I am not a political analyst. This is just an ordinary person’s observations and penning of my understanding of democratic systems.
The paradox of democracy: 1 man, 1 vote
Democracy is simple: Every eligible citizen votes for the candidate they want to run the country or a specified area. The simplicity lies in its complexities and difficulties as democracy evolves with the country’s progress.
Plurality of voices; rise of “wokeness”
Pleasing everyone with the limited resources
When times were challenging, basic issues dominated as people eke for a better life — employability, inflation, housing and education. As society evolves and progresses, everyone has more and different views, interests and rising aspirations. These are diverse issues ranging from social mobility, housing, economic prospects, healthcare and education. It can also be LGBT, ministers’ salaries, the influx of foreigners, arts and sports, racism, gender equality, the death penalty and mobility for physical handicaps.
A strength of democracy is that it allows wide diverse voices to be heard. Everyone has the right to voice and vote, regardless of race, religion, gender, or social status. This diversity of voices helps to ensure that the government is responsive to the needs of its citizens.
Each interest group regards their interests as important and wants the politicians and governments to do something. This is also the rise of the “wokeness” ideology. It is hard to please everyone. This can become a weakness of democracy. As views and interests get more diverse with rising expectations in each issue and together, it becomes more and more difficult to prioritise the issues, reach a consensus and find solutions that everyone agrees on and implement with limited resources. Few voters may be concerned about the limited resources, capital allocation or the needs of others. They want the outcomes and do not think about issues relating to their implementation. They are also not aware of what the government has done for others. They are looking at their governments narrowly with what the latter has done for them.Societies become more divisive, less cohesive and less resilient. With each election, needs and expectations get more varied and each vote gets more complicated.
Politics make us dumber.
Polarisation: Support or oppose; there is no in-between.
Voting means ticking and supporting one and rejecting the rest (i.e. mutually exclusive). We believe in the “goodness” of one and criticise the “badness” of the other. We become “extreme” to support “everything of one” and reject “everything of others”. This can lead to polarization and cognitive biases, such as identity bias, status quo bias, confirmation bias, groupthink and motivated reasoning. These biases affect us in several ways:
- We become more polarised. When we are exposed to political news and information, we are often only exposed to information that confirms our beliefs.
This can lead to partisan politics; being less willing to listen and objecting to opposing viewpoints. People believe that they are right and others are wrong. They can be dogmatists. Can the chasm be closed?
Societies become divided, dysfunctional and difficult to agree on solutions and work together on pressing issues. - We become more emotional. Political discussions can often be very emotional and less rational. We become biased. We are less open to new information and want others to accept our views rather than be convinced by theirs. Our views become irreconcilable.
- We become less informed. Political news and information can be very complex. It is difficult to stay updated
Because of our identity and confirmation biases, we seek and consume information that is aligned with ourselves and that the information is not holistic and objective. - We become less engaged in civic life. When we feel overwhelmed or frustrated with politics, we may be less likely to participate in civic life. This can make it more difficult to hold our leaders accountable and to make our voices heard.
In normal circumstances, there are shades of grey with a spectrum of strengths and weaknesses. Politics becomes a sensitive topic like region, race and our sports teams. We become more binary, more biased and less objective. Political views can be hard to change.
Election is a beauty contest.
First impressions last (i.e. halo effect).
Voters are more likely to vote for candidates who are attractive, charismatic and eloquent; voters make decisions based on superficial factors rather than on the candidates’ qualifications and governance capabilities.
It is important to remember that elections should not be beauty contests. Voters should consider a candidate’s policies, experience, and personality when making their decision; not just the superficialities (their appearance, ularity and speeches).
The democratic election process can result in poorer quality of the political candidates in a few ways.
- The need to raise large sums of money to finance campaigns can give an advantage to wealthy candidates and make it difficult for qualified candidates from less affluent backgrounds to run for office.
- Politicians often prioritize policies that yield immediate benefits for their constituents and keep them going for policies that people like. They avoid actions to solve complicated long-term issues that are difficult to solve, unpopular, and cause short-term pains.
- Many voters may not understand or appreciate the long-term effects of political decisions until decades later, especially in critical areas such as education, social mobility, social security, healthcare, defence, and foreign investments.
- Economic development and nation-building take years and decades. Short-term decisions that may seem good now can have negative consequences in the long run. This can lead to bad decision-making, a lack of planning, and a culture of risk aversion that prioritizes avoiding mistakes over innovation and progress.
- It is easier for politicians to focus on what is popular and short-term than what is right and long-term, result in budget deficits, less investment, and missed opportunities for sustainable development. It can also lead to systemic problems being ignored and future generations being left with significant challenges and burdens.
- It is important for voters to be aware of the potential long-term consequences of political decisions and to hold their leaders accountable for their actions.
- It is easier to focus on what is popular and the short-term than what is right and the longer term. Political candidates campaign for as much gains and less pain as possible to win; prioritizing politics over policies. Spending more and taxing less to please and make the lives of voters better now can result in budget deficits and less investment in the longer term. By neglecting the long-term perspective, governments miss opportunities for sustainable development, fail to address systemic problems, and potentially leave future generations with significant challenges and burdens.
- The media can play a role in shaping public opinion and can sometimes give undue attention to candidates who are not qualified or who do not have the best interests of the people at heart.
- The democratic election process can be manipulated or corrupted by special interests or by wealthy individuals who seek to influence the outcome of elections.
- The democratic election process can be a long and arduous process that can discourage qualified candidates from running for office.
The democratic process is to vote for a popular and more capable candidate to lead the country. It is difficult to judge a candidate during election campaigning. It will be bad if the winning candidates turn out to be popular but not as capable as expected and lead the country further into dire straits. The voters have to wait for the next election for a change but the damage is done.
Tyranny of the immediate
Short-term gains, long-term pains
Politicians’ terms in office are short. Many countries impose term limits. Power can corrupt; they fear the abuse of power.
However, there are trade-offs. With a shorter term, elected officials may prioritise policies that have immediate benefits for their constituents. They need to show the “needed” results to be re-elected. They keep going for policies that people like. They avoid actions to solve complicated long-term issues that are difficult to solve, unpopular and cause short-term pains. Many voters may not understand and appreciate the long-term effects and implications of what has been done and not done until decades later (many elections later), especially in critical areas such as education, social mobility, social security, healthcare, defence and foreign investments. Economic development and nation-building take decades. What is “good”, “easy” and “harmless” now can be very wrong many years from now. This can have several negative consequences:
- Bad decision-making: Politicians who focus on the short term may make decisions that are not in the country’s best interests in the long run.
- Neglect of solving long-term problems: Long-term problems, such as poverty, healthcare, education and climate change, can be neglected if politicians focus mainly on short-term issues. They are kicking the problems down to the next candidates.
- A lack of planning: Politicians who focus on the short term may not be able to plan for the future, which makes it difficult to address long-term challenges.
- Stagnation through safety. A culture of risk aversion where avoiding mistakes and failures is prioritized over innovation and progress.
It is easier to focus on what is popular and the short-term than what is right and the longer term. Political candidates campaign for as much gains and less pain as possible to win; prioritising politics over policies. Spending more and taxing less to please and make the lives of voters better now can result in budget deficits and less investment in the longer term.
By neglecting the long-term perspective, governments miss opportunities for sustainable development, fail to address systemic problems, and potentially leave future generations with significant challenges and burdens. The results are that nation-critical difficult problems remain unresolved. The latter offer poor short-term effort-returns and risk-returns, thus, not worthwhile to solve. They go for easy wins and kick the hard problems down the road. The countries become less competitive and cohesive in the longer term. It can be difficult for the voters to judge. This is evidenced in many democratic countries.
What is clear: Many problems that countries face are deep-rooted. They are caused by years of neglect for long-term policies and the desire for easy short-term wins. It is difficult for many to evaluate the implications of the policies in the longer term. This only becomes more evident decades later when the countries’ situations worsen.
Different countries need to find a system that works best.
Political pluralism
More voices, more fragments, less progress
With time, more political parties represent different ideologies, interests and agendas. This diversity of opinions can lead to fragmentation and make it challenging for any party to secure an outright majority in elections. To overcome this challenge, political parties may engage in coalition-building, forming alliances with other parties to gain a combined majority.
The advantages of political pluralism include representing a wide range of perspectives and fostering a more inclusive political landscape. However, it can lead to challenges in governance, as forming a coalition may involve compromises and negotiation, and it may be harder to implement decisive policies for the country to progress.
