The news that the world’s sole superpower had slipped to a historic low in a Global Corruption Index will not come as a surprise to many. This is the land of Enron, WorldCom, the subprime scandal, Wall Street wheeler dealers, etc. etc. The United States previously occupied a coveted ‘Top 20’ spot in the league of least-corrupt nations worldwide, but this year dived below the Plimsoll line to wind up at No. 22 (from 19th place in 2009).
 |
Transparency International (TI), commenting on the 178-nation index of international perceptions of corruption, attributed the US’s decline and fall to “financial scandals” and the “influence of money in politics”. The head of TI Stateside pointed to exposés of ‘Ponzi schemes’ and imbroglios over political funding for the ignominious slide of the Land of the Brave and the Free into the corruption doldrums (at least, by its perceived or self-declared standards). This is the first time in the 15-year history of the prestigious index that the economic powerhouse has not figured in the leading score of relatively corruption-free countries.
Be America’s “integrity deficit” as it may, the bad news for the top dogs in world politics does not appear to end there. In a separate ranking of the most influential men in 2010, US President Barack Obama was ousted from the No. 3 position he held last year… this time, he came in 21st – and those who note such trivia may recall that he was voted in as numero uno in 2008, just before he assumed what is arguably the world’s most powerful office. So, to whom did the embattled Chief Executive lose out? Well, in the top slot was The Daily Show host Jon Stewart – closely followed by the ubiquitous Bill Gates (who guest stars on just about all ‘most anything’ lists).
At No. 3 was FaceBook wunderkind Mark Zuckerberg, whose image ironically took a few body-blows recently in a less-than-complimentary movie of his life and times.
Not surprisingly for a nation that worships computer gods and geeks, Apple guru Steve Jobs was in fourth place. But the twists of the knife that added insult to Obama’s injury were a rash of comparative unknowns and even controversial outsiders in AskMen’s ‘Top 49 Most Influential’. I mean to say, who’s heard of Drew Brees (No. 6) and Elon Musk (No. 8) outside of the US of A? Rapper Kanye West in fifth place and actor James Franco at slot seven are understandable enough in a society where people can’t get enough of bad-boy artistes and enfants terribles – but for in-the-news-for-the-wrong-reasons Lebron James (#17) to top good old Barack stretches one’s incredulity a poll too far!
In the meantime, in an unrelated development, perennial comic-strip favourite Superman is to get a makeover that will portray him more as a dark, brooding anti-hero than the well-disposed-to-humanity good guy that aficionados of DC know him to be. In the re-interpretation of the Man of Steel’s origins, the famous Kryptonite ex-citizen will be presented to appeal more to a whole new generation of potential fans who are generally more enamoured of vampire-like Edward Cullen cum Robert Pattinson types. Clark Kent may still be tall and handsome; but he’s darker, leaner, and possibly meaner – a less than uber super man for our increasingly postmodern age.
What potential lessons are there in all of the above for us, the US, and the planet we know and love?
For one, in the arena of perceptions versus reality, that even the once-mighty can come a cropper and be counted among the fallen. If the self-declared defender of the faith in terms of transparency and good governance worldwide is shown up to be a pretender, what price redemption for Somalia, the bottom of the corruption barrel?
We won’t bother to tell you where Sri Lanka is ranked (do look it up, will you): but is there an opportunity in here somewhere for a revision of international opinion? One can only hope that our reality will fare better than previous perceptions of bribery and self-serving bureaucracy in our blessed isle…
For another, if the “man who makes the fake news” (TV host Stewart) is thought to be more influential than his Head of State (who supposedly makes the ‘real news’), what reversal of roles can be envisaged for our own politicians and propagandists? Is it possible that in Sri Lanka, too, those who shape private opinions are more powerful than the public figures whom they lionize?
Last but not least, it is clear that we live in an age where even iconic Earth-savers like the man with the cape and his underpants worn on the outside have to bow before consumer fads, tastes, and preferences – rather than be able to rely on old-fashioned and traditional loyalty. No wonder, then, that Superman among other would-be heroes of a fickle world are looking decidedly edgy today. |
E-mail
