Are there leaders that you admire but who cause inner conflict?
Odd topic for a blog, but here is the lowdown on this idea. Ever realize that you sometime may admire someone who goes against much of what you seem to believe? Give this some thought and see if you can come up with one to share. For me it is President Richard Nixon. President Nixon seems to embody most of what I don’t like about politicians. According to historical accounts he was a hypocrite, he was a liar, he was a bully, he seemed to have little or no discernable ethical foundation, he tried to keep John Lennon out of the United States while giving Elvis some kind of badge regarding the war on drugs, and yes Virginia, he was a crook. Yet, and this is painful to admit in public, I admired him in some ways. His administration ended the Vietnam War, even if he could have done it earlier, he at least did it; he recognized the largest county in the world (China) as a county and opened relations with them via a series of ping pong matches, thus the title ping pong diplomacy; he seems to have been much more environmentally savvy than subsequent presidents (with the possible exception of President Jimmy Carter), he had a plan to deal with gas shortages; and he appeared on Rowen and Martin’s Laugh In during the late sixties with the line “Sock it to me” but his delivery made it sound like a question.....it really was good humor, especially given the unrelenting attention paid to him by the show often through the work of Lilly Tomlin. Not to mention the Watergate hearings provided some of the best live daytime television drama ever produced.
Yet, I keep being drawn back to the reality of Neil Young singing “tin solders and Nixon coming, we’re finally on our own, this summer I hear the drumming, four dead in Ohio”. Maybe it will finally come a time when we got to get down to it again. So, is my admiration for a man that so runs counter to my personal political beliefs curable? Or is it wise to seek to understand the ways and wisdom of those that seemingly define our opposite side?
Now you know mine, at some level I admire some of what Richard Nixon did. So who is your nominee for the leader least likely?
20 comments:
I find that I am diametrically opposed to 99% of what our President feels is the right direction for our country but I am moved by his passion for his beliefs. Despite what you may hear the talking heads from the right banter about, I don't believe that Barack Obama wants America to suffer or fail. He truly believes that his plan to nationalize American industry and the economy is best for ALL the people. He is wrong, but I can't help but admire his passion. Hearing him speak on YouTube about public education in our Monday night class, I couldn't help but think that he was right on the money with why public education is failing and on what we need to do to help out our failing schools. He is wrong to assume that the Federal Government should have any role in this transformation (see the 10th amendment to the Constitution), but his passion is real and his sentiment genuine.
Our President's policies will thankfully be checked at this point as he and the Democrat majority in both houses had their policies repudiated on Nov. 2nd by the American people. But again, the President said that he is going to forge ahead with his policy provisions rather than wait for this lame duck Congressional session to end. Even though Europe is frantically trying to reverse course from its socialist policy failings of the last few decades as countries like Greece and now Spain and Ireland teeter on the verge of national insolvency, our President indicated last week that he is pushing ahead with his agenda. We should not be surprised with what he is doing. This is exactly what he told us he would do when he was running for the office. I admire his passion and his determination, even if like Dr. Proffit feels towards Nixon, I don't agree with his policies.
I realize that when I post this I may be quickly blown out of the water, but here goes. Let me say, first and foremost, I do not admire this person, yet I am drawn to his ability to lead. Keeping in mind that lead does not necessarily imply that it is for the good.
ADOLPH HITLER
Born to a very poor family in the late 1880's who would have believed that this Austrian born German politician would so profoundly impact the world in which we live now?
Ironic that his failed Beer Hall Putsch coup would eventually lead to notoriety? His abilty to speak to thousands and convince intelligent individuals that the Aryon race needed purification is worth noting. His charisma won over brilliant minds who should have known better than to have systematically slaughtered people. His leadership led to 6 million Jews and a total of 14 million (or something like that!) losing their lives. Polar opposite of that is his infastructure improvements (railroads, damns, etc.) that made an undeniable impact. In addition, his abilty to "advertise" his beliefs and stir up people from the depths of their being in some way, shape, or form, worked in getting people to "buy in" to his agenda.
