Global and Local Impact of Barack Obama’s Leadership
Disputes around the figures of prominent leaders of the past and nowadays are integral part of contemporary politics. Their actions are discussed not merely within the boundaries of their areas of influence, but also outside these domains, where the echoes of actions and decisions taken to elevate individual influence, or laws implemented to protect the cast of political actors are also sound.
World history examples, especially those related to the developed countries has shown many political figures whose role in the formation of contemporary society is still perceived as dominant. For instance, the aggressive political doctrine of Russia and its president Putin based on country’s broadly discussed aggression against its geographical neighbors and economic partners of Ukraine and Georgia is still discussed in contemporary wisdom as the heritage of its Soviet leadership perception guided by communist leaders of Stalin and its followers. In the meantime, this contemporary wisdom frequently fails interpreting how certain countries and economies managed achieving their comparative prosperity, taking, for instance, strong political and economic standing of the Germany capitulated as a result of the Second World War five decades ago.
This example, however, was not used to present a context of political discourse in stereotyping leaders, but rather what it takes to be assessed as a global leader by the mass. Political leaders, in their pure establishment of good or evil, are more likely to be portrayed in a grayscale, since their actions, even if supported by strong experience, shiny diplomas and certificates or millions of dedicated followers, would still be evaluated against the perceived importance of mass needs. Historically, United States played important role in economies and social lives globally, criticized, adopted, blamed, godliked, or ignored depending on the context of their political actions. Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States whose leadership style has been chosen to evaluate the global impact in this paper, has faced the same fate as his forty-three predecessors, being praised or opposed for the vision of the world of his political ego and its projection on presidential administration. It is a natural order of things for the politics and for people to evaluate their leaders for what they do for satisfaction of own needs, still, global choices and reactions of outside world would still not be equivalent.
Bromwich (2014), for instance, reflected on the opinions of the mass to see Obama more like a king than the president, but “a king in a mixed constitutional system, where the duties of the crown are largely ceremonial” (para. 1). His leadership style through his second presidential term is majorly evaluated through personal envisioning of presidential office functioning as an institution to which Americans are majorly attuned (Bromwich, 2014). While this deserves particular critics in a democratic environment which United States is believed, and constitutionally confirmed, to exist in, this might still have different facets in choosing the directions of things on a global and local level. In this paper, I will further reflect …