The general welfare of a nation s people is a better indication of that nation s greatness than are the achievements of its rulers artists or scientists

Any nation strives to ensure a minimum standard of living for its citizens, and providing opportunities for them to achieve their goals. If a section of the population is thriving, and the rest of the people are living hand-to-mouth then this is not a good sign for the country. A necessary condition for a nation to be great is if everyone, or nearly everyone, is able to enjoy a decent minimum in their lives. If one part of the population is thriving at the expense of another, then this is acme is only transitory. A system with huge divides between people cannot remain stable. So, a better parameter for gauging the greatness of a nation would be the average welfare of the nation’s people than the achievements of a small group of professions like rulers, artists, or scientists.

The task of qualifying achievements of people is a tough nut to crack. The absence of definitive standards makes it a matter of subjective opinion. A researcher could be churning out papers by the dozens. But if these papers get published in only journals with low impact factors, then that casts aspersions on the quality of the research being done. A lot of novel work with less potential, or very high potential work coming out of the labs only sporadically, who is to say which one is better? Anyone seeking to push a particular narrative can cherry-pick facts and arguments to suit their ends. The yardstick for greatness should definitely not be so vague and open to interpretation.

People living with an assured minimum standard of living with a support system would automatically have a greater number of opportunities to succeed in their respective fields. The converse, however, is not true. In developing countries, it is not uncommon for even excellent sportsmen to be living in highly underdeveloped areas. The only reason these sportsmen succeed is their own grit and tenacity. The system or the nation have little part to play in their achievements. Attributing their victories to the ‘greatness’ of the nation would thus, be highly unfair and grossly misleading.

The talented people in any profession would also weigh their options. It would be a matter of probability of likelihood for them. They know they are skilled, and would likely excel anywhere they find themselves. Would they still want to work in a country where they have only a small chance of leading a good life, when there are other countries that guarantee better resources, facilities and wellbeing? The answer is a patently obvious ‘No’. And thus a country that cannot ensure a good standard of living will gradually experience ‘brain-drain’, or the exodus of the skilled workforce, leading to the gradual decline in whatever perceived greatness the country had.

A nation could, however, capitalise on the achievements, inventions and their concomitant recognition, and take certain steps to ameliorate the situation. Technology plays a huge role in nation-building and raising the standard of living. The country could construct research parks and incentivize entrepreneurship to ensure that researchoutput increases, and the time-to-market of newer technologies is reduced. A wider reach of such technologies would usher in greater purchasing power, newer markets and foreign investments. Cumulatively, all this will set the country on the path of greatness. Thus, if the leadership of the country is proactive and takes initiatives, then the achievements in professions like arts and science, would certainly signal an up-and-coming great nation.

In conclusion, while achievements in certain professions could, under some conditions, lead to a great nation, a firmer standard for measuring greatness of a country is the average welfare of the people of the country.