I agree with you that the leaders should not live in splendour while their nation suffers. I don't agree though that it should be the masses of people that lead a nation. In a typical nation, the common person is not well-informed. The typical citizen is primarily concerned with the daily workings of his/her life. The leadership of the nation is responsible for the well-being of the entire nation, which could mean millions. I'll give some examples:

How many people understand the principles of economics?
How many people know the dynamics of foreign relations...with the 5 most important contacts of their country?
How many people know the treaties that their nation has signed on to, and thus obligated to uphold?

I'll make the last example more specific. In Jamaica, it makes perfect sense to legalize marijuana, yet, it is not feasible. Jamaica has signed anti-narcotic treaties, of which it would be in violation with the legalization of marijuana. Violations would result in economic sanctions. Can the youth on the street in Kingston, some of whom are illiterate, understand the full pros and cons of a decision to violate even that one treaty?

Now I understand I may have come across elitist in that response, but as a socialist (under which most Rasta principles fall politically as well), I believe that there are those who are blessed with certain abilities of leadership. It is their duty to help those that may not have the same abilities as themselves. Thus, I can fully support the leadership of HIM in his nation, when many of the common people did not understand many of the issues faced by their nation. I do believe though that it is the duty of the populace to get those true leaders into positions of leadership.

Love And Peace,
Jah Melku