Throughout the article, Concepts of Leadership: The Beginning, Bernard M. Bass references many influential leaders throughout history and how their ideologies from the past shaped and defined modern leadership techniques that are still prevalent today. Referencing Plato, Aristotle, Machiavelli, Greek mythology, and other historical topics, Bass discusses how knowing the history of these leaders is important to understanding the basis of leadership roles today. This connects with the article, “Why History Matters” by Penelope J. Corfield because this article dives into the idea that understanding the people of the past and our history is the best way to effectively change and live in the future.
However, while listening to the blog post today, we dove into the idea that historiography. Historiography is the concept that history is often mistold and corrupted to show the side of the winners because those are the people in charge of telling the stories of the past. This is an important thing to remember when thinking about the ideologies of the effective leaders of the past and what has lasted the test of time as meaningful ideologies. For example, Michavelli’s The Prince has many controversial standpoints of violence for absolute control within it, but it is still considered an important book for strong and controlling leaders, as Hitler is known for quoting his ideologies. Therefore, it is important to remember the influence ideologies have had in the past and their outcomes.
I feel it is important to tell the history not just of the winners but of those defeated as well. If we can learn so much from what the victorious did right, why can we not also take into account what the losing side did to bring on their demise?
I really liked how you compared the two readings to the podcast and highlighted the fact that understanding the leaders in history is important, however history is usually written by the leaders/victors so it is therefore biased, because I did not really make that connection after completing both. I also definitely disagreed with Machavelli’s view that if authority cannot be obtained by populace, then one should retreat to deceit or violence. However that ideology can still determine someone as an “effective” leader, maybe just not a moral one.