Self-serving and corrupt politics
A facade
Some politicians are motivated by personal interests and to use their positions of power to enrich themselves and/or their families, rather than the interests of their constituents or the country as a whole. They use their positions to award contracts to friends and family members, accept bribes, take advantage of insider information, silence critics and promote their agenda. They maintain a different social persona with the public and the latter find it hard to believe that the politicians are corrupt and self-serving. Widespread corruption can have a devasting impact on the country (Malaysia and Lebanon).
There is a need for a separate independent institution (a second key) to guard against self-serving and corrupt politicians. We can never be sure whether their interests are for the country or if they design complicated schemes that can ruin the country. Independent oversight to audit and check the government and politicians is important.
Identity politics/sectarianism
Unite a race, religion or a population segment but divide the country
To win the election, some political candidates and parties exploit on dissents to play the race and religion cards or the lower-income groups; seeking to mobilize voters based on shared identities. This can be divisive and harmful. While it unites and seeks support from a race or a religion, It can lead to increased prejudice and discrimination. It magnifies religious differences and creates political instability, economic inequality and external interference. It can have a devasting impact and more difficult to build a cohesive and inclusive society as a country. We can observe major social fault lines in many countries which are difficult to heal once developed.
Do religion and politics have something in common that explains this similarity? One possible explanation is that they deal with questions that have no definite answers, so there’s no back pressure on people’s opinions. Since no one can be proven wrong, every opinion is equally valid, and sensing this, everyone lets fly with theirs.
But this isn’t true. There are certainly some political questions that have definite answers, like how much a new government policy will cost. But the more precise political questions suffer the same fate as the vaguer ones.
I think what religion and politics have in common is that they become part of people’s identity, and people can never have a fruitful argument about something that’s part of their identity. By definition they’re partisan.
…. The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you.
Paul Graham, Keep your identity small
Democracy’s megaphone
Grabbing attention
The role of media (mainstream, social media) in elections and politics is crucial and multifaceted. Media serves as an important platform for political communication, shaping public opinion, facilitating the exchange of information, and holding political actors accountable. Both play significant roles in influencing elections and politics, albeit in different ways. Here’s a breakdown of how each can exert influence:
Mainstream media:
- Agenda-setting: Mainstream media outlets have the power to set the agenda by determining which stories, issues, and candidates receive the most coverage and attention. By highlighting certain topics and downplaying others, they can shape public perception and the political discourse.
- Framing: Media outlets can frame stories in a particular manner, influencing how the audience perceives events and individuals. The framing of political issues can shape public opinion, either by emphasizing certain aspects or by presenting them from a specific ideological or partisan perspective.
- Candidate visibility and image: Mainstream media plays a crucial role in shaping a candidate’s public image and visibility. Through coverage of campaign events, debates, interviews, and analysis, media outlets can amplify or diminish a candidate’s visibility and affect public perception of their competence, character, and policy positions.
- Fact-checking and accountability: Traditional media outlets often engage in fact-checking and investigative journalism, holding political actors accountable for their statements, actions, and policies. By exposing misinformation, corruption, or misconduct, they play a crucial role in maintaining transparency and informing the public.
Social media:
- Viral spread of information: Social media platforms enable the rapid dissemination of information, allowing political messages, news, and campaign materials to reach a vast audience quickly. Information, whether accurate or misleading, can go viral, potentially shaping public opinion and political discourse.
- User-generated content: Social media platforms provide individuals with the ability to create and share their content, opinions, and perspectives. This user-generated content can influence public sentiment, mobilize support, and engage in political discussions, thereby impacting elections and politics.
- Micro-targeting and personalized messaging: Social media platforms offer targeted advertising capabilities, allowing political campaigns to reach specific demographic groups with tailored messages. This personalized approach can influence voters’ opinions, preferences, and behaviour.
- Echo chambers and filter bubbles: Social media algorithms tend to prioritize content based on user’s preferences, leading to the formation of echo chambers and filter bubbles. This can reinforce existing beliefs and limit exposure to diverse perspectives, potentially polarizing public opinion and political discourse.
- Disinformation and misinformation: Social media platforms can be vulnerable to the spread of false or misleading information; more mudslinging and blaming games. Malicious actors (among the voters and/or foreign countries) can exploit these platforms to disseminate propaganda, and misinformation (half-truths and fake news), or engage in coordinated influence campaigns, which can impact public sentiment, sow discord, and undermine the integrity of elections.
Both mainstream media and social media have their own biases, limitations, and challenges. Citizens have to evaluate information, seek diverse sources, and engage in media literacy to navigate the complex media landscape and make well-informed decisions in elections and politics.
