There are those who find complete satisfaction in what they know and how they expect things to be in line with what they know.  These are the ones who, in their stagnancy of thought,  miss out on the richness of going beyond the horrizon, not acknowledging that knowledge,  as life, is is a never ending journey of exploration and discovery.

They are like the acclaimed wise village chief who comes to the city for the first time. He stands on the beach and considers what he sees as the line between the sea and the sky as the end of the world. He goes back to the village and makes his starkling justification of the traditional view that the world has an end. The news of this spreads wide until a young girl who comes to the village for vacation explains to them the actuality of the roundness of the earth and it's position in space, trillions and trillions of light years away from the sky.

We find many Liberians with this deadly affliction. For them,  all there is and ought to be is what they have come to know to be all there is and ought to be. That they have come to completion of everything to know,  they conclude that what they do not know to be all there is and ought to be is false and does not exist. That is why they posit that Ambassador George Manneh Weah lacks all sense of direction,  vision or ideas.  And it is on this note I would endeavor to journey  them beyond their horrizon of knowledge so as to make them see him in a new and dynamic way, dismiss their stagnant view about him and relieve themselves of its derivative affliction.

I understand these people when they look for leaders with  sense of direction, vision or ideas. In fact,  I join in their quest.  But what I do not accept is the way they castigate Ambassador Weah based on  one-sided interpretation of what constitute men of high sense of direction, vision or ideas. The delusion they carry is that Ambassador George Weah has not read some of the best treatises on political economy and political philosophy to have a sound understanding of farsightedness and ideological clarity necessary for political leadership.  Thus,  they label him as an example of a bad leader, a visionless leader. What a charge!

Let's  accept for the sake of this discussion what they say that Ambassador Weah has not flipped the works of great men and women on matters of politics,   economics and philosophy; he hasn't written a scholarly piece like Marx, Lenin, Mao, Nkrumah,  Nyerere and others.  In deconstructing this,  we are posed to ask: Did all the great visionary laders in history read Marx and others before becoming visionary?  Haven't we seen many ideological leaders surfacing to power and becoming some of the greatest despots, flunkies and reactionaries?

Don't get me wrong! I would have love to see Ambassador Weah as highly versed in the revolutionary literarures because I come from this background. But the truth is,  history has a way of doing great things in suprising ways. George Weah is this phenomenon these critics can't understand because they fail to understand this historical fact. They would not accept that a visionary leader doesn't have to be as ideological are Nkrumah or Nyerere.

Ambassador Weah's visionary leadership is a complete phenomenon to his haters. He has not gone through their mechanical steps to be worthy of such a title. So have many great leaders in history. They do not see the fact that as a Liberian, he has seen the afflictions of his people and has had his fair share of this affliction.  Growing up in Gibraltar, New Kru Town, he tasted the harshness of bad governance in the forms of the poverty and total backwardness of the masses. By Providence, discipline and dedication to practice,  he would rise to stardom in the soccer arena . Living in Europe, he would come to see vividly how these countries have changed dramatically through a kind of leadership that contrasts from the backward type which has long characterized his nation Liberia. 

Realistically, Ambassador Weah had the opportunity to see the contradictions between two societies: his native Liberia and Europe. He learned from direct experience and interaction what others locked themselves up in half-dark rooms to read about. He didn't get infected with certain backward rhetorics which characterized some of these pieces. His deep passion to see his country rise from its shackles awoke his consciousness and determination to form part of this great national process which call on all compatriots to be a part of.  With his direct experience drawn from two different societies,  Ambassador Weah developed a clear vision, a roadmap of how he wants his country be become. 

He has come to realize that  power and wealth has been in the hands of few men and women who  do so to keep the masses in poverty, subjection,  and at their mercies for survival. He has seen the effects of corruption and other bad governance practices. He has seen how Liberians do not dominate the economic life of the state and how the state does more importing than exporting. He knows how we have failed to develop agriculture and industry as in Europe and elsewhere. And he developed  the awareness eversince his conscious awakening to these contradictions that Liberia will not advance unless these issues are addressed. Thus, he would bring out his famous statement: Power to the People. 

The  expression "Power to the People " which is now the first pilliar of the Change for Hope agenda is a complete package of a true visionary leader. When economic and political power are given to the people under the leadership of a passionate and change seeking leader like Ambassador Weah, all the contradictions stalling the nation's progress will be addressed. This is because the people become part of the decisions of their common destiny. Isn't this a clear vision, direction or idea for genuine change, Weah haters?

We can see from this single expression that Ambassador Weah has expressed in simple terms the foremost solution to the ideological dispitute over the distribution of power and wealth. How could he have come to this stricking awareness if he didn't read any of the great pieces on the subject. The answer lies in the historical fact that many have walked this road before and this is a logic of history we must accept.  They were not baptised in any ideological school of thought except that their deep passion for change enabled them to pay keen attention to the way things have been in society and they were able to see beyond the contradictions what needed to be done.  In another term,  direct history thought them. George Weah is no exception.

With this clear vision, George Weah can now rally the support of everyone, including the experts, and influence them all to work toward achieving it. All he is required to do is to believe in this vision, remain focused on achieving it, seek good counsels and put in the rightful good governance mechanisms.

Already,  the people have embraced his vision. They have longed to see themselves being part of the national decision making so as to change their living conditions for the better. This is the hope which has kept them going admist difficult circumstances.  And clearly drawing out the vision which expresses the general aspirations of the people, Ambassador Weah has offered to lead the change in order to realize their hopes. It is only a matter of time when the deal is finally signed, sealed and saved.

Behold,  the time of the masses redemption has come and let none stand before is crushing force!

What is your take? Please post your comments below: