I read this
extraordinary op-ed by a Trump administration insider. It reinforces what I
was thinking about for some time. In our current time, leadership has become a
farce. It could be a significant detriment to the world to have such leaders
come up on top of organizations and nations. Why is this happening, in spite of
a large number of people knowing that this is all illogical, improbable and irrational?
Looking at the words
used to describe Trump in this article: worst inclinations, misguided impulses,
amorality, not moored to any discernible first principles that guide decision
making, little affinity to ideals, impetuous, adversarial, petty, ineffective,
whims, veer off topic and off the rails, repetitive rants, half-baked,
ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions, flip-flipped, erratic
behavior.
I see more of
similar behavior from leaders, may not be such crazy levels. Narcissism, not
encouraging feedback, shooting the messenger, prone to exaggeration, lack of
humility, hypocrisy, not liking anyone else looking even slightly good, not
interested in details, taking rigid positions, simplification, generalization and
host of other problems.
I think another
factor has amplified the problems that such leadership is inflicting on the
world. How we consume information and form opinions have fundamentally changed
with social media and such leaders are adept at managing the perceptions
through such mechanisms. If both of these combine, it multiples the power.
From the article: “The
bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what
we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and
allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.”
Someone remarked
couple of days back that even if Trump shoots someone, it will not change
anything. Another was betting that he will still win a second term. I have met
people who think in spite of everything, the nation is benefiting overall, so can
put up with everything else. A grain of truth inside a mountain of lies still
makes people “agree partially”.
Should some of our
positions be one or zero, with or against, than partial? How should we avoid getting
toxic leaders? How to call them out in clear terms without being stripped of
civility and stooping low?
