Man in the Mirror: A Political Reflection
Who’s Really Responsible for Change—Our Leaders or Ourselves?
Who Needs to Change? Us or Them?
The other day, I was listening to Michael Jackson’s Man in the Mirror. Sure, I’m more of a Smooth Criminal or Off the Wall kind of guy, but you can’t deny MJ knew how to deliver a hook. And this particular hook got me thinking—like, really thinking.
“I’m starting with the man in the mirror.
I’m asking him to change his ways…”
Now, if you’ve read my stuff or know me personally, you might assume my brain immediately went to sushi, anime, comics, or Star Wars (and honestly, I could make a compelling argument about The Mirror Master being criminally underused in The Flash rogues gallery).
But no. Waits in Dora the Explorer pause My brain went straight to politics.
The age-old question bubbled up: who’s really responsible for change? Is our government a reflection of us, or are we a reflection of our government? It’s a chicken-or-egg situation, except instead of poultry, it’s a democracy—and depending on your perspective, one that might have its feathers ruffled.
"We Were Made to Be Ruled"—Or Were We?
From the dawn of civilization, people have sought leadership. Whether it's the Divine Right Theory, Force Theory, or the Social Contract Theory, every government essentially asks: Do you want someone to lead, inspire, and love you—or just boss you around?
Even Loki from The Avengers threw his two cents in:
"You were made to be ruled. In the end, you will always kneel."
Cue half the audience awkwardly wondering if he's wrong.
But here’s where it gets messy. Leaders are either a top-down imposition or a bottom-up reflection of who we are as a society. Let me propose something bold: maybe leaders—elected or otherwise—are just giant mirrors showing us the parts of ourselves we try to ignore.
Freud, Arnold, and the Battle of the Unconscious
Let’s take a quick Freud detour. (Yes, Freud. No, not for that reason. Get your head out of the gutter.) In his world, the "id" is our raw, chaotic desires; the "ego" handles reality; and the "superego" keeps things classy. Most of us say we want leaders who embody our superego—justice, safety, and fairness—but deep down, the id is whispering, "You want the guy who crushes enemies and hears the lamentations of their women."
Case in point: Conan the Barbarian.
Arnold Schwarzenegger didn’t actually win California’s governorship by promising to "crush his enemies," but let’s be real—half of California voted for The Terminator expecting him to say, "I’ll be back… to lower your taxes."
Leaders as Funhouse Mirrors
Think of it like this: Leaders are society's funhouse mirrors, stretching or shrinking certain traits. A society that values inclusivity might elect a unifying figure. A society in denial about its problems? They might elect someone who lets them stay comfortably oblivious.
And here’s the kicker: When we elect these leaders, we’re not just expressing who we are now; we’re projecting who we think we should be. It’s all very meta—and maybe a little terrifying.
The Ballot vs. The Bullet
Let’s get real. When we vote (or don’t), we’re casting a reflection of ourselves. Think about it: how often do we choose leaders who echo our biases, fears, and frustrations, rather than our higher aspirations?
It’s easy to blame leaders for societal problems. “This is not who we are!” we shout, conveniently ignoring that we chose them—or at least, allowed them to rise. If the government is failing, maybe it’s because we’ve been more interested in Netflix queues than policy discussions. (Although, full disclosure, I can multitask both.)
Thomas Jefferson (yes, that problematic fave) once said, “The government you elect is the government you deserve.” And before you dismiss this as another antiquated platitude from a guy who couldn’t practice what he preached, let’s unpack that.
Our leaders don’t come out of nowhere. They’re forged in the fires of our priorities, our apathy, and, let’s be honest, our contradictions. They’re a blend of what we say we want and what we actually prioritize. And that’s where the question gets juicy: if we’re unhappy with our leaders, is the real issue them—or the people who put them there?
The Mirror Doesn’t Lie
Blaming a coach when a team fails is a time-honored tradition in sports—and politics. But the truth is, if the team doesn’t have its act together, no amount of strategy from the sidelines is going to help.
So, when we look at our leaders, we need to ask tough questions:
Are they uninspiring, or are we just hard to inspire?
Do they promote division, or are they reflecting the divisions we’ve been fostering?
Are they failing us, or are we failing each other?
The Final Question
So, who really needs to change? The leader, or the people? Are we ready to have that tough conversation with the person in the mirror?
And hey, when you’re done with that existential crisis, imagine how different this essay would’ve been if I’d been inspired by Don’t Stop ’Til You Get Enough. Maybe we’d all be asking: “Is it us or the boogie?”