Before I get slaughtered, please let me say that his acts remain despicable. As a leader it is often valuable to know what you are NOT in order to determine what you ARE.
I can't imagine what would cause an individual to become what Hitler became which was an individual devoid of moral characteror conscience. I am NOT a history buff so, if you are, feel free to "call me out" on any misinformation.
Hitler was not only born poor (high poverty home as we would define it today) he also endured a violent childhood with his father beating him. As a young boy his brother also died. In my mind, it seems as if these events led to the beginning of his rebellion.
I guess what I am saying is you can never underestimate a leader because they don't have the same values or beliefs that you have. Often leaders are leading in the wrong direction. It is almost a "sleeping with the enemy" approach. Being cognizant of "leaders" such as Hitler helps us to define our true beliefs and values and hopefully keeeps us morally in check.
Karen
Wow, Karen. Nice choice. I can't disagree with what you have said. Regardless of his evilness he was effective, perhaps too effective.
Edgar Allen Poe is said to have been one of the greatest, yet unhappiest and poorest of American poets. Ah, if only he could have known the literary critics that would follow him. Poe was the father of the mystery genre and a poster child for tragedy. His literary leadership was never known to him...seems to me that is the way it usually pans out. Leaders that don't know they are leaders...Maybe another blogathon, eh Wise One? I can think of a few, thank to Hostetler, we cannot forget to mention Socrates and of course MLK (both, I believe, led change without the intent of leadership - just the intent of change) I'm not sure if this is what you had in mind, but I am definatley enjoying it.
I was talking this assignment over with my wife and the first name of that came to mind of a least likely leader was Hitler. Like Karen said, I don't approve of many of his actions, but this was a man who survived a rough childhood and become the leader of a nation, and almost the world. He helped improve Germany's economy and was able to gain many followers through his propaganda and charismatic talk. He took a country that was being rebuilt and turned it into a world superpower. Again, while I don't agree with some of the wways he achieved this power, he was able to build a strong following.
How about a leadership decision (and the leader who made it)? One of the most debated decisions in American history would have to be Harry Truman's decision to drop the Atom bomb on Japan. I have tried to find a way to be as decisive in my thinking about this as Truman was in his decision. To my knowledge, he defended this decision without wavering. He even said he would do it again under the same circumstances.
While WWII obviously claimed millions of lives, the lives that cause many the most conflict were the ones incinerated in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. While we can readily renounce the deaths of humans in concentration camps, it is more difficult for history to judge the death of Japanese civilians this way. I think the awe of the power of these weapons cause the constant debate over whether it was justified or an overreach. An invasion of Japan would likely have caused many more casualties and much more destruction. But the dropping of these bombs did much to reverse a virus of thought, i.e. the thinking that led to war tactics such as the use of Kamikaze pilots.
I can't imagine having to make a decision like that myself. I feel respect for Truman's decisiveness and disbelief at the horror of the actual event. It seems to me that some decisions can be necessary (I believe it was) and not moral or immoral.
My person of interest is Jim Jones (Peoples Temple Cult) not because I admire him but as a much younger person I remember being very intrigued when everything happened. I was at the age where I was just starting to pay attention to the news and this very sensational event happened. This strange man to me had people follow him from the USA to Guyana and then commit suicide.
I have always asked my self what did he possess. Could he just be a brainwasher or did he really communicate a aurora magnificence. In reading account of him it is said that he realized the way to achieve social change was to mobilize people through religion. Did this man occur at the right time in history…..war that was not supported….civil rights and people were just looking for an out. How does he convince a huge group to leave everything for the possible promise of a better life else where, were the people that desperate. This man had wonderful leadership skill but how one thinks of themselves is a reflection. Why do so many “good leaders” go to extremism? How would the world be different if leaders like this kept it between the ditches?
Great thinking on your part, Craig. Like Hitler, Jones had an incredible following that defies all logic.
