Public servants
From my childhood, I have been noticing that top level positions e.g. prime minister, minister, secretary, additional secretary, chairman of any commission or bureau, etc. carry a lot of prestige, and those who hold the offices, barring a few exceptions, behave like being esteemed. But I wonder why it is so. Aren't they public servants? In that case, they are supposed to be humble, unassuming, unprivileged, subservient, obliging and all the other synonyms you could find in the dictionary.
The other day I was watching Islamic TV and someone was speaking about the lifestyle of Umar(RA), the second Caliph of Islam. Once he was on a state visit to a Christian-ruled state, I don't remember which one, and the Christians had taken all the preparations for a ceremonious reception. But the first shock the Christians had was that there was no official entourage; only two people were seen coming, one on the back of a camel, the other holding the reins. Expectedly, the official of the hosts rushed towards the person on the back of the camel, and gave due salutation. But the man replied that he was not the Caliph ; the Caliph was holding the reins. I think this explains what Umar(RA) really thought of the word “public servant”.
I guess the marriage of prestige and public office comes from the British era. The Nawabs and top level public office holders were the ones who could go nearest to matching the lifestyle of their British masters, and probably got the elitist tag from there. And as with so many other things, we have failed to change things that should have been changed.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments