There is a famous quote by Groucho Marx about politics: "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies."
This quote teaches us that the primary function of politics is to solve problems, not to waste time blaming others. However, if we look at history, we see that in third-world countries, the serpent of vengeance is always hissing.
Nelson Mandela once said, "Resentment is like drinking poison and then hoping it will kill your enemies." The most vile and destructive emotions in the human heart are envy, resentment, hatred, ill will, and mutual hostility. These emotions corrupt the soul and, most importantly, destroy all other good deeds.
A hadith states that envy and resentment erase all of a person’s virtuous actions and religious merits. Jubayr ibn Mut’im (RA) narrated that the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) said, "The disease that destroyed the previous nations has also infiltrated you: envy and hatred." In other words, envy and hatred are enough to bring about the downfall of a nation.
In some developing countries, those who assume power become so engrossed in listing the mistakes of past rulers that they lose focus on the real problems of the country. In third-world nations, major shifts in power occur every few decades. These transitions are rarely ordinary. Those who bask in the warmth of power at such times glorify these shifts as "widespread and significant changes".
However, a wise observer might ask: does a mere change in leadership truly signify "change"? If, even after declaring that "change has occurred," the same acts of vengeance are carried out as before, and criticism follows the same tone and style, then where is the real change?
If lawsuits, intimidation, abuse or misuse of power, and intolerance remain as severe and sharp as in the past, then where exactly is the change? When leadership fails, countless ordinary people—who were never part of the power structure—begin to suffer oppression. At such times, what meaning does the word "change" hold?
We often see that in such transitions, a wave of false cases sweeps across cities and villages alike. Along with it, the same old incendiary slogans—"Break it down," "Crush it," "Destroy," "Set it on fire"—continue to echo.
If that is the case, then even the language has not changed. If unrestrained propaganda and loud rhetoric, just like in the past, are enough to define "change," then in these third-world nations, shifts in power often lead to increased anarchy rather than reducing it.
Therefore, in the developing world, those who frequently chant "change, change" after a power transition should be asked—where is the change? They should clearly state: "We are different in these specific ways."
There is an ancient tale about a king who commissioned the most skilled and cunning weaver in his kingdom to craft a fine fabric. The weaver, however, forgot to weave the cloth and instead presented the king with an "invisible garment," claiming, "Only the wise can see this fabric; fools cannot." The king joyfully adorned himself with the invisible robe, and as a poet described:
"Everyone is clapping, cheering, and shouting, 'Bravo, bravo!'/ Some remain silent out of fear, some out of blind tradition;/ Some have mortgaged their intellect to others;/ Some are sycophants, opportunists, or deceivers;/ Some believe the royal garment is indeed too fine to be seen;/ Though it is invisible, at least its existence is not impossible./ Everyone knows the story…"
Like this tale, perhaps only the wise can see the so-called "change" in the third world. After all, who would willingly wish to be a fool?