Why do you believe or not believe that there is a crisis of leadership in this country?

2018-11-19T09:34:16-05:00

I watched an interview that Stanley McChrystal (Retired) gave to yahoo news a couple of weeks ago. The most remarkable part of this interview was that the interviewer was an anonymous journalist on yahoo staff.

The interview sparked a mental gymnastics match in my mind. I started arguing with myself about why I thought there was not a crisis, and then countered all of my arguments with reasons why I thought there was a crisis. I can tell you that the argument persists. To add insult to injury, I started arguing with myself about why I believed the argument about crisis of leadership and the crisis of followership in this country persists!

Much of the discussion of leadership in this country centers around the values that leaders hold and the values that followers hold. We can say that if there is a crisis of leadership in this country, there is also a crisis of followership in this country because the values of leaders and the values of followers are not aligned. Leaders need followers to follow and followers need leaders to lead. This discovery of knowledge begs another question: why are the values of leaders and the values of followers not aligned?

In the American system of government, democracy and egalitarianism are values and efficiency and effectiveness are values with more moderate viewpoints in between both poles. This concept to some extent and at least sometimes helps me to put American politics into perspective.

I wanted to include egalitarianism and effectiveness tags in this post also.

Response by SPC Margaret Higgins made Nov 19 at 2018 9:39 AM

2018-11-19T09:39:07-05:00

This should truly be a bipartisan country, I believe, Anthony. CPT Private RallyPoint Member

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 19 at 2018 11:05 AM

2018-11-19T11:05:39-05:00

The only crisis in this country of which I am aware and the one from which ALL divisiveness originates is the existence of political parties, as in more than one.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Nov 19 at 2018 1:25 PM

2018-11-19T13:25:32-05:00

If you peel back the onion, the POTUS is a toxic leader.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 19 at 2018 8:11 PM

2018-11-19T20:11:52-05:00

I think that there are two problems reflected in politics:
1. The people who run for office frequently appear to be narcissists. They are committed only to their personal advancement and enrichment. Any ideological or institutional alignment that they may proclaim is likely to be nothing but marketing bunk.
2. Most of the American public outsources its opinions to the leaders of their respective political tribes. Whether it is left-wingers getting their news from Vox or right-wingers getting their news from Fox.

Factors 1 and 2 combine to produce a political landscape from the Jerry Springer Show. Years ago, I used to listen to talk radio. On one episode of the Neal Boortz show, he asked a caller who claimed to have read Atlas Shrugged some questions about the book. It was pretty clear that she hadn't actually read the book. However, she knew that it was supposed to be an important book. She knew that the host of the show liked it. But she hadn't read it. Years before that, I used to listen to the Rush Limbaugh Show, years before the age of Trump. At that time I think he was a bit milder. He used to have an economist named Walter Williams fill in for him. Callers would get on the air and be very enthusiastic about being on the side of Rush Limbaugh and what they called conservatives. But I had the distinct impression that few of these callers would ever crack a book like Henry Hazlitt's Economics in One Lesson, or Free to Choose by Milton Friedman. Because of that, I don't think they actually understood what Williams was talking about. I don't think they were actually interested in his ideas as much as aligning with his side of the political spectrum. (I think Walter Williams is a very smart guy.) Not only does much of the talk radio followership seem to align with Republicans mostly out of an almost sports-fan like affinity, but they don't seem to understand the principles underlying what American conservatism used to be.

I was never a lefty, but most of the people I interactive with nowadays are definite left-wingers. They are operating on some really far-out ideas about conservatives. The Twitter fits that Trump has, don't help any. To say THE LEAST.

I think America would choose better leaders if they would step away from the party line a bit, and go read some books.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Nov 19 at 2018 8:22 PM

2018-11-19T20:22:29-05:00

He is a fool. He called a gold star mother and said that he signed up for the military which made her cry.

Response by SSG Robert Perrotto made Nov 20 at 2018 4:40 AM

2018-11-20T04:40:57-05:00

in a nutshell - two party leadership. when the dominant political parties are two powerhouses, polarization is inevitable - neither party can admit that their values and norms are similar. So the result is this, they HAVE to promote and megaphone their differences in order to obtain votes, so they slowly begin to focus on the radical viewpoints of their extreme spectrums - for example, if you oppose socialized medicine, then you support the death of millions who cannot afford healthcare for the left, and for the right, if you support dreamers or a path to citizenship for illegals, then you support the breakdown of our society - there is no longer a middle ground. Couple this with a media that absolutely manipulates the public in order to facilitate the divide (sex, violence, conflict sells - media is a business first, they have to generate revenue, they do NOT have the publics interest as a first priority) and then added to this is social media, where people can have their viewpoints accelerated and spread instantly - creating echo chambers and further polarization.