I'm thinking of Barack Obama today and the word that keeps coming up in my mind is "empathy." The man has got great empathy. He made me feel last week; he has made Chris Cristie feel. I thought, "Isn't empathy the most important quality in leadership?" And then, history racing through my head, I thought, "No." Is it in moral leadership? Yes, maybe, but we're talking about Barack Obama, the president of the United States, we're talking about political leadership here so I didn't think anymore about moral leadership. What are the important traits of great political leadership, is empathy one of them, does Barack Obama have any of them and to what extent, how would one characterize his leadership ability?
There's a book, Leadership, by James MacGregor Burns, I think, I read it years ago, it's on my bookshelf now as I write, but I don't remember much about it which is why I said "I think" it's by MacGregor Burns--I do remember "transformational"--and I am not going to take it down off my bookshelf yet. First, I'm going to "wing it," which is what I think Obama does, and consult Leadership later. I don't think Obama is a great political leader, that's the bias I start with but let's answer some of those questions and reevaluate.
"Important traits of great political leadership." History racing through my head as it was shortly ago, I thought, "Great leaders, great leaders," and then immediately thought, "Hitler," and then "Mao," not good leaders obviously, two hideously evil, immoral leaders, "great" as used here not as the superlative of "good" but sort of as the superlative of "big," like, I don't know, "The Great Smokey Mountains," which is the first thing that popped into my head maybe because I've been there, there being nothing morally "good" about mountains, they just "are," there being nothing "great" actually about The Great Smokies to me, it's just a name, an inapposite example that I wish hadn't been the first thing that popped into my head. "Great:" other examples, "The Great Seal of the United States." Goddamn it. "The Great Leap Forward," "The Great Hall of the People," "The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution," yes, "great" more like that, BIG things, movements, auditoria. "Powerful," not auditoria, but movements, people. "Great" as in "powerful" leaders. Thought of this way, "great" is almost synonymous with dictators like Mao and Hitler since dictators are always going to be more powerful than democrats unless democrats have the NSA. He-he-he, snuck that one in there before you knew it, didn't I, he-he-he. Thought of that way, maybe "great" isn't what we want to measure Obama by or against. Maybe there's another word more apposite to democratic leadership. Maybe "transformational," the only thing I can recall from Leadership, but I'm not clear on what that means, "transforming" the country I think, but that was exactly why I immediately thought of Hitler and Mao when I thought of "great," because they certainly "transformed" their countries didn't they, whooo doggie, they sort of created their countries, "created" here used as a superlative of "transformed." So I think I'm going to stick with "great" with the understanding that we're talking about democratic leaders and because "great" is more understandable than "transformational," with the understanding that we're not talking about mountains, seals, auditoria and like that.
I think "will" is an important character trait of great democratic leadership. "Will" as used here means to get what you want, not just to try, but to get it. You can't be a great leader just by trying, you have to win. You have to "work your will," use the "bully pulpit," you have to force, in a democratic kind of way, other people to go along with you, to "follow the leader." You can do that by moral suasion, by eloquence, but you must win and I think you're going to have to be "forceful:" intimidating, threatening, charming, promising, bribing (in an "honest graft" kind of way), begging, groveling, lying, to work your will and be a great democratic leader.
You have to know what you want before you can will it, right? That goes without saying although I said it. You have to have an "agenda." You have to consciously decide, "This is what I want." And then, "By God, I'm going to get it." Barack Obama has not worked his will on America. He cannot will the Republican Congress to do anything. Obama also reacts, that is, he has not set and pushed an agenda, his agenda, and that is because he does not deeply feel about many issues. In that sense, he lacks empathy, in addition to will. On that component of greatness, Barack Obama is lacking. He's a good man, though.
There's a book, Leadership, by James MacGregor Burns, I think, I read it years ago, it's on my bookshelf now as I write, but I don't remember much about it which is why I said "I think" it's by MacGregor Burns--I do remember "transformational"--and I am not going to take it down off my bookshelf yet. First, I'm going to "wing it," which is what I think Obama does, and consult Leadership later. I don't think Obama is a great political leader, that's the bias I start with but let's answer some of those questions and reevaluate.
"Important traits of great political leadership." History racing through my head as it was shortly ago, I thought, "Great leaders, great leaders," and then immediately thought, "Hitler," and then "Mao," not good leaders obviously, two hideously evil, immoral leaders, "great" as used here not as the superlative of "good" but sort of as the superlative of "big," like, I don't know, "The Great Smokey Mountains," which is the first thing that popped into my head maybe because I've been there, there being nothing morally "good" about mountains, they just "are," there being nothing "great" actually about The Great Smokies to me, it's just a name, an inapposite example that I wish hadn't been the first thing that popped into my head. "Great:" other examples, "The Great Seal of the United States." Goddamn it. "The Great Leap Forward," "The Great Hall of the People," "The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution," yes, "great" more like that, BIG things, movements, auditoria. "Powerful," not auditoria, but movements, people. "Great" as in "powerful" leaders. Thought of this way, "great" is almost synonymous with dictators like Mao and Hitler since dictators are always going to be more powerful than democrats unless democrats have the NSA. He-he-he, snuck that one in there before you knew it, didn't I, he-he-he. Thought of that way, maybe "great" isn't what we want to measure Obama by or against. Maybe there's another word more apposite to democratic leadership. Maybe "transformational," the only thing I can recall from Leadership, but I'm not clear on what that means, "transforming" the country I think, but that was exactly why I immediately thought of Hitler and Mao when I thought of "great," because they certainly "transformed" their countries didn't they, whooo doggie, they sort of created their countries, "created" here used as a superlative of "transformed." So I think I'm going to stick with "great" with the understanding that we're talking about democratic leaders and because "great" is more understandable than "transformational," with the understanding that we're not talking about mountains, seals, auditoria and like that.
I think "will" is an important character trait of great democratic leadership. "Will" as used here means to get what you want, not just to try, but to get it. You can't be a great leader just by trying, you have to win. You have to "work your will," use the "bully pulpit," you have to force, in a democratic kind of way, other people to go along with you, to "follow the leader." You can do that by moral suasion, by eloquence, but you must win and I think you're going to have to be "forceful:" intimidating, threatening, charming, promising, bribing (in an "honest graft" kind of way), begging, groveling, lying, to work your will and be a great democratic leader.
You have to know what you want before you can will it, right? That goes without saying although I said it. You have to have an "agenda." You have to consciously decide, "This is what I want." And then, "By God, I'm going to get it." Barack Obama has not worked his will on America. He cannot will the Republican Congress to do anything. Obama also reacts, that is, he has not set and pushed an agenda, his agenda, and that is because he does not deeply feel about many issues. In that sense, he lacks empathy, in addition to will. On that component of greatness, Barack Obama is lacking. He's a good man, though.
