Political leadership is an oxymoron
by Miki Saxon
The terms ‘leader’ and ‘leadership’ are bandied about constantly, but nowhere more often than in politics, especially during elections.
But did you know that nearly five thousand years ago a Chinese philosopher proved that truly great leadership couldn’t exist in the political arena?
Not true, I hear many of you say.
OK, first, consider three generally acknowledged descriptions of true leadership by Lao Tse in the Tao Te Ching
- Be gentle and you can be bold; be frugal and you can be liberal; avoid putting yourself before others and you can become a leader among men.
- The superior leader gets things done with very little motion. He imparts instruction not through many words but through a few deeds. He keeps informed about everything but interferes hardly at all. He is a catalyst, and though things would not get done well if he weren’t there, when they succeed he takes no credit. And because he takes no credit, credit never leaves him.
- As for the best leaders,the people do not notice their existence.
The next best,
the people honor and praise.
The next, the people fear;
and the next, the people hate—
When the best leader’s work is done,
the people say, “We did it ourselves!”
To lead the people, walk behind them.
Now name for me just one politician who comes even close to fitting these descriptions.
Sadly, the oxymoronic coupling of ‘leader’ and ‘politician’ usually is just plain moronic.
Your comments—priceless
Don’t miss a post, subscribe via RSS or EMAIL
Image credit: Patti CC license
September 13th, 2008 at 6:22 am
Good Morning Miki,
I agree with the characteristics of what a leader should be as you have written in your post, but I completely disagree that politicians can’t be leaders. I believe they have a responsibility to lead.
The characteristics/components you have listed are not the only requirements needed in a leader/politician. I want my leaders to lead from every position, the front, the middle and the back. Leaders who ONLY lead from behind cannot lead this country. Our next President better be able to be in the forefront (lead from the front) of this country and represent us in other nations. They must lead from the front! They also must be accountable for the decisions made that affect the citizens of this country. I don’t want to see a team concept in the white house or the senate or the house. I want to see those who are making decisions that will not only affect me today, but that will affect the generations to come.
Leaders who can not take responsibility for their decisions don’t need to be in politics. Stand up and be counted. Those are the leaders that should be in politics.
Darlene
Interview Guru
http://www.interviewchatter.com
September 13th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Hi Darlene, thanks for stopping by and adding your thoughts.
Although I don’t disagree with some of what you want from the next president, I would prefer one who did listen to what all sides want, not just the faction that got him elected; if that’s team decisions, so be it. I don’t believe that Lao Tze was excusing leaders from responsibility, I think he was referring to the ego that manifests itself these days in so-called leaders—not all, but many.
No one running for office, past, present or future, has a direct line to truth with a capital T. Americans are a diverse crowd, not just ethnically, but in multitudinous ways and all deserve to be heard—not just those who agree with the incumbent.
In January I wrote a post and among other things said,
We have no leaders, let alone statesmen, just ideologues, elected by like-minded ideologues, who care only about getting reelected, bringing government money back to their constituency and making lucrative connections in the event they aren’t reelected or are caught by term limits.
I still believe that and that is not my definition of a leader.
In another post about the differences between politicians and statesmen I said
Politicians talk it — Statesmen walk it
Politicians run to win — Statesmen run to serve
Politicians are ideologues — Statesmen are open-minded
Politicians, “it’s all about me” — Statesmen, “it’s all about them”
Politicians focus on the next election — Statesmen focus on the future
and a reader added
Politicians posture – Statesmen act.
I suppose my problem is that I want a statesman and there isn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell of that happening.
September 13th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I like the statesman list. Very nice. I do believe that it possible to find a statesman according what you have listed. I also believe that a statesman can be a leader. And as such, can make decisions, lead from the front, back and middle. Just a thought!
September 13th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Darlene, I’m not trying to be argumentative, but I can’t name a politician in living memory who I would class as a statesman. Can you?