A more important, more difficult and less attractive job
Governing a country well is important but undesirable to be a politician
Politicians need to be good at winning votes (politics) and capable of running the country well for the longer term (governance). Not many are good at both. Governance becomes difficult and politics becomes dirty. Competent and qualified people are less willing to step up to be involved in politics and governance while some get involved for possible “personal gains”. It is not worthwhile. The efforts-return is not attractive. There is less privacy for themselves and the family members and amplified through social media. Any glitches and mistakes are being watched and commented; they are also being amplified and memifed. The competent professionals can earn more elsewhere, live a quieter and happier life and contribute to society in different ways. Politics has become a less attractive cause. This can become a vicious cycle until some qualified people with a strong sense of patriotism and duty decide to step up amidst the challenges.
Policy complexities and its long-term implications
Ability to assess the candidates and performances
The cause and effect of the policies and the quality of governance and leadership make it difficult for voters to understand and evaluate the public policies and their impact well and early. This difficulty arises from several factors, including the numerous variables affecting the outcome of a policy, the long time it can take for policies to play out their impact, and the lack of clear and consistent evidence about the costs and benefits of policies.
Policy complexity can have several consequences. It can make it difficult for voters to make informed decisions about who to vote for, and it can make it difficult for governments to design and implement effective policies. This can create a vicious cycle. The problems faced currently can be the results of policies implemented by several previous governments.
This highlights the challenges faced by voters in acquiring the necessary knowledge and understanding to make well-informed decisions about governance and policy choices.
Also, some policies may be good and some may not be good. How should we assess and decide with our one vote?
It is difficult for the majority of voters to know who and what will be good for the long term. People vote based on who they trust and believe. It is not possible to get it right and it may not be the best person standing for elections. Very few professional and experienced investors themselves are good to identify and hold multibaggers; let alone the majority of the voters.
Outcomes and factors of democracy
What do we want out of democracy?
There are several outcomes that democracy should achieve; they include:
- Improved economic well-being: Economic growth can raise the median household income through foreign investments, local companies growing and expanding and good job opportunities
- Better education outcomes: Opportunities for students to succeed, pursue their interests and realise their potential regardless of families’ backgrounds
- Greater social cohesion and peace: A safe country where there is a rule of law and everyone is treated equally and a high level of social trust in the country not divided by gender, race, religion or other characteristics
There are two key factors influencing these outcomes: meritocracy and corruption.
Democracy is an important factor in determining the well-being of citizens and the country as a whole, it is NOT the only factor. It does play an important role in affecting many other factors to achieve the desired outcomes that people want for themselves and the country.
Beware of breaking moments
These are the moments when the democratic system is under threat. The possible factors for the system to break:
- Widening wealth gap and there is a wealth gap clash. This happens when people believe (or perceive) that they have limited or no opportunity to rise up and be wealthy. This could be due to situations where powers are accentuated into a few people and businesses due to their monopolistic powers and/or association with the government.
- Weakening meritocracy. This happens when people believe (or perceive) that there is no equal opportunity to succeed in the country in terms of education, employment, housing and healthcare. Being democratic, there should also be a meritocracy of ideas and talents for the government and country.
- Erosion of trust in institutions: When people lose trust in the institutions that are supposed to uphold democracy, such as the police, the judiciary and the media, it can lead to a breakdown of the system.
- Rise of populism: Populist movements that appeal to people’s fears and prejudices can be a threat to democracy because they can undermine the rule of law and the institutions of democracy.
- Foreign interference: Foreign actors are trying to influence elections and public opinion in many countries. This can undermine the legitimacy of elections and the rule of law.
- Economic crisis: Economic crises can lead to social unrest and instability. This can make it difficult to maintain a democratic system.
Often, these are the results of focusing on the short term and what is popular. There are no checks and controls on the elected politicians. What they do now can have huge implications over the long term.
It is complicated.
The Rise and Fall of Empires
Sir John Bagot Glubb (1897–1986) was a British soldier, scholar and author who led and trained Transjordan’s Arab Legion between 1939 and 1956. After he retired from the British army, he wrote a profound essay, The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival, which analyses the life-span of great nations, from their genesis to their decline. Glubb notes that, over the past 3,000 years. most great nations do not last longer than 250 years (or 10 generations), and many last much shorter periods.
