Presidential ambitions as a driving force of state

The fact that so many citizens of Kyrgyzstan are not only dreamed but   convinced and assumed they would to be an excellent president is a positive sign.

Assumption shapes our reality, it is more than what we see around. If a person sincerely believes they are worthy of such a goal, they will achieve what they set out to do.

And while not every citizen of Kyrgyzstan who holds this sincere belief can actually become president, such a conviction will nonetheless foster their own personal growth and contribute to the advancement of the nation.

Anyone who is convinced they would make a worthy president—perhaps even someone in the mold of Lee Kuan Yew, V;clav Havel, or Abraham Lincoln—will naturally dedicate their life to self-improvement and remain actively engaged in the country’s public affairs.Even if they never become the nation’s leader, they will still secure a respectable place within society.

It is vital that good people dream big and set lofty, ambitious goals for themselves—not because this might lead to political chaos or disorder, but, on the contrary, to prevent demagogues, criminals, and megalomaniacs from rising to power.

I am more than convinced that individuals such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, Bocasso, and Kim Sen Ir were not necessarily "bad" people to begin with.

However, absolute authority and dictatorship caused them to degenerate into full-blown, pathological figures—a process that occurred largely because the intelligent and decent people in their circles failed to stand up to them in time. Although Stalin and many other leaders who rose to power were initially linked to the criminal underworld—and were, in their very essence and nature, amoral individuals—even such people, should they attain power, would be more likely to reform within a democratic environment than to degenerate into hardened criminals.

In an authoritarian environment, by contrast, their transformation into bloodthirsty dictators is all but inevitable.

From this perspective, Kyrgyzstan—like most nations across Asia and the rest of the world where the principles of democracy and popular sovereignty are little more than empty words—finds itself in a zone of particular danger.

In a nascent political landscape such as ours, the only way to prevent—or even render impossible—the rise of potential bloodthirsty dictators is for as many people as possible to harbor presidential ambitions.

Ultimately, if every individual in Kyrgyzstan were to genuinely believe that they would make a good president, it would foster an environment conducive to the healthiest form of political struggle and competition—one that allows for the birth and strengthening of democratic institutions and the rule of the people.

This would accelerate our progress toward creating a prosperous society—a nation where all citizens thrive, much like in Switzerland or Singapore, where 60 percent of the population has no desire for a pay raise or a promotion.

If the average monthly salary for a citizen of Kyrgyzstan were 10,000 dollars, if the country’s president changed every year, and if members of parliament were limited to a single four-year term, then the majority of our citizens would likely find contentment. They would no longer aspire to the presidency, nor would they relentlessly pursue higher incomes—a pursuit that often leads people to stop at nothing to achieve their goals.

In this way, the entire population of Kyrgyzstan would no longer be collectively dreaming of becoming the country’s president.