Presidential IQs & intelligent leadership

In these difficult times, what is the most important quality a national leader must have? More than any other trait, Filipinos identify "being intelligent and knowledgeable in managing government" as most necessary. Close to three out of ten (28 percent) respondents in a national survey by Pulse Asia last December 2001 give this answer. "Being strong-willed and capable of equally enforcing the law on influential and ordinary people alike" gains second mention, endorsed by less than two in ten (17 percent) of those asked the same question.

Other qualities trail in importance with at most eight percent of the public mentioning them. "Being pro-poor" which in past surveys had been much demanded by Filipinos of their national leaders now fails to impress them as much. The poorest respondets themselves (those belonging to the impoverished socioeconomic class E) refuse to make it their first choice and self-denyingly make it fifth on their list.

"Producing concrete results" is paradoxically the least salient as it lands eleventh among eleven qualities tested for. Just about two percent among the public would have a national leader show hard results at this time, belying the oft-repeated canard that Filipinos are unreasonable and impatiently demand not only the moon but the sun, the stars and the whole universe from their much beleaguered, hard working and altogether noble political leaders.

Recently, perhaps in keeping with the people’s expressed desire for a leader who is intelligent and knows how to manage government well, some publicists have tried to cash in and tout the president as Malacanang’s intellectual in residence, as someone with enough IQ points to inspire the usual public awe for those brainy enough to brain the brainless several times over.

The truth is one’s IQ level may have something but not all that much to do with one’s ability to know how government works, much less manage it well. Any normally intelligent person has the requisite IQ points to know that objective reality rather than its cosmetic misrepresentation counts, that vested-interest groups treat government and its resource pool as an arena where the public interest is generally operationally excluded and that to uphold the interests of the nation in a regime which is basically oligarchic is to wage war against those few who have been historically endowed with prerogatives and perks.

One must not overrate the technical knowledge demanded of governance even in relation to managing modern societies. A prominent economist used to counseling American presidents once publicly remarked that the most basic, introductory courses in undergraduate economics would be sufficient to guide presidents in managing the American economy. One can say the same of political theories relating to the wherefores and operations of political regimes and their public administration. Public finance and the political economy of a seriously democratizing oligarchic regime - hopefully a truthful description of the Philippines under the Macapagal-Arroyo administration - demands neither the IQ of a genius nor a Ph.D in either economics or political science.

Orientation, focus and courage are obviously much more critical qualities for leaders who seriously figure in ther nation’s struggle for a recognizably more human existence.

What must be done to serve this national interest and improve the Filipino quality of life had been known to authorities in this country for well over a century now. Further expert analyses of the national condition, its developmental conditionalities and modalities have little value-added to yield. They will not differ much from the sensible observations, conclusions and recommendations of normally intelligent Filipinos who have honestly tried to make sense of their country’s increasingly deplorable condition across the years.

In remarking on the paramont need for their leaders to be intelligent and knowledgeable, the public may actually be demanding that such leaders be wise enough to know the difference between being truly intelligent and being simply IQ-impressive and smart. An intelligent leader orients himself to a nation and preferentially to those most disadvantaged in that nation; a smart leader has a compulsive obsession with himself and his immediate circle of associates. The properly intelligent and the simply smart have been contemporaries in recent Philippine history. It would really be tragic if Filipinos and their present national leaders were unable to distinguish between a Jose W. Diokno and a Ferdinand Edralin Marcos.

Given intelligence, a national leader’s knowledge about the effective running of a government is properly an asset at the service ultimately of the people. Deprived of this intelligence, smart leaders will be no more than predators and plunderers of their own nation. With intelligence properly orienting this country’s leaders - most particularly the one who happens to be president of her people - a high IQ need not be a handicap and indeed would be quite helpful in governing the Philippines in these critical times. Intelligent leaders of course also know that their people do not have to choose between charismatic and brilliant leaders. Their people can have both, if they and their leaders are both intelligent enough.

(Note: Survey results cited here come from Pulse Asia’s December 2001 Ulat ng Bayan Quarterly Survey, conducted from December 2 to 19, 2001, involving 1200 nationally representative adults 18 years old and above. This survey has a national margin of error of approximately plus/minus 3 percent and a 95 percent confidence level.)