Hear the sirens

Most of the current events that occur around us are repetitions of patterns that already took place. History repeats itself, we know. In the same vein, contemporary events can be related to some older narratives, such as the tales of Greek mythology. Recently, I have become increasingly uneasy with the profiles of 21st century western leaders, embodying the consecration of a century of mass media communication, aiming at convincing and charming its receivers. I think these modern techniques of charming one’s audience are one of the biggest threats we face as a pseudo-democratic people. Since the earliest theories of mass communication and the unveiling of public opinion concepts, those in power have learned and perfected the art of manipulating large electorates through the beautification of increasingly short and vague messages that aimed at inspiring an increasingly apathetic population rather than solutioning problems that needed to be adressed. As electoral campaigns get nearer, we become the sailors on a ship approaching the sirens, or our politicians, whose chants is aimed at seducing us to later deceive us.

Odysseus And The Sirens, painting by Léon Belly, 1867

A gradual effect

This did not happen overnight. Yet, it seems that despite being somewhat conscious that we are being played out by the said political elite, we are complacent to do something about it. Because we don’t believe there is any solution. In fact, mainstream media tend to completely discredit the classic ideas of rebellion that were normal until the 21st century. Revolutions are too dangerous they say, too damaging for a country as a whole. Instead, we need to focus on gradually reforming, focusing on stability above anything else. But this slow-paced change never occurs. Even the few politicians that have the will to change things end up entering an outdated political space in which the iron hand of bureaucracy prevents creative solutions and where compromises with the traditional majority parties are the only options to govern. As a result, an increasing amount of young people lose hope.

From Obama to Trudeau, Macron and Varadkar. Classic examples of sirens

While glamorous chiefs of states have arguably always been present, embodied in the US by JFK in the cold war era, they haven’t been spread out everywhere in the same vein. We have reached a period in which the spread of those profiles has intensified. It started in the US with Obama, who was, along Bill Clinton and JFK, the youngest US president of the 20th century. A strong, attractive man whose progressive policies were appealing to the younger electorate despite never really being implemented as promised. We are still waiting for Guantanamo to close, for the American presence in the Middle East to disappear. Canada recently elected a president that was so good-looking and charming that the world heard about him and langered over his attractive smile while ignoring whether his political agenda was truly being passed or not. Macron is clearly continuing the trend, as his political campaign was letting citizens hear what they wanted to hear, a passionate call for change in the traditional outdated political system, but not too much either, because stability was key. In the end, the larger corporate interests lurking over France are the real winners of his election. Varadkar does the same for Ireland.

Complicity between Justin Trudeau and Emmanuel Macron

Authoritative counterweights

While these new energetic leaders emerge around the western world, another predefined mold of leaders has also risen in the least traditionally democratic corners of the earth. Countries where freedom of speech was never established as a fundamental core value of society have now embraced the other end of the spectrum. Strong, masculine and determined heads of states such as Erdogan, Putin, al-Sisi or Duterte rose to power, perhaps in reaction to the perceived volatile liberalism of the west. Their narratives are also populist and provide a strong hand argument to counter the growing issues deriving from laissez-faire.

Are we falling into yet another dichotomized world?

Is this happening because people are not satisfied with the status quo and the apparent invisible hand that seems to tie all political leader in one way or another to abide by the larger agendas set by the economic leaders of a neoliberal net? It seems that few options remain available to us, in our pseudo democracy.