In this year's presidential election, there is very little leadership that inspires, is open, and inspires faith in the future.
The presidential election early voting starts next week, in the middle of an almost grave social atmosphere. No matter how you go about the race, Finland is looking for a president at the end of an exceptionally honest and careful election debate.
As far as arguments go, the president is now being treated to a considerable extent as the leader of the past. When you look at the development of the presidential institution in Finland in recent decades, such a spiritual return to the past cannot be considered positive.
Times are serious, and Finns really don't want a light-hearted joker as their president – never have. When the situation in world politics is still this tense, it can be seen in the campaign as well.
With the exception of minor nuances, all the candidates are genuinely unanimous in foreign and security policy. In today's politics, that undoubtedly has its advantages. Unlike, for example, in the United States, the people do not have to worry about how big a change in the country's line will take place during the elections. Stability is also a value in Finland.
The positive thing about this unanimity of candidates is that it shows that Finnish parliamentarism works. The president's powers are limited and clear. There is no longer an old-fashioned debate about what the president should intervene in and what not. Now we are clearly looking for a leader of foreign and security policy, with whom there is certainly an opportunity to combine spiritual value leadership as well. But mostly things are decided in parliament, as it should be.
For value leadership however, a unified ethos of seriousness is a difficult thing. There is now a very wide range of prudence and, especially in the case of one candidate, an emphasis on fear and threats. There is very little available leadership that inspires, is open and inspires faith in the future.
It's hard to think that in a world that's getting more complicated all the time, leading to this kind of 1980s way would really be a return. However, this campaign – and also the election debates – seem to be directing the candidates in the direction of the old-time presidency.
Until the end of the Cold War, the institution of the presidency and the Soviet Union were serious matters in Finland with really big letters. In the 1990s and 2000s, the atmosphere in society relaxed significantly, although the Finns didn't want a light-footed power user even then. No Veltto Virtanes there were opportunities, but personalities like him were possible in politics. They also joked about the elections and the president.
“
Mere prudence does not create faith in the future.
When the candidates are widely also quite similar in profile, at worst the election campaign promotes the outdated idea that only a certain type of person can speak about serious issues in our country. Always before in the history of Finland, this kind of power was represented by a man who spoke seriously, slowly and in a deep voice, of a certain age and spoke in a certain way.
Even those candidates whose real personality would be more free are now playing it safe. The people are thought to be in need of solid seriousness. In this day and age, this can really be the case, but in management, such an assumption is always a cycle that feeds itself.
With the manager – especially the value leader of the country – always has the opportunity to somehow influence how the people they manage feel. The governed, in this case the voters, can always be made at least somewhat more fearful or somewhat braver. And Finns should be the latter.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with being careful, at a certain age or gender. A flamboyant style is not an absolute value. However, in a democracy, being able to choose between genuinely different candidates and genuinely different leadership styles would be of great importance. Fear or mere caution does not create faith in the future.
It is still possible for these candidates to distinguish themselves from each other in the final debates. They can also distinguish themselves from the ethos of the past world, which will not return. They should do that, now we are electing a president for the 2020s.
The author is the editor-in-chief of Helsingin Sanomat.
#Column #president #true #leader #good #Finland
