5 ms·

The problem of various "revolutions" is that we no longer have great leaders. There are influental leaders, but none truly great ones. Just like with music band

The problem of various "revolutions" is that we no longer have great leaders. There are influental leaders, but none truly great ones. Just like with music bands, we no longer have The Beatles or The Queen. I struggle to name three great present-time politicians. In the absense of great politicians, any post-revolution cabinet degrades into tyranny of mediocrity or fails to work at all.

lukifer 13y ago
I have high hopes for Elizabeth Warren. I also hope Lawrence Lessig runs for national office someday. But the general trend you refer to is accurate. The various vested interests have got character assassination down to a science, and anyone who doesn't play ball at least a little tends to be filtered out of the political process.
- tome 13y ago
  I agree that there are no great world leaders at the moment but that doesn't mean we "no longer" have them. Clinton was the most recent great leader in the West, in my opinion. We could easily have another in the next decade. Blair was nearly there, as is Merkel, though she feels like more of an administrator than a leader.
  - guard-of-terra 13y ago
    I fail to see either of them as great. They're the difference between a (wo)man in office saying right words and one saying wrong words. They certainly got most of their words right but anyone could say those. From great leader I expect doing something nobody else in their position could.
    - lukifer 13y ago
      I could make a case that a good leader is mostly hot air. What distinguishes a great leader is performing the right words and gestures for their zeitgeist, thereby becoming a symbolic figurehead that shapes broad social forces into real progress. Perhaps, then, our lack of good leaders is not about the leaders themselves, but rather due to the fragmentation of cultures and social institutions.
      - guard-of-terra 13y ago
        That fragmentation thing is dangerous because fragmented people have troubles maintaining their rights. We desperately need politicians that will figure out this fragmentation thing.
        lukifer 13y ago
        That, or bottom-up big-tent coalitions that can stitch together a bunch of fragmented groups. (For all their many faults, the Republicans had this formula perfected in the 80's and early 00's.)
        guard-of-terra 13y ago
        You have to adapt this formula to a post-revolution country where nobody trusts nobody, nobody knows what they want, people have bizzare ideas that have nothing in common with reality (think religions), and there is no political rallying point to stitch groups around.
  - dageshi 13y ago
    Especially in the case of Blair and Clinton, they were in power during relatively benign economic times. I can't help but feel that it's easy to like people who never had any really serious problems to deal with. Certainly not on the scale of those imposed by the financial crisis/euro crisis. But I will grant you, they both had something about them, a force of personality perhaps that exceeds many other politicians.
  - mhurron 13y ago
    What did Clinton do that would qualify him for great? Honestly, from where I'm sitting, what did Clinton do that set him apart from any other President at all? And Tony Blair? A head of state that was just seen as a puppet of another as 'almost great'?
    - tome 13y ago
      I won't argue that Clinton was great like JFK, or even Reagan, but when fishing for great Western leaders of the past thirty years is there anyone else who comes out better? Blair on the other hand led the reformation of the Labour party and made them electable again, whilst mainaining Britain's standing on the world stage, far from a puppet actually.
      - mhurron 13y ago
        >I won't argue that Clinton was great like JFK, or even Reagan, but when fishing for great Western leaders of the past thirty years is there anyone else who comes out better? Better by comparison is not the same as great. It is quite possible that there be no great leaders. I do not know of anything Clinton did that would be great. >Blair on the other hand led the reformation of the Labour party and made them electable again, whilst mainaining Britain's standing on the world stage, far from a puppet actually. Making a party electable again may be a sign of a savvy leader, but it is not greatness. Britian's standing on the world stage under Blair was one of a lapdog in many circles. Again, a leader that garners the reputation as a puppet is not a great leader.
  - venomsnake 13y ago
    Merkel is quite the opposite of great. While she would make a decent politician in a regional level, as the recent history shows she lacks the abilities to deal on global (or even European stage) Clinton had the benefit of cashing on the post cold war sole super power golden decade and the upper slope of the dot com bubble. His mishandling of the Kosovo events set a ticking time bomb there.
  - smsm42 13y ago
    What's so great about Clinton? Except giving endless material for comic shows and explicit jokes, I have hard time recalling something that would nominate him personally for greatness.
mindcrime 13y ago
The problem of various "revolutions" is that we no longer have great leaders. There are influental leaders, but none truly great ones. Good. We don't need "Great leaders", in the sense of how most people use that term (that is, political leaders). We just need people to be free to do what they do best - live, love, learn, play, grow, work, build, create and dream without arbitrary restrictions and constraints imposed through force. Having "leaders" who "lead" by being influential, outspoken, visionary, etc. is another thing. I'd call somebody like Elon Musk a "leader" in this regard, but he isn't forcing anybody to do anything. I'm not a big fan of Nick Saban, but back when he was coach of the NFL's Miami Dolphins he was asked once about needing more leaders on defense. He said something like "We are looking for wolves, not sheep. We want every player on defense to be a leader, not somebody who's looking for a sheepdog to guide them around and lead them." That, to me, gets to the heart of the matter: We should all be leaders in our way. I struggle to name three great present-time politicians. That's OK, I struggle to name a single "great politician", ever. In fact, I consider the term to be an oxymoron.
- guard-of-terra 13y ago
  "We don't need "Great leaders", in the sense of how most people use that term (that is, political leaders). We just need people to be free to do what they do best - live, love, learn, play, grow, work, build, create and dream without arbitrary restrictions and constraints imposed through force" That's extremelly cool but that does nothing for a country which have just experienced a revolution and now doesn't know what to do with itself. There are people who proved capable of creating a country following a revolution. My latest impression is Ataturk, but you can find one or two in the history of USA.
- chongli 13y ago
  >"We are looking for wolves, not sheep. We want every player on defense to be a leader, not somebody who's looking for a sheepdog to guide them around and lead them." All the more ironic when one actually understands the social structure of wolf packs.
  - mindcrime 13y ago
ahallock 13y ago
Why do we need great political leaders? Where are they leading us and why should we follow those who have an appetite for so much power? People should think for themselves and follow their own convictions and espouse true virtue, not get carried away with the mythology and worship of politicians. Great political leaders are like super heroes in movies and comics: they're a cheap, vicarious substitute for being a leader (or hero) in your own life.
- guard-of-terra 13y ago
  Why do we need political leaders at all? Why do we need a mediocre (wo)man on top instead of some kind of direct democracy? If you've got leaders at least be sure you have good ones. WRT power: you're so wrong. Great political leader is capable of creating a country. Or rethinking one. They produce power out of the thin air, for everybody to use. Mediocre leaders? They tend to "consume" power. Exactly what you are fearing.
OnyeaboAduba 13y ago
The reason we dont have good leaders or good music or good anything is because there is too much information and misinformation out there no adays alot of what makes something great is often the "secret sauce" and nothing secret anymore. But I believe that of the politicans music bands athletes etc will be called great 30 years from now too much cyncism in our society right now
smsm42 13y ago
If we don't have them this would be excellent. Great politicians make people abandon reason and throw themselves into crazy fantasies which cost millions of lives. One charismatic German being at the right place at the right time cost the world more than a decade of unimaginable suffering and hundred millions dead. And that's in Europe, considered most advanced and civilized part of the world. And that's not the only example. Thank you very much, I'd rather deal with a hundred of regular politicians and their regular small-time stupidity and their regular small-time mistakes and evils than with one monumental charismatic figure like that.
- guard-of-terra 13y ago
  "I'd rather deal with a hundred of regular politicians and their regular small-time stupidity" That doesn't work in a revolutionary country. What you get is a hundred of gangs.

