Selecting Leaders: Did We Strike Gold with Obama-Biden?
Selecting leaders is one very big aspect of the survival of the species. Biologists never tire of studying the methods employed by various species in selecting leaders. One tried and true method is for alpha males to beat each other up. Group leadership on the other hand employs subtle signals that cause all members to act as one -- say schools of fish, or flocks of birds.
Humans, ever strutting their rational superiority over other species, engage in selection rituals of their own design. These range from military coups to tribal warfare, to neighbors slaughtering neighbors over who exerts leadership. But the most rationally advanced selection processes are those employed by democracies. These processes use rules and codes purportedly designed to find the best person among all of the citizens to lead the country into the future.
How well has this superior system worked for democracies? Allowing for varying results from nation to nation given differences in election processes, it can still generally be said that only checks and balances, impeachment clauses, and term limits have saved these democratic systems from total disasters. They are far from perfect.
Occasionally a superior result allows us to claim rational superiority over lower species: a Lincoln surfaces to bind the nation together and grant Blacks freedom from slavery. Nelson Mandela rises from jail to liberate South Africa from apartheid. A written-off Winston Churchill turns out to be the right person at the right time to stem Hitler's ambitions. Mohandas Gandhi fasts, walks 240 miles and protests until the British are compelled to relinquish control of India. Such leaders give us hope we can do the right thing when we put cynicism, fear, and narrow self-interests aside. Or perhaps it is just luck.
The selection process has grown much more complex and risky with the rise of billion dollar campaigns deployed with TV, radio, and Web power. Leaders can be packaged overnight and sold or destroyed by media hype and attacks. One person-one vote gives way to one person with a big wallet and lots of votes. For example big Texas wallets launched a media blitz called Swift Boat that destroyed John Kerry's 2004 bid for the Presidency.
So in the end the smug superiority of the rational system too often gives way to head butting by alpha males or females. Subtle and not so subtle signals about racism, homosexuality, and women's right to choose can move whole flocks of true believers regardless of the actual quality of the leadership candidates. Fears, money, and media power scour out most of the rational aspects of the selection system.
We must shed our arrogance, admit our system failures, and design a much better method for selecting leaders. We can't look at the other institutions for easy answers. Corporations and education are not faring much better in finding great sustainable leadership. The best models tend to look at whole teams, not just the heroic figure. To survive as a species we need a wholly new system for selecting leaders. The talent resides amongst us, but we are not getting the best and brightest through the system.
John Gardner, a great leader and author of Excellence was fond of asking why a tattered group of 13 colonies could select world class leaders like Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams, Franklin, Hamilton and more while a nation of 50 states and more than 300 million people can't find one to equal them. (One hint: none of those exemplary leaders were professional politicians.) With our current system we can only hope for luck or divine intervention to find a vein of gold. It appears that the Obama-Biden team may be that lucky strike -- in spite of the selection system needing an overhaul.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I find myself somewhat surprised by my attitude-----but I have come to the realization that with McCain----we are doomed! With Obama----we at least have a chance!
That was a pleasure to read...ver
And, if I may digress for a moment...t
Al Eisele warned recently, in a Huffington post blog, that journalists risk extinction if they do not become multi-platform content providers (MPCPs). In fact, journalists miss the point - AGAIN - if they believe that, in the age of the internet(s), they must simply become MPCP’s. Journalists must provide context or the content they provide is distorted and meaningless, at best, or dangerous, at worst. It will be the lack of context and the inability to inform the people about what they need to know that orchestrates the continuing demise of journalism and the further weakening of American democracy.
The media coverage of Senator Joe Biden, particularly throughout the last year, is a classic case in point and has provided clear evidence of an incompetent and inept media who have collectively created and propagated a national myth of epic proportions about this esteemed statesman. And, in so doing, they have successfully denied the people the opportunity to properly assess his leadership capability.
...continu
...continu
The media-created NATIONAL MYTH goes something like this... “Joe Biden is a gaffe-prone blowhard, Washington insider and plagiarist whose ego and arrogance are second in magnitude only to his love for the sound of his own voice and doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously by us, the media and our precious pundits, or by anyone else.”
Of course, not ALL of the media and blogosphere (mainstream and otherwise) felt the need to actually verbalize this message as it was much easier to just ignore the candidate and his campaign and dismiss his selection as VP (which, by the way, singularly demonstrated Senator Obama's superior judgement). Besides, they didn't have to put voice to the message. They have long since accomplished the task of creating and sustaining that media-driven national myth that continued to surround Senator Biden throughout this election cycle and which was, as if preordained, gleefully taken up - hook, line and sinker - by a majority of the electorate.
These days, it is not nearly enough for the press to be free. It must be intelligent, too - if the democracy it serves is to survive and thrive. I have come to the conclusion that we are pretty much doomed and destined to reap the unhappy consequences of an ill-informed electorate, and media who seem collectively incapable of understanding the role and importance of a free press in a democracy, much less capable of responsibly performing their duty.
That headline is just too funny! LOL!
Hilarious!
Doesn't he have to be elected first?
Mr. O'Neil, I couldn't agree more. To me, Senator Obama is virtually the first truly "presidential" contender for the Oval Office I've seen since JFK.
For heaven's sake, America, let's really restore dignity, honor, and intelligence to the White House. Make sure everyone you know, especially those who can cast a ballot for the first time in this election ( http://www
Vote for peace. Vote for hope. Vote for real change and leadership.
Throughout this election, Barack Obama has exhibited a cool & steady hand; he has demonstrated and commanded a level of excellence from his campaign; he has executed the exact campaign strategy that he laid out in his book "The Audacity of Hope;" he shown the cunning of a champion poker player, while refusing to compromise his dignity and family honor; he has empowered and rejuvenated a new generation of politically conscious grassroots leaders; and through "truth telling" and a consistency of message he has broken the code on a broken system of influence peddling, favoritism, and cronyism in Washington DC.
I honestly think that this man has been divinely ordained..
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
