I truly admire the character of Francis J. Underwood. I am referring to the House of Cards. And I will admit that I binged watched the series, considering the currency of the presidential race that has apparently culminated in Trump becoming the president.
Well, coming back to Underwood who is the protagonist a true antagonist, who doesn’t flinch before killing someone, who spits on the statue of Jesus, who pisses on his father’s grave, crosses his wife, does everything that is subversive all of it just for himself. This is a significant set of traits that, well, would declare anyone as evil. Yet, I don’t somehow want to call him evil. I think it’s a gift if one can disassociate oneself from emotions that make one weak, fragile or credulous. It takes some serious strength of character to do this. And whether you want to term it as character or characterlessness, it truly depends on how you want to look at it. But he gets things done – by hook, crook, manipulation or subversion. And I truly admire and loathe such characteristics at the same time.
We live in a society where economics and power are the driving forces; it’s a dog-eat-dog world and everyone keeps scores. And a point worth exploring would be – what is it that drives such behavior. Well, the stakes were of Presidency in Underwood’s case, but how does the ‘I will keep myself before anyone else” attitude comes?
Is it more of some kind of a dogmatism that some people inherently possess? Or is it pure economic play? Do we cease to see below the surface?
It’s unnerving to see protests underway on the streets of America, against Trump. People fear for their civil rights. But this is also the America that chose Trump and voted for him. I am sure that more than half of America sees something in Trump. Now, I don’t have to go to the nitty-gritty of what Trump is actually made of; there were a lot of questions that were raised about him during this entire race to the presidency – but I cannot seem to be oblivious to the fact that he is, at the end of the day, a businessman, whose wealth would have given him the power to do anything – he did not need to be the president to do that. But is this more about leading the nation to satisfy ego? Does he truly want to make America a model for something? Or is it just the America against any form of fundamentalism?
It’s the Day of the Donald truly!
However, I am still contemplating on this: Did Hillary come about as a common person, who the America thought of more as a ‘friend of the masses’ and not as someone who could “lead”? It's worth exploring what leadership is truly about.
(The thoughts expressed in the article are personal.)