RELUCTANT TO LEAD

Leading is thought of as a privilege, good fortune and a measure of success in life. Hence one tries all sorts of  means to acquire the position of a leader.
Those who are less qualified are more than eager to grab the position of a leader .
If they do acquire this position  by  crafty means they celebrate .
It is an irony that many times the leader  who  is supposed to set an example of being an ideal leader demonstrates  base qualities to come up to the position of becoming a  leader.

On the other hand those who are  qualified  to lead are reluctant to fight the crooks  and acquire that position-- fearing that they will become part of the same league of leaders who are corrupt and crafty.
In such conditions they try to avoid taking positions of leadership for which they are  actualky qualified.

Leadership is not a privilege rather it is a responsibility. Along with every responsibility there are certain resources provided to fulfill the responsibility with efficiency. These resources are not a  source for squandering or enjoying...

In the Ramayana we see that Manthara and Kaikeyi wanted the position of prince hood for Bharata.
Bharata knew very well the responsibility of this position of prince hood.
On the other hand Lord Rama even though he was qualified to lead had never even in his wildest dream thought  about this position.
It is very interesting to note  that even though Bharata did not give in to the selfish and cruel desire  of his mother of his accepting prince hood... this very reluctance and obstinacy to accepting the position became his qualification to lead Ayodhya on behalf of Rama for the next fourteen years. 
What  he was fighting not to accept, that attitude itself became the qualification for ruling for next fourteen years on behalf of Rama.  Was Kaikeyi happy in this scenario? 
Valmiki does not answer this question but we can be assured that even she  realized that it was not a happy position to be in .
Rather it was a situation to ponder and reflect over .
Her idea of leadership versus Bharata's idea of leadership.
For Bharata the position was a responsibility not a privilege and that position was only the right of Rama. For Kaikeyi the  position was a privilege and a source of power to show off.

Those who are reluctant are qualified to lead and those who are too eager and scheming are trouble makers for themselves and for others.

It is our choice  whether to have an attitude like Kaikeyi to lead or have an attitude like that of Bharata to lead.  The result will certainly be completely opposite.
One will be an impetus to growth in the society  and create a legacy of leaders .
The other will create a legacy of scheming and conspiring  leaders who squander the resources for self enjoyment and cause pain to those whom they lead.