Okay, so it is going to be politics or history- two subjects I try hard to avoid. However, the common theme appears to be extremism. So I guess my "leader least likely" would have to be Sarah Palin. I must admit that I am secretly inspired that a woman might actually be president. Mrs. Palin practically came out of nowhere and now has generated a massive following. Around half of the Tea Party candidates she endorsed were elected in the mid-term elections. Many speculate that she will run for president in 2012. Mrs. Palin has spunk, strong ideals, a great new show, nice hair, and cool glasses. More importantly she is a visionary- she can almost see Russia from her backyard. I guess my concern would be her ability to run the country considering her far right extremist views. I am also concerned for the impact her reign would have on future women leaders in general.
I love what Amy said about Sarah Palin. The remark about Russia from her back yard is an interesting and geographically accurate remark. You know she is becoming politically relevant when Saturday Night Live and the entire late night talk show crowd devotes so much of their time tryig to discredit her. I only regret that a belief in our Constitution and what our founders stood for can now be called "far right extremist views" :(
Some may see this response as a cop out, but since all of the good ones are taken - I'm proceeding with I truly believe. Each and every one of us would qualify for the "leaders Least Likely" award. There are folks in each of our arenas saying "What in the heck are they thinking?" There are those who truly believe we are off our rocker and don't have a clue! There are those who truly do not like or respect us. None of us have delusions of grandeur and none of us know the true impact we will make on the lives of those we serve. We won't know, because it is as individual as a blade of grass.
If you look at every leader we have had or ever has been throughout time - we all start at the same humble beginning - the pains of childbirth, naked and vulnerable. Even though some of us are afforded more opportunities than the rest - we all have the same basic choice - what will we do with what we have. We will make wise choices that will gain us acclaim. We will make poor choices that will tarnish us. For every single leader mentioned - even Jesus and Mother Teresa - there are those that love and those that hate. Even these two - embraced their humanity and human weaknesses. Even these two caused inner conflict with us all. It's what great leaders do! They challenge us. They challenge us not to accept things as simple fact - but to think and figure out meaning for ourselves. Great leaders are not those with robot soldiers who simply follow commands. Great leaders instill in us the need and desire to be elements of change ourselves.
Castro, Hitler, Bush, Lenin, Stalin depends on who you ask from around the world. I agree with the numerous comments about Hitler. So I am deciding to go in a different direction with a leader I have read a lot about and I detest even though I love the team he owned, George Steinrenner, the owner of the New York Yankees. Traits that I admired about him: often generously helping former New York Yankee players and employees, his desire to win, how he grew the Yankees into a billion dollar organization and his public speaking ablity. Traits I dispise: over spending for free agents, not listening to staff about baseball decisions (until the past 15 years, the years the Yankees have been a powerhouse), trading away good young talent in the farm system for over the hill veterans that never panned out, his firing and hiring of numerous managers, especially Billy Martin (hired and fired 7 times), the hiring of a convicted gambler to dig up dirt on Dave Winfield (his right fielder for many years) and being banned from baseball for 4 years for his Dave Winfield dealings. George Steinbrenner has recently passed away with most fans of the game recalling all the great he did for the game, but forgetting about how terrible he was for the game especially early in his ownership of the club. At Yankee Stadium past the center field wall there are monuments to the greatest former players and managers. Within a month after his death a plaque was placed along with the Yankee greats. He is the only owner with a plaque and he was not the best Yankee owner, not even close. By the way the plaque is 4 times larger than any other plaque, even Babe Ruth's!!!
Debra Gladstone- Forsyth Cohort
I am taking the same path as Patti. Many of the leaders I would have chosen are already taken. I believe that many of us are questioned ad criticized by the members of our school community. However, I think that one of the most important components to being a great leader is to be someone who is respected and trusted by those around him/her. I think that regardless of how brillant a leader is or how charimatic and cofident, they must demonstrate great character traits. They must lead by example. I think this is where character education in our schools comes into play. Theodore Roosevelt once said that to educate someone and not to include character eduction into the schooling was creating a menace to society. Hitler was a brillant man; however, he used his intelliegence and leadership to wipe out a nation of people. I thnk that when I read most of the postings, this is what I am hearing from others as well. They recogized people as great leaders in some respects; however, may of these people were viewed as liars, cheats, and crooks. It is difficult to bestow your faith and confidence in people that you cannot trust to make choices that are respectable and filled with integrity.
