Student Politicians: Champions of Change or Chasing Self-Interest?

By Rianat Ademola

History does its job well in keeping records, reflecting even the truths we would rather forget. History will say it, no matter how shameful it may be. It neither favors the rich nor condemns the poor; it tells things as they are. If it records that we have had countless leaders, we accept it as fact. If it recounts tales of their valour and misconduct, we must not question its accuracy. It reminds us that leadership is both an opportunity and a responsibility, a delicate balance not everyone maintains. 

The will to serve others resides only in the mind of a true leader. Yet to lead, one must possess power; a force with undeniable drawbacks. As Lord Acton wittingly says, power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Student politicians, often seen as the leaders of tomorrow, are not exempt from this reality. Their pursuit of leadership raises a pressing question: Are they driven by a genuine desire to serve their peers, or is it self-interest cloaked in activism? 

To say we do not know the answer would be untruthful. However, attempting to paint all student politicians with the same brush would lack intellectual reasoning. To address this question, we must rely on observations and evidence as the premise of our argument. While we recognise the traits of a good leader as integrity, selflessness, and vision, we must examine whether these traits are embodied by student politicians. Their actions often contradict these ideals. A glaring example is their “open-secret” campaigning, which occurs even before the official ban is lifted. Their activism, initially disguised as altruistic, is often unmasked as self-serving through the slogans and promises in their back-to-school flyers, which later reveal themselves as “vote for me” flyers.

Leadership loses its essence when its primary purpose is overshadowed by personal gain. The primary motive of being in a position is to serve the people. What do we call it if it digresses from the main motive? Is it still leading? Leadership ceases to exist when its purpose is lost. We often find these student politicians vibrant before elections, but afterward, they are no longer accessible. They leave behind their main motive. Even though they cannot be checked in the moment, history will tell their story whether it is good or bad. They start by dismissing complaints, labeling them critics or stereotypes. They only answer questions they want to answer, leaving the ones we are curious about rumbling in our stomachs. It is amazing and troubling that someone who is a leader, a representation of uprightness, refuses to abide by basic rules of accountability.

It is in their absence during matters concerning our welfare that their priorities are revealed. To take the wheel of leadership means being ready for the tasks it entails. What excuse can be acceptable for not showing up during pressing issues? True leadership demands accountability, visibility, and a commitment to the welfare of the people being served. A leader who disappears in times of need not only betrays their position but also ridicules the trust of those they claim to represent. 

We have had many student politicians, and we can analyse them based on the activism they showed toward the students. Some campaigned with bold promises, but their tenure was marked by inaction and neglect. Only a few stood out for their consistent dedication and ability to deliver on their words. Nelson Mandela maintained a balance in categorizing leadership into two groups: those whose actions cannot be predicted—that is, those who agree on a major issue today and take action on it the following day—and those who are consistent, who have a sense of honor and vision. And this, they must be lectured about. It is through this lens that we must evaluate our leaders. 

Leadership is not just about holding office. It is about translating vision into action, ensuring that the collective good outweighs personal interests. There is no gainsaying that the honest critic, will document these actions without bias, revealing whether their leadership served others or themselves. Student politicians today are often motivated more by personal ambition than by a genuine desire to serve. Their behaviors, the strategic campaigning, the empty promises, and the silence during crises suggest that their leadership is rooted in self-interest rather than altruism. 

Yet, not all hope is lost. The student body must also bear responsibility, not just in choosing their leaders wisely but in holding them accountable. A disengaged electorate enables poor leadership to thrive. Congress is the platform for students to demand regular updates from their leaders. Only then can they realise that leadership comes with responsibility, not a figure of titles. For the leaders and those aspiring to take the wheel of leadership, the question still remains: will you rise to the occasion, or will you merely become another shameful tale in the record of history? Only time will tell, but history will surely not forget. And this, we must remind them.