By: Michael Ringrose
Historically, it is possible to point to individuals, across the world, who have been identified as world leaders. Some of those individuals enjoy, posthumously at least, the mantle of greatness and the adulation of millions of admirers. History is not so kind to others who, while clearly identified as "World Leaders" in their time, Hitler for example, are are not models that one would wish to emulate.
However, leaders are leaders and whether we identify people like, Mother Theresa of Calcutta, Mahatma Gandhi, also of India, or the late Col. Ghadafi of Libya, Osama Bin Laden, Sadam Husain or Abraham Lincoln, they undoubtedly possessed the capacity to engage and encourage and inspire thousands and millions of followers and over long periods of time.
When discussing and analysing leadership attributes and characteristics it is important to also take into account the fact that individuals who may be now held in disdain were once entertained and fated by the world's "respected" Presidents, Prime Ministers, Sovereigns, etc., and regarded as people who deserved a certain degree of respect. The reasons for according such respect, which are many and varied, include selfish political and economic interests.
It would be unnecessarily limiting to exclude those individuals, however disdainful their conduct, in analysing leadership qualities and ask what it is or was about their personas that attracted followers and inspired others to give of their loyalty and commitment. We can exclude those who followed because of fear and intimidation practiced during the tyrannical rule of the despots but it is fair to assume that it would not be possible for such dictators to survive for so long had they not had the support of a substantial majority of their constituents.
It is in this context that one can ask, "Where have all the Leaders gone?" Where is that element that allows the antidote to be foster and emerge so that it may provide the necessary leadership in a vacuum or as a direct opposition to perceived inadequate, mis-directed and evil leaders?
There appears to be enormous complacancy in society that allows our world, our communities and our lives to be managed and directed now by powerful media corporations and by even more powerful economic institutions. The terrifying thing about these instruments of change is that they are not subject to any election or choice of the people. They are not given the enormous power that they exercise. They just take it and assume it and spin the world when they utter their judgements on the capacity of a state or a nation to survive economically.
Consider what happens when Standards & Poor, for example, makes a pronouncement about the AAA rating of the American economy or any of the countries in Europe that are experiencing the effects of recession. The system holds its breath. Should the AAA rating be threatened, the system rocks. But, ask the question, "Who are Standards & Poor"? Who is it, what is his or her name, that makes a decision to make such an announcement? Who benefits from making such a statement? These statements are not automated announcements such as one might hear on an anwering-maching. Some individual or group of individuals sit and discuss this before it happens, before or after their cornflakes. To whom are they anwerable? These individuals exercise enormous power and influence. Why do we accept that such power should be exercised by and remain in anonymous hands.
It is not uncommon now to witness street protests at the locations of economic summit meetings. Who are they protesting against? Do they know? It is, at least, a symbol of unease about economic direction but unless those who exercise economic control are identified and brought in under some form of democratic control, then the seeds of anarchy will continue to be fed and it is out of such beginnings that the Hitlers of this world emerge.