lukifer 13y ago

I have high hopes for Elizabeth Warren. I also hope Lawrence Lessig runs for national office someday. But the general trend you refer to is accurate. The various vested interests have got character assassination down to a science, and anyone who doesn't play ball at least a little tends to be filtered out of the political process.

tome 13y ago
I agree that there are no great world leaders at the moment but that doesn't mean we "no longer" have them. Clinton was the most recent great leader in the West, in my opinion. We could easily have another in the next decade. Blair was nearly there, as is Merkel, though she feels like more of an administrator than a leader.
- guard-of-terra 13y ago
  I fail to see either of them as great. They're the difference between a (wo)man in office saying right words and one saying wrong words. They certainly got most of their words right but anyone could say those. From great leader I expect doing something nobody else in their position could.
  - lukifer 13y ago
    I could make a case that a good leader is mostly hot air. What distinguishes a great leader is performing the right words and gestures for their zeitgeist, thereby becoming a symbolic figurehead that shapes broad social forces into real progress. Perhaps, then, our lack of good leaders is not about the leaders themselves, but rather due to the fragmentation of cultures and social institutions.
    - guard-of-terra 13y ago
      That fragmentation thing is dangerous because fragmented people have troubles maintaining their rights. We desperately need politicians that will figure out this fragmentation thing.
      - lukifer 13y ago
        That, or bottom-up big-tent coalitions that can stitch together a bunch of fragmented groups. (For all their many faults, the Republicans had this formula perfected in the 80's and early 00's.)
        guard-of-terra 13y ago
        You have to adapt this formula to a post-revolution country where nobody trusts nobody, nobody knows what they want, people have bizzare ideas that have nothing in common with reality (think religions), and there is no political rallying point to stitch groups around.
- dageshi 13y ago
  Especially in the case of Blair and Clinton, they were in power during relatively benign economic times. I can't help but feel that it's easy to like people who never had any really serious problems to deal with. Certainly not on the scale of those imposed by the financial crisis/euro crisis. But I will grant you, they both had something about them, a force of personality perhaps that exceeds many other politicians.
- mhurron 13y ago
  What did Clinton do that would qualify him for great? Honestly, from where I'm sitting, what did Clinton do that set him apart from any other President at all? And Tony Blair? A head of state that was just seen as a puppet of another as 'almost great'?
  - tome 13y ago
    I won't argue that Clinton was great like JFK, or even Reagan, but when fishing for great Western leaders of the past thirty years is there anyone else who comes out better? Blair on the other hand led the reformation of the Labour party and made them electable again, whilst mainaining Britain's standing on the world stage, far from a puppet actually.
    - mhurron 13y ago
      >I won't argue that Clinton was great like JFK, or even Reagan, but when fishing for great Western leaders of the past thirty years is there anyone else who comes out better? Better by comparison is not the same as great. It is quite possible that there be no great leaders. I do not know of anything Clinton did that would be great. >Blair on the other hand led the reformation of the Labour party and made them electable again, whilst mainaining Britain's standing on the world stage, far from a puppet actually. Making a party electable again may be a sign of a savvy leader, but it is not greatness. Britian's standing on the world stage under Blair was one of a lapdog in many circles. Again, a leader that garners the reputation as a puppet is not a great leader.
- venomsnake 13y ago
  Merkel is quite the opposite of great. While she would make a decent politician in a regional level, as the recent history shows she lacks the abilities to deal on global (or even European stage) Clinton had the benefit of cashing on the post cold war sole super power golden decade and the upper slope of the dot com bubble. His mishandling of the Kosovo events set a ticking time bomb there.
- smsm42 13y ago
  What's so great about Clinton? Except giving endless material for comic shows and explicit jokes, I have hard time recalling something that would nominate him personally for greatness.

