The problems which have beset Gordon Brown, and now the pending workload facing Barack Obama, has set me to wondering why anyone should want to place themselves in such a position.
They are both different of course…Brown with his involvement in the detail over a decade as second-in-command. He had of course been jealous, and it was blatantly obvious that he felt he should have had the position much earlier. When Tony Blair stepped down, Brown simply became the leader. He was never selected by competition, and so there was the question as to whether he should have accepted the post without going to the electorate. Things looked reasonably good for him, but as we all know, his desk has been littered with major problems, internal to the party and now the world-wide financial situation. He cannot claim that he was un-involved or could not have had any idea about the fiscal storm which has been brewing for a long time now.
Obama, on the other hand has appeared from relative obscurity, to arguably the most important position in the western world. With no experience in diplomacy, he can also claim no involvement in the history of politics or finance which are now causing problems. He comes with a possible fresh approach, and was selected by the (strange to us) voting system in the States.
So why do these folk, knowing what it involves, wish such a post, especially with both having young children who should be having their attention?
Is it power, and control they can wield, whatever the sacrifices?
Is it the money?
Is it an ego-centric thought that ‘You need me’?
Is it an altruistic wish to serve one’s country and the world?
Is it a wish to go down in history?
Are they pushed or encouraged into it by colleagues, friends, or spouse?
Please tell me!