition is stiff, viscous and could be brutal. Attempt would be made from within and without to undermine your goals. Some, on purpose, some, out of thin-brain ignorance. You need to have 'aroma' to succeed as a leader. You can be cool but your rugged stubbornness to achieve development success for your people must remain indomitable.

Let me stop here for now. My friends can add their thoughts on the subject.

Post a Comment