The stages of the rise and fall of great nations seem to be as follows and all the empires he analysed went through the same (seven) stages.
- The Age of Pioneers (Outburst)
- The Age of Conquests
- The Age of Commerce
- The Age of Affluence
- The Age of Intellect
- The Age of Decadence
- The Age of Decline & Collapse
What marked the penultimate age? Defensiveness, pessimism, materialism, frivolity, an influx of foreigners, the welfare state, and a weakening of religion. To what did he attribute this decadence? Too long a period of wealth and power, selfishness, love of money, and the loss of a sense of duty.
Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.
G. Michael Hopf, Those Who Remain
Is there a “law of physics” that is unstoppable? Will we band together (Manhatten Project moment) only during existential situations/age of decline and collapse / existential situations?
Ray Dalio’s study of the rise and fall of the nations and the changing world order is another great material to study. His video on the topic is a must-watch.
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order by Ray Dalio
Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order (5-minute Version) by Ray Dalio
Evolution of political systems
Political systems have evolved with time in response to various factors such as economic development, social development, technological advances and wars. Early political systems were often based on kinship or tribal affiliations. As societies became more complex, these systems gave way to more centralized forms of government, such as monarchies and empires.
In the modern era, democracy has become the most common form of government, although there are still many countries that are ruled by authoritarian regimes. The evolution of political systems is a complex and ongoing process. Political systems will likely continue to change in the future in response to new challenges and opportunities. There is a growing call for greater transparency and accountability in government. Here are some of the challenges that political systems are facing today:
- Globalization: Globalization is the process of increasing interconnectedness between countries. Information can flow freely with foreign social platforms and influencers which can result in foreign interferences. High-income, and skilled personnel can migrate easily. Money moves easily too.
- Inequality: Inequality is the gap between the rich and the poor. This is a growing problem in many countries, and it is putting a strain on political systems. When the gap gets too wide with a lack of social mobility, it can lead to serious social problems.
- Political polarization: Political polarization is the division of a society into two or more opposing groups. This is a growing problem in many countries, and it is making it difficult for governments to function effectively.
- Lack of faith in the political system: When many people believe that the democratic system is corrupt and that their vote does not make a difference, this can make it difficult for people to get involved in politics and trust the system and the leaders.
Tocqueville effect (aka Tocqueville paradox; Progress paradox)
It describes a seemingly contradictory phenomenon: as social conditions and opportunities improve, social frustration can grow more quickly.
Here’s the core idea:
- Imagine a society with significant inequalities. People are used to these disparities, even if they aren’t happy with them.
- Now, imagine reforms are implemented, leading to improvements in social conditions and opportunities for many.
- According to the Tocqueville effect, this newfound progress can raise expectations and heighten awareness of remaining inequalities. Even small disparities might now seem more glaring and unacceptable compared to the previous situation.
- This increased awareness can fuel frustration and discontent, even if the overall situation is demonstrably better than before. It’s as if “the appetite grows by what it feeds on.”
The Tocqueville effect doesn’t imply that progress is undesirable. It simply highlights a potential unintended consequence of positive change.
It doesn’t suggest that people are ungrateful. Instead, it emphasizes the power of rising expectations and the human tendency to compare their situation to others.
The effect isn’t deterministic. Other factors, such as effective communication, can mitigate its impact.
The Tocqueville effect reminds us that progress, while necessary, may come with its own set of challenges.
Nothing lasts forever.
Democracy is not a silver bullet.
Democracy has not uplifted most developing democratic countries towards better economic growth and standard of living. Many developed democratic countries are not faring well too. Corruption, weak institutions and inequality are some reasons; made worse by global economic shocks. Democracy is not the silver bullet.
Democracy is complex and imperfect with both strengths and weaknesses that must be carefully navigated. The challenges highlighted above suggest that the reality of democracy does not always live up to its ideals and that ongoing vigilance and reform may be necessary to address its shortcomings.
The success of a country has many moving parts beyond having a democratic system. Many factors can contribute to the success or failure of democracy; such as the level of education and civic engagement of the population, the strength of the rule of law, and the existence of checks and balances on the power of the government.
Democracy cannot be static; it is a process that needs to evolve to the relevance of the country. Democracy is a system created by people. However, this can be tricky as any proposed changes can be interpreted as having ulterior motives and manipulative. Without the required changes, the political system remains lagging with its weaknesses being exploited. These can have serious long-term implications for the country.
History will repeat.
