Saturday, 19 November 2011

The "myth" behind names of officials, fiefs and dukes of their "doms"

The "myth" behind names of officials, fiefs and dukes of their "doms"

The title is enough to justify these officials as trying to instil everyone's mindset as the lords of their territories. As we ususally see pictures of leaders in every village, taking pride of their contributions as maintainters of roads and bridges, promoters of programs and of issuers of decrees and congratulating illustrous individuals, these leaders somehow tried much to represent the people as well in their respective communities.

But then they became exaggerated in their moves as they continue to propagate their cult of personality.

Sorry for the term "Cult of Personality" for that is usually used in countries under "dictatorships", but their actions somehow showed the exaggerateness as they took pride in their works and contributions in their respective communities from village up to national. Obviously, that is one of remnants of a past that everything is "possessive", that leaders aren't been voted, but endorsed by a supernatural, hence "divine right" as others may say.

But on the other hand, people tolerated it since they think that these people are good enough to show concern, that they had the will to put their name in it as its benefactor and contributor, that their taxes are allocated in it especially those of tangible ones.

Or even to show its paternalistic tendencies as these people ought to bid thee a greeting such as "happy holiday" or whatsoever in commemoration of a certain holiday or a celebration.

But still, it shows exaggerateness as suspected.

I may as well wandering why these people in their respectable posts from village to national level tend to personalise what is supposedly from the people. Obviously, it is a "tradition" to take pride in their respective contribution such as improving roads, bridges, setting forth campaigns against this and that, recalling that the leaders of then did so in their pride just to appease everybody else and say "they are doing their job." Yes, it showed much a benevolent paternalism using the money of everyone rather than its own as an individual.

But are these roads, bridges, campaigns, laws, statutes or any kind of shit enough to say as a responsible leader? The problem is that they are too personal enough to do a job that made them think that they do it as a leader, not noticing that the money being used came from the taxpayer, and it may as well be subjected to a series of questions especially those of corruption prone ones such as kickbacks and the like. 

And since people are quite becoming in a state of ridicule about the posters, of streamers featuring prominent people as benefactors of roads, bridges, programs, statutes, even well wishers, perhaps they ought to say that why not instead of a project of this and that be rather said made via the taxpayers  of that said village, town, city, or even the entire country itself. So why to settle for an individual if everyone paid to see having a road? May as well that person ought to pay for cement, gravel, labor and machinery using their own money aside from the tarpaulin and the print for commemorating their own feat.

After all... Politicians are Products.