By Wisdom Agape Newman
Entitlement programmes have long been the centerpiece of political campaigns. They thrive on the notion that the government which offers the most immediate and tangible benefits to its citizens is inherently the better government. This approach appeals to the electorate by shifting personal responsibility to the state, a prospect that resonates with many. However, this allure often undermines the democratic process, resulting in the election of leaders who focus on short-term gratification rather than long-term development—what Socrates might call the election of “sweet shop owners” over “doctors.”
In his analysis, Socrates described a hypothetical political debate between a doctor and a sweet shop owner. The sweet shop owner could argue that the doctor performs painful and unpleasant actions, such as administering bitter medicine and performing surgeries, under the guise of helping. Meanwhile, the sweet shop owner offers instant gratification through sweets and delights, garnering immediate approval. This allegory highlights how populist rhetoric often eclipses the uncomfortable but necessary truths required for nation-building. Electorates, swayed by promises of comfort and ease, frequently choose policies that provide short-term satisfaction but fail to address long-term challenges.
Socrates’ argument underscores a critical issue in democracy: nation-building is an arduous and demanding process that requires collective sacrifice and individual responsibility. Entitlement programmes, especially those driven by populist motives, often lead to the election of unsuitable leaders, drain national resources, and neglect future needs. 
Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s first female Prime Minister, illustrated this dilemma with her allegory of “the better nurse.” She questioned whether the better nurse is the one who challenges a patient to take small but necessary steps toward recovery or the one who indulges the patient’s desire for comfort by allowing them to remain in bed. While the former approach demands discipline and effort, it ultimately leads to healing. Similarly, leaders who enforce tough but necessary policies are often unpopular, as their measures bring discomfort in the short term.
In times of crisis, such as economic downturns or austerity measures, the electorate’s impatience with discomfort often leads to the rejection of effective leaders. Instead, voters gravitate toward candidates who promise quick fixes and play to their desires and biases. Unfortunately, these leaders seldom address deeper systemic issues, leaving nations vulnerable to future crises.
While these perspectives might seem overly critical or conservative, history provides ample evidence of their validity. The challenge for democracies lies in educating electorates to prioritize long-term benefits over immediate gratification—a shift that requires a collective commitment to the principles of nation-building and sustainable governance.
About the Author
Wisdom Agape Newman is an Adjunct Lecturer and Senior Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation Officer at the National Africa Peer Review Mechanism. He is an expert in governance and public policy, with a wealth of experience in research, analysis, and strategic planning within these areas. His work focuses on promoting good governance practices and advancing effective public policy initiatives across Africa.
Contact Information:
Phone: +233 20 858 5865
Email: aspinoza4480@gmail.com
Brief and informative. I like the practical instances given as well.
Short term gratification over long term benefits is human in every way. Hopefully with the right education, the electorate would be better equipped to choose wisely.
Dear Vanessa,
I echo your sentiment on the role of education in re-orienting the public’s perception and consequently, the public’s expectations of the government; particularly within the context of each party’s contribution to the greater effort of nation-building.
Great contribution!
This piece is amazing , seeing this from a psychological point of view , the electorate have a cognitive distortion that the leaders seem to take advantage of and that is present bias , where immediate desires are prioritize over future benefits. I think citizens need to learn how to delay gratification and see the governments for what they truly have to offer for the future and if their goals are visionary . When we come to awareness and acceptance of delay gratification , we just might turn things around for the better as citizens .
Lovely piece of write-up…. very brief but really deep. This sums up what informs electorates choices and how leaders take advantage of the ignorance of the electorates for their advantage. Like the writer rightly suggests , the electorates needs more education to understand that long-term development objectives are more viable than short-term benefits.
This is Phenomenal ..I think Leaders should just come to the awareness o DB how people survive so they can help for a better living .
I love this piece Bøss .
How do u expect me to comment on this masterpiece that is so simple to read and understand…i wish all philosphers were like u…u spoke the truth in the piece, yet i wasnt bored reading it. You have done your part. Over to whoever the caps fits.
Great work there sir, such are kind of pieces which must be considered and I think the long- term development can have a lasting solutions as compared to the short term drama, such like having a National Agenda than spitting things which they think, it will sound sweet in people’s ear without being held accountable… well said…
This is indeed a fact but it’s quite unfortunate the electorates only focuses on short term satisfaction instead of addressing long term challenges
They only think about how comfortable life would be for them
This is a fact but it’s quite unfortunate these electorates shifts their attention to only short term policies instead of addressing long term challenges
They’re so much focused on how comfortable life would be for them instead
A reflection on the complexities of our democracy.
This is just a masterpiece of work, good job done boss, this is basically a real definition of a good work actually, this will actually help electorates have some knowledge about who to choose to be in government and who will help them, in all it balls down to choosing leaders wisely, leaders just take advantage of electorates and in my opinion it isn’t fair
A masterpiece very well presented. So many solutions to challenges can be teased out from this paper. You have exhibited your name WISDOM, in plain words to everyone’s understanding. Kudos 👏
Really interesting take on how short-term promises can overshadow long-term progress in politics. The Socrates and Thatcher comparisons were spot on
I believe it’s human when electorates desire for comfort and ease rather than focusing on long term goals and most times some governments take advantage of such, offering instant pleasure (short term goals) making people think it’s for the best whiles other leaders who make tough decisions (long term) for sustainable solutions are not chosen. So it’s high time electorates prioritize long term developments over short term benefits. Great write up there.