Patti - I totally agree! We must remember to embrace our humanity and human weaknesses and we must remind out leaders do the same. We must refrain from assigning Hero Worshiping to leaders, all of us are fallible. A true leader realizes this but continues to lead in spite of it.
I am afraid I will have to follow Patti's lead, but I want to narrow the field to our political arena. Each time an election year comes about, I am amazed at the number of negative ads, ads that stir fear in the people, ads that tell you to vote a certain way if you are a Christian, doesn't anyone run a clean campaign anymore? These are our leaders, these are the ones influencing our children, these are the ones who should be leading by example. With that being said, there are a lot of positive things that come out of every politician during their time in office, why not capitalize on that? Have we as a people lost our ability to understand the issues, to vote on the issues, and to discern good political leadership from bad political leadership? During my voting years, I have admired many of these political leaders, while at the same time they have caused inner conflict in me.
Bill Clinton - reduced the Deficit by 600 Billion, created 6 million new jobs, signed in the Brady Bill but had the morals of an alley cat (my opinion)
Ronald Reagan - got the American Hostages release, created 15 million jobs - but his trickle down theory never made it to me and his administration had multiple political scandals including one with the EPA.
The list could go on and on, but my point is that although I am not on the same page with each and everything the politicians do, I am aware that they are human and therefore fallible. And although they are on this side of the blog, they could just as easily be on the other side as well.
I guess I should have gotten in on the ground floor of this blog. All the seriously creepy historical figures are already taken. Ok, so my two cents. When I was in the Air Force I was going to be a missileer. It would have been my job to launch any of the hundreds of ICBM missles that are scattered throughout the midwest. The comment about president Truman resonated with me because history will determine if you are a leader or a monster.
I was also going to vote for Jim Jones, 900 people drinking the kool aid and I sometimes can't even get 40 people to send home progress notes on the same day. I think: "lets all commit mass suicide" is outside the scope of my reach!
The least likely leader no one has mentioned yet is from the events on June 5, 1989. As the tanks rolled into Tieneman Square in Bejing to disperse the students protesting there, one man stepped out in front of a line of tanks and stopped them cold in their tracks - with nothing more than an outstrecthed hand.
Talk about eloquence in leadership. Talk about putting your money where your mouth is. Talk about being willing to stand up for your beliefs. This man humbles me. The best thing about it... twenty years later, nobody knows who it was. The identity of the man remains a mystery and no one can truly identify him. A true leader cares about the messagea and the results, not about his own noterity.
Well, got to go drink the Kool Aid, see you.
JULIUS CAESAR
I say Julius Caesar is a prime example of a leader who was very controversial, and possibly hated! Caesar was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths while expanding the Roman Empire's borders further and further north, into Britian and Gaul, among other smaller conquests.
His military might brought him into the realm of roman politics, and thus had many rivals, particularly Pompey. After being called to Rome to stand trial, he came to Rome with his legions, sparking a civil war. His victory in this conflict placed him with unmatched political and military clout.
Through his reign he changed the system of government, essentially placing himself into a "Dictator" position. He was disliked by many Romans, especially many senators, led by Brutus. After his assassination, however, Rome fell into anarchy, igniting even more civil wars until eventually Augustus Caesar prevailed as leader of the Roman Empire some time later.
Now, Caesar is seen as a transformational leader, possibly one of the greatest to ever live. We all know his name, and his name even came to mean "Leader" shortly after his demise. Yet, like any other leader he had faults and flaws, and was not universally loved by rivals or constituents.
I will take a different direction. We have all watched a John Wayne movie and probably heard someone say that he was a great hero. I have watched a number of his movies and thought about how great he was but is that a reality?
John Wayne decided to stay in Hollywood to make movies, while other male movie stars were volunteering to serve in WW II. He did not actually dodge the draft, but he pulled all the strings he could to keep making movies. We all probably thought John Wayne was really at Midway.
He also made multiple comments that are far from my views about Native Americans and African-Americans.
All this said I still when I am flipping channels and see True Grit on, I watch and enjoy.
Post a Comment