Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr. Strangemonkey" data-source="post: 898256" data-attributes="member: 6533">From my own experience I can tell you that leaders can form out of a variety of circumstances, and that the actual ability to lead can derive from a number of different skills possessed by the leader and/or the followers, and that a leader and someone who can lead are distinct, though not necessarily seperate, individuals.I do not recommend the Prince as a primer for leadership.  The Prince is a fantastic book for someone who holds an office and is assured of followers.  It provides no advice for someone who must gain loyal apostles and officers.I also do not recommend thinking of people as sheep.  Herd animals are way more democratic than people are, they follow the sheep who has been proven to act on the best common interests of the herd or vere away from that which frightens them.  While these motivations do apply to people under a variety of circumstances, people are generally very resistant to herd behavior in this sense and people who are following a leader do not follow this paradigm at all.  In general, I would identify three dynamics behind the phenomena of leaders.First, and primary, it's smart to belong to an organized group.  There may be circumstances in which other situations have comparitve advantages, but to deny this as a general rule is foolishness.Second, heirarchy is a fantastic tool for coordinating between groups, not because the person above you will make decisions for your group, necessarily, but because the person above you can make decisions for other groups.  Look at highways, most people obey the laws not because it tells them what to do, but because it controls other peoples actions as well.  If faith in the laws ability to do that falls away then so does the leadership, compare Italian and American traffic patterns to see this in action.Third, continuity magnifies the benefits to any hierarchy and group.  A system which can promise higher levels of continuity both to the past and the future will benefit extradordinarily from this ability.  The appeal of continuity includes appeals which involve information from the ground up.  A leader who has to listen to you now and again has great continuity since they can't go crazy and do whatever they want.Any leader will have to be able to latch onto these three apeals to at least some extent, though they level at which they appeal to each might vary.A totalitarian dictator for instance probably holds the greatest appeal in how well the dictator can control other groups, but that dictator must offer communal benefits to his police and advisors and demonstrate continuity in a high level of personal security and fitness.A well organized theocratic republic, such as the Papacy or the Dalai Lama, has a tremendous appeal to continuity.  A president must present an satisfactory appeal to the first or second criteria, but a presidency is most satisfactory for its strong potential appeal to continuity.  I would also point out that a leader is something of a fiction, all leaders must negotiate with at least some group that has a fair amount of control over the leader, though there is a lot of variance in this condition, that group often has more authority and power than the leader does.Every leader must have some ability to fascinate and hold the attention of others, particularly to be effective to and outside of the group mentioned above, and the means to achieve that fascination are varied, complex, and unstable.</blockquote>

Verification