Intelligence test for leadership

This year’s presidential election, like the many previous ones, will be remembered for its many unprecedented phenomena. On Feb. 25, 2013, when the new president gets down to business after her inauguration ceremony, I hope to see a totally new chapter of political history open in our nation.

Interestingly enough, Korea is probably an exception where the level of intelligence of the presidential candidates is put to a downright public test. They must give speeches, answer odious questions and even face rude attacks by an offensive rival representing a distinct minority eye-to-eye in a studio on nationally televised debates.

Rather suddenly in our terms, the vocabulary, knowledge and logic-processing ability of the candidates are exposed through all types of modern media.

No matter how elaborate a political party’s pledges and policies are, a persuasive and appealing delivery by the candidate is the key to communication. The candidates explained their hopes and dreams on the three televised debates but many wondered whether they really understood the in-depth meaning of the words they were uttering.

It is almost beyond imagination that former Korean presidents could have ever been subject to this sort of situation, not only because of the acquiescent-to-power media coverage atmosphere of the past, but rather the presidents’ monarchic style of leadership and our conservative top-down traditional political culture.

Before introducing this quite “Western” approach of verbal confrontation, the government commissioned the Korea Speech and Communications Association to research similar systems in other countries. The 2011 report presents case studies of election broadcasting in the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany.

The report ‘s conclusion is that it is necessary to train our presidential candidates in preparation for these debates, as they are not familiar with this type of communication, just as most Koreans are not. In Korean social and educational traditions of the past, silence and politeness were emphasized far above expression of individual personalities and opinions. There was no show and tell training in our childhoods.

In addition, I think it is also unnecessary for the president to understand everything and be able to defend against all tricky questions in detail. Would it seem dumb if the candidate said “I will select the best and most capable people as ministers to handle the practical affairs”, if we recognized that in fact, this is what a competent president does?

If anyone hopes to run in the next election, they may need to prepare with the basic terminology and knowledge of existing institutions, problems and issues, improvements and solutions needed; as well as presentation and speech skills, how to look attractive on TV cameras, etc., etc.

In this regard, the 2010 book “The Reading Methods of Presidents,” examining different reading habits of former presidents, focuses on guidelines for an intellectual exploration of next-generation leadership.

Former presidents had their own unique merits and demerits and played the historic roles that were required of them. Election results could have been different if their on-screen performances were scored as a powerfully decisive factor.

The ideal image of a political leader in the neo-Confucian Joseon Kingdom (1392-1910) was a self-disciplined, learned man of virtue with love and care for the public. Acquiring knowledge in Chinese classics and the writings of former Korean scholars was a fundamental task for Korean men seeking public office.

French officer Henri Zuber, who was part of the 1866 French invasion of Ganghwa Island, near Seoul on Korea’s west coast wrote, “No matter how poor the family is in Joseon, they have books at home.”

Those books were not for academic research or hobbies but were essential means of cultivating personality and preparing oneself for social and economic participation such as advancing to high government posts through state examinations or networking with fellow literary gentlemen.

Respect for education still survives strongly in Korean veins. And yet there is a giant divide in content and media among generations. Internet, smartphones, animation and cartoons are important channels of information delivery for youngsters while the aged consider them as mere “light” entertainment.

Meanwhile, publications on paper ― including newspapers, magazines and even books ― face serious survival challenges throughout the world.

Media may change. Expressions and speech skills may evolve. But the importance of sincerity, integrity and authenticity of a person’s beliefs and statements will not change. Maybe this is my simple hope while the reality is to the contrary, but I do hope for it.

When college professors retire these days, their biggest headache is disposing of hundreds or even thousands of books from their university offices. Some can afford to open a new office to store books and receive guests but when the majority try to donate them to public libraries most politely turn down the offer or just diffidently ask them to bring the books to the library to be reviewed.

Are we advancing intellectually? Enough to have even our presidential candidates so widely informed, and thoroughly prepared for public communication? As they say, “All that glitters is not gold,” and politicians’ appearances may be deceiving. The next five years will show us the gains and losses of our changing election system and the culture of this nation.

The writer is the chairwoman of the Korea Heritage Education Institute (K*Heritage). Her email address is Heritagekorea21@gmail.com. <The Korea Times/Kim Ji-myung>