We can find traces of the seven stages of the rise and fall of great nations highlighted above happening in many countries currently. Certain universal truths about human nature transcend time and place. While there are certainly some differences between people from different cultures and historical periods, we are all similar in our basic needs, attitudes, emotions and desires as we react and adjust to different situations. Of course, there are also many ways in which humans have changed over time. We have developed new technologies, new ways of thinking, and new ways of interacting with each other. But even with all of these changes, there is still something fundamentally human about us.
End of history illusion
Countries that have experienced significant economic growth or political stability in recent years may be more likely to believe that they have reached a point of peak development and that there is little room for further improvement. This can lead to complacency and a lack of innovation, ultimately hindering a country’s long-term growth.
Another aspect of the end-of-history illusion can be applied to international relations. Countries that believe they have reached a state of dominance and power may be less likely to engage in cooperation or compromise with other countries. This can lead to conflict and instability in the global system.
Peace and prosperity should not be taken for granted. It is the quality of the political leaders and the prevailing political culture that determine the quality of the governance and the country’s economic and social progress to a large extent. It is a major determinant of the quality of life and struggle of the people. The political system must be able to allow competent leaders to step up and stop corrupted leaders from ruining the country. Otherwise, democracy is just a deceptive facade.
Circle of Concern and Influence
Focusing on the Circle of Concern
Using the concept of the Circle of Concern and Circle of Influence from the book “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People” by Stephen Covey, many focus on and enlarge the Circle of Concern by commenting, judging and whining about the politics and government on what they should do. This focus on the Circle of Concern results in blaming and accusing attitudes, reactive language, and increased feelings of victimization. The negative energy generated by that focus, combined with neglect of areas to do something about, causes the Circle of Influence to shrink.
Many believe that they are expanding their Circle of Influence and not their Circle of Concern. Not true,
- They are interested in sharing their views (more often, complaining) and are insistent on their views that they are not interested in listening to alternative views for a more constructive discussion. The views can be inaccurate and incomplete.
- Their views represent what they want (wilfully) without considering the resources required and available. What would they do differently?
No, nothing is solved. It is easy for anyone to give an opinion. They are armchair critics and quarterbacks who are more concerned (whining) about the state of affairs than doing anything constructive to contribute and help. They like to predict and feast on the negativities.
The net result is an expanding Circle of Concern more than the Circle of Influence. This will add to feelings of stress and helplessness because you cannot change anything in the Circle of Concern which is getting bigger.
Admittedly, political discussions have become sensitive and polarised. I prefer not to participate in political chats and focus on other stuff. However, I will clarify and correct any inaccuracies where needed.
A fault-finding mind will not bring happiness.
Ajahn Brahm
Focusing on the Circle of Influence
Talk less, do something.
Proactive people focus their efforts on the Circle of Influence to improve their lives and that of others. They learn more and yet do not enlarge their Circle of Concern consciously. Instead, they take responsibility and work on the things they can do something about.
Country ≠ Government
The country is not just the responsibility of the government. We can also do our part to help others in our little ways. Do something substantive if we passionately believe in change; take charge and be the change.
By doing something, we can have a better first-hand understanding of the actual situation. It helps to develop our awareness and humility. It also helps us to appreciate our well-being, peace and prosperity so that we are born healthy in the right country, the right family in the right era. If any of the variables change, our fate can change drastically. So, don’t be complacent and accept our good fortune as default.
The nature of their energy is positive, enlarging, and magnifying, causing their Circle of Influence to increase. Life will be easier and happier.
Change our attitude and perspective: It is what we choose to focus on and work on. Focus on what is good and we will realise that the world can be more good than bad. Start small and enlarge the circle.
Focus on what you can control and don’t waste energy on the things that you cannot.
Unknown
Be globally mobile
Yes, there can be circumstances that we believe are difficult to resolve and we dislike. There will be circumstances where we and our families can do better elsewhere and perhaps, contribute better.
- Develop the skillsets that are in high demand in many countries; these are usually the professionals (doctors, finance, investments, engineering, tech)
- Develop those skillsets that can operate anywhere (just with the internet)
- Develop the skills and attitude to live and settle well in other countries as a local. The trade-off is our home, a familiar place and the need to assimilate into the new country and surroundings.
- Always stay humble and be empathetic
- Do not be xenophobic
- Do not show superiority and arrogance because of our native citizenship, worth and profession
- Help and contribute to the local community where possible
