Thanks for another thought-provoking post. What could you tell us about the quality of leaders in liberal democracies at different times. How would we survey that? What makes a good quality leader? What aspects of leadership do we arrive at when we strip back ideology as far as we can? What I’m wondering is, what can we say about a society at a given point in time in relationship to the quality of their leadership?
“People want politicians who are more responsive to their needs and who are more competent and honest, among other factors.” But do good quality leaders emerge from a vacuum at random? It seems intuitive to me that the quality of political leadership would be proportional to the wider community’s engagement.
I would think it extremely unlikely that better political leadership will emerge just because we want it. Rather, I think we have to do something about it. Of course, you can argue it the other way around – good leadership inspires greater engagement. But how’s that working out for us?
Those are really great questions, Rhys. I won't be able to do them justice just at the moment, I'm afraid. There are modern textbooks on leadership in the disciplines of pysch and management. They have some valid things to say – but clearly they haven't solved our problems, as leaders appear to be getting worse lately (to put it crudely). Maybe 'the world' has gotten too difficult to be led? (Even the Greens, who used to pride themselves on integrity....) There are some general things we could say about leadership, but people have been working on this for millennia (literally) – for example, the mirror of princes tradition. What could we do about it today? I can think of some things, and could even write some bullet-points, but any proposals to train or 'produce' good political leaders would soon be shot down as elitist and undemocratic. And the competitive multi-party system doesn't reward the kinds of leadership you may be hoping to see. A political party could develop its own internal process, of course. If done well, that may inspire confidence in enough voters. Grant
Thanks Grant! I’m recalling some things from 200.215. Virtuous rulers, philosopher kings and correct constitutions. Yes, I suppose we’ve been wrestling with what good leadership means since time immemorial. What concerns me is, I’m not convinced the conceptions of good leadership which are undoubtedly shared amongst many moderate New Zealanders are being exhibited by our leaders. I.e. what unites us vs. what divides us.
I think you might be on to something with the world being too difficult to lead. Furthermore, it seems the issues we face are so complex and value laden that it’s unreasonable to expect a small group of leaders to carry that much responsibility. It’s a situation made worse by the constant need for parties to maintain image in the vote/campaign-centric approach which typifies our party politics.
I’d suggest both of these issues could be helped by devolving more decision making to the wider community. If everyday New Zealanders could carry a bit more of the responsibility and support our leaders a bit more; if we could shift the model from what parties can get from the public (their vote) toward the value they can give, then maybe we could improve democracy. We have the technology now to enable a nuanced participatory governance. Is it risk free? No, nor is it a panacea but we could move things forward a lot, and I would expect better leadership would emerge from a more engaged community.
Good thoughts, thanks Rhys. I agree that we can do this better. We need to go beyond tick-box surveys and consultations, and look at some of the deliberative practices that are being used around the world these days.
Grant, people want the right to express an opinion and to listen to diverse opinions. People rely on our universities and schools to be forums for those opinions. Our idealised 'forums' have let us down badly. People also want a MSM that respects its own journalistic code and reports matters of the day objectively, again I think we have been let down by our media. If both these aspects of our lives were corrected we'd have a democracy of note. They haven't been and we don't.
Great comments, thanks Mike. I agree that those institutions have let us down – although there are many great individuals within them who'd love to be enabled to do their jobs better. NZ will have a lot of idle capacity, after lay-offs, in media and higher education. How could we re-employ those people? Where would they get revenue from to support a vibrant democratic environment? I meet journalists first-hand, and have been thinking about it, but don't have answers right now. GD.
Hi Grant,
Thanks for another thought-provoking post. What could you tell us about the quality of leaders in liberal democracies at different times. How would we survey that? What makes a good quality leader? What aspects of leadership do we arrive at when we strip back ideology as far as we can? What I’m wondering is, what can we say about a society at a given point in time in relationship to the quality of their leadership?
“People want politicians who are more responsive to their needs and who are more competent and honest, among other factors.” But do good quality leaders emerge from a vacuum at random? It seems intuitive to me that the quality of political leadership would be proportional to the wider community’s engagement.
I would think it extremely unlikely that better political leadership will emerge just because we want it. Rather, I think we have to do something about it. Of course, you can argue it the other way around – good leadership inspires greater engagement. But how’s that working out for us?
The new parties are coming…
Aroha nui
Rhys
Those are really great questions, Rhys. I won't be able to do them justice just at the moment, I'm afraid. There are modern textbooks on leadership in the disciplines of pysch and management. They have some valid things to say – but clearly they haven't solved our problems, as leaders appear to be getting worse lately (to put it crudely). Maybe 'the world' has gotten too difficult to be led? (Even the Greens, who used to pride themselves on integrity....) There are some general things we could say about leadership, but people have been working on this for millennia (literally) – for example, the mirror of princes tradition. What could we do about it today? I can think of some things, and could even write some bullet-points, but any proposals to train or 'produce' good political leaders would soon be shot down as elitist and undemocratic. And the competitive multi-party system doesn't reward the kinds of leadership you may be hoping to see. A political party could develop its own internal process, of course. If done well, that may inspire confidence in enough voters. Grant
Thanks Grant! I’m recalling some things from 200.215. Virtuous rulers, philosopher kings and correct constitutions. Yes, I suppose we’ve been wrestling with what good leadership means since time immemorial. What concerns me is, I’m not convinced the conceptions of good leadership which are undoubtedly shared amongst many moderate New Zealanders are being exhibited by our leaders. I.e. what unites us vs. what divides us.
I think you might be on to something with the world being too difficult to lead. Furthermore, it seems the issues we face are so complex and value laden that it’s unreasonable to expect a small group of leaders to carry that much responsibility. It’s a situation made worse by the constant need for parties to maintain image in the vote/campaign-centric approach which typifies our party politics.
I’d suggest both of these issues could be helped by devolving more decision making to the wider community. If everyday New Zealanders could carry a bit more of the responsibility and support our leaders a bit more; if we could shift the model from what parties can get from the public (their vote) toward the value they can give, then maybe we could improve democracy. We have the technology now to enable a nuanced participatory governance. Is it risk free? No, nor is it a panacea but we could move things forward a lot, and I would expect better leadership would emerge from a more engaged community.
Ngā mihi
Rhys
Good thoughts, thanks Rhys. I agree that we can do this better. We need to go beyond tick-box surveys and consultations, and look at some of the deliberative practices that are being used around the world these days.
GD
Grant, people want the right to express an opinion and to listen to diverse opinions. People rely on our universities and schools to be forums for those opinions. Our idealised 'forums' have let us down badly. People also want a MSM that respects its own journalistic code and reports matters of the day objectively, again I think we have been let down by our media. If both these aspects of our lives were corrected we'd have a democracy of note. They haven't been and we don't.
Great comments, thanks Mike. I agree that those institutions have let us down – although there are many great individuals within them who'd love to be enabled to do their jobs better. NZ will have a lot of idle capacity, after lay-offs, in media and higher education. How could we re-employ those people? Where would they get revenue from to support a vibrant democratic environment? I meet journalists first-hand, and have been thinking about it, but don't have answers right now. GD.