Aristotle once said, “Men are marked out from the moment of
birth to rule or be ruled.”
In this week’s reading by Heywood on Political Executives,
he summarizes the various forms of political executive rules and the various
styles, theories and types of leaderships.
I would like to shed more light on the theory, which
mentions leadership as a personal gift. It is known to be the traditional view
of leadership, but it is what sparked interest in me because I agree with this
theory of leadership. This goes all the way back to the ever-popular debate
about whether leaders are born or made. I feel there are some certain traits
within leaders, which drives them towards power. Modern psychology even
supports this theory and James Barber’s analysis, further strengthens this
theory. I feel that certain personality traits such as having charisma
instilled within oneself is something, which polishes with time to create a
good and solid leader. Once again, this is just one theory and obviously, there
is a great deal of debate going on about the other theories as well with
strengths and shortcomings of all views.
What I feel is that personality trumps other factors that
make a good leader. If you go down history, there are numerous examples of
leaders who ruled well on the basis of their strong and charismatic
personality, whether it is Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma or Nelson Mandela in South
Africa.
I agree with Hamza. A strong personality is something that eventually helps develop a sort of 'cult of personality' for the rulers. In history, this worked for Stalin and I believe it also works in the present if you see the rulers of Pakistan. In the eyes of an educated man the policies and the way these rulers govern their country is nothing but a dictatorship, but for their followers these rulers are the best there can be.
ReplyDeleteIf a leader is able to do this, i believe he can lead the people into doing almost anything without a rebellion. And this ability, I believe comes as a natural gift.