All that has been going on in the capital for the last ten days is disconcerting for concerned citizens of Pakistan. A few legislators were allegedly offered bribes to change their political loyalties and took the bait.

For serious students of Pakistani politics during the late 1980s and early 1990s, it was déjà vu. Some legislators had then been taken to Changa Manga by an ambitious aspirant for the top slot in the power hierarchy. Nawaz Sharif was catapulted from anonymity to the prominence of provincial finance minister-ship. He won the coveted office of the Punjab chief minister in 1985.

Sharif had set his sights on seizing premiership. His adversary, Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, countered his maneuvers by similarly doling out patronage. To ensure their continued support and to deny the opposition access to them, some of the legislators were taken to Murree. Both Sharif and Bhutto were unable to complete their tenures despite such efforts. In the process they lost the respect and trust of some of their supporters.

Unfortunately some of the most influential political leaders in Pakistan have no scruples worth the mention. It is through their discourse and practice that the idea that everything and everyone has a price has been bandied around for decades.

To such people, values, ethics, honesty and integrity are mere cliches. Such abstractions don’t count for them when it comes to the realm of politics steered by pragmatism. Idealism, has not mattered for them. Such a mindset tends to justify use of corrupt means. Corruption can strike deep enough roots in no time to stymie almost every state institution.

The alleged audacity of resorting to horse trading in this day and age calls for a dispassionate analysis of exactly what is lacking in the political leadership of Pakistan. After some deliberation, I have managed to pinpoint two deficiencies that cause our politicians to act the way they do, with impunity. They lack a sense of history and they don’t care about what sort of legacy they will be leaving behind.

The biographical literature on eminent political leaders — from Lincoln to Nelson Mandala — indicates that these were the factors constituting their vision and weltanschauung. Thus, I intend to shed some light on these formulations and their significance. It is noteworthy that the two formulations are related.

A sense of history necessitates divergent insights drawn from the knowledge of the past and present, geography, culture, demography and economy converging into a vision of a leader who envisages the future of a certain community or nation. Thus, with a sense of history, the important element is leading. History provides lessons to leverage and, sometimes, avoid repeating certain mistakes.

However, leaders with a sense of history don’t get stuck in the past. Importantly, history gives us the opportunity to learn from other people’s mistakes. It also enables us to understand the many reasons why people may behave the way they do. As a result, it helps us become more impartial as decision-makers.

Having a sense of history translates into making an impact on the present with a momentum to affect future generations in an affirmative manner. Acting with a strong sense of history means that the leaders are giving something to the future generations to pull forward and then improve as needed.

Leading with a sense of history means solving tough problems, crafting progressive solutions and building diverse relationships. Without a sense of history, we get stuck and mired in uninspiring work and there is no progress. Without a sense of history, leaders arouse discouragement and divisiveness.

Leaders with a sense of history think, lead, and aspire forward. A sense of history demands leaders to step up to the needs and responsibilities of what confronts us today. These leaders don’t have to solve all the problems on their own. Great leaders deliver the culture and the support for diverse individuals to come together, design solutions and drive implementation.

Great leaders create an environment in which people are active in their choices, implementation and outcomes. They manage that because they are imbued with a sense of history. The sense of history creates in them care as to the sort of legacy they will leave behind. Thus, consciousness derived through their serious engagement with history inculcates in them the importance that legacy holds in the life of an individual, a society and a polity.

Legacy is about life and living. It’s about learning from the past, living in the present and building for the future. According to Susan V Bosak, legacy is fundamental to what it is to be human. Research shows that without a sense of working to create a legacy, adults lose meaning in their life. Exploring the idea of legacy offers a glimpse not only into human relationships and building strong communities, but also the human spirit.

From a purely practical standpoint, if you don’t pass on your life’s experience by leaving a legacy, the wisdom you’ve gained through decades of difficult learning will disappear as your physical body wears out. The power of legacy enables both young and old to live fully in the present. You understand that you are part of a larger community, a community that must remember its history to build its future. There is caring combined with conscience.

There is also wisdom to be found, linking action and reflection to deal with complex problems. Legacy is very much about life and living.

The indifference shown to the discipline of history has done us great harm. Our priorities, political, economic, or social can be defined as individualistic. Convergence at the collective level does not seem likely. That makes us a crowd and not a nation. In this deplorable situation, a serious consideration by our political leaders to cultivate a sense of history and legacy may bring to the fore, some collective vision that can transform us into a nation.

The author is a professor of history and a writer.  He can be reached at tahir.kamran@bnu.edu.pk