mindcrime 13y ago

The problem of various "revolutions" is that we no longer have great leaders. There are influental leaders, but none truly great ones. Good. We don't need "Great leaders", in the sense of how most people use that term (that is, political leaders). We just need people to be free to do what they do best - live, love, learn, play, grow, work, build, create and dream without arbitrary restrictions and constraints imposed through force. Having "leaders" who "lead" by being influential, outspoken, visionary, etc. is another thing. I'd call somebody like Elon Musk a "leader" in this regard, but he isn't forcing anybody to do anything. I'm not a big fan of Nick Saban, but back when he was coach of the NFL's Miami Dolphins he was asked once about needing more leaders on defense. He said something like "We are looking for wolves, not sheep. We want every player on defense to be a leader, not somebody who's looking for a sheepdog to guide them around and lead them." That, to me, gets to the heart of the matter: We should all be leaders in our way. I struggle to name three great present-time politicians. That's OK, I struggle to name a single "great politician", ever. In fact, I consider the term to be an oxymoron.

guard-of-terra 13y ago
"We don't need "Great leaders", in the sense of how most people use that term (that is, political leaders). We just need people to be free to do what they do best - live, love, learn, play, grow, work, build, create and dream without arbitrary restrictions and constraints imposed through force" That's extremelly cool but that does nothing for a country which have just experienced a revolution and now doesn't know what to do with itself. There are people who proved capable of creating a country following a revolution. My latest impression is Ataturk, but you can find one or two in the history of USA.
chongli 13y ago
>"We are looking for wolves, not sheep. We want every player on defense to be a leader, not somebody who's looking for a sheepdog to guide them around and lead them." All the more ironic when one actually understands the social structure of wolf packs.
- mindcrime 13y ago

ahallock 13y ago

Why do we need great political leaders? Where are they leading us and why should we follow those who have an appetite for so much power? People should think for themselves and follow their own convictions and espouse true virtue, not get carried away with the mythology and worship of politicians. Great political leaders are like super heroes in movies and comics: they're a cheap, vicarious substitute for being a leader (or hero) in your own life.

guard-of-terra 13y ago
Why do we need political leaders at all? Why do we need a mediocre (wo)man on top instead of some kind of direct democracy? If you've got leaders at least be sure you have good ones. WRT power: you're so wrong. Great political leader is capable of creating a country. Or rethinking one. They produce power out of the thin air, for everybody to use. Mediocre leaders? They tend to "consume" power. Exactly what you are fearing.

OnyeaboAduba 13y ago

The reason we dont have good leaders or good music or good anything is because there is too much information and misinformation out there no adays alot of what makes something great is often the "secret sauce" and nothing secret anymore. But I believe that of the politicans music bands athletes etc will be called great 30 years from now too much cyncism in our society right now

smsm42 13y ago

If we don't have them this would be excellent. Great politicians make people abandon reason and throw themselves into crazy fantasies which cost millions of lives. One charismatic German being at the right place at the right time cost the world more than a decade of unimaginable suffering and hundred millions dead. And that's in Europe, considered most advanced and civilized part of the world. And that's not the only example. Thank you very much, I'd rather deal with a hundred of regular politicians and their regular small-time stupidity and their regular small-time mistakes and evils than with one monumental charismatic figure like that.

guard-of-terra 13y ago
"I'd rather deal with a hundred of regular politicians and their regular small-time stupidity" That doesn't work in a revolutionary country. What you get is a hundred of gangs.