A typical follower will experience occasional indecisiveness or hesitancy to step up. This idea from the citizen leader article verifies that some are naturally imposed to be leaders, while others prefer to stay in the background. The importance of leaders are often overstated in society, and the article talks about how it is important to develop more a more active participatory population. While this theory makes sense, it is also important for an effective leader to take initiative. This action can be taken through understanding the community’s unity and identity because the leader will better be suited to address the needs of the general public. Having a sense of the public’s identity is important because there are certain individuals who are more willing to step up and show the characteristics to be the face of a movement, so being able to lead without forgetting about the common person is very important.
The article talks about how the issue with modern-day leaders is that they seem, “stripped of a communal identity.” While it is important to develop an active citizen base, it is even more key for a leader to be able to act on the behalf of the public with their best interest in mind. A leader that has this sense of communal identity will be able to inspire their followers to act, creating a leadership hierarchy within their support system. Though I’m trying to argue that the best leader inspires others into action and creates, I am not disagreeing with the author’s point of the importance of an active citizen base. Creating a culture of accountability and driven individuals will not only make more effective leaders, but it will make a more efficient society.
I agree that it is important for a leader to have a sense of knowledge of what the community needs and how today’s leaders are somehow disconnected. Communal identity is super important when trying to achieve a better community.
I agree with what you said towards the end that a great leader influences people to take action and be creative. I think that is very important in talking about great leaders. Like MLK influenced people to peacefully protest. We can also talk about Hitler who used this negatively, he isn’t a great leader by any means but he was very influential, in which he influenced his followers to put innocent people in concentration camps and to murder millions of people.
I definitely agree with your points. As a country, our politics would be run more smoothly and more equitably if everyday people were more involved. The reason that were are so polarized is because of the large percentage of the population that is disengaged. We cannot expect leaders to carry all of the weight and then get upset when there is something done that we don’t like. It reminds me the “closed mouths don’t get fed” mentality
I agree with what you’re saying, especially on the article’s point of having a more active participatory population. Without people engaging in the world around them, they sometimes remain ignorant to current issues. This may lead to societies, much like ours, where it seems like there are only extremes with no in between because they are the ones getting the most attention in the media.