Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

What is leadership?

What is leadership?
March 13, 2014, 05:36:52 PM
What is leadership?

A leader makes decisions. Choices. He does this based upon considerable experience. Thus a leader must be experienced. Experience gives him scope. Scope is a larger picture than a lack of experience allows.
Therefore, the young rarely make good leaders, lacking the scope of the older person.
This is why opinion can play no reliable part in being led.
Leaders do not lead by popular opinion. If they do, then it is called 'democracy', and we know how flawed that is.

I lend DMBM my full support and loyalty. Why? Because he makes enough good decisions, and makes enough sense, enough of the time, that I choose to support him. Sometimes he says flaky things. But rarely. Nobody is perfect, outside the realm of the spiritually-adept. And the only people who listen to the spiritually-adept, are either all five spiritually-adept people, or the tiresome group known as complete wankers.

There can be no real leadership unless the rest of the people are equipped to recognize real leadership.
The only way I know of, to do this, is to dispense with opinion. Agreement is not necessary. Ego never agrees with anything it didn't think of first. And so can never be led. Thus no real leadership can be possible.

Get my drift?

Re: What is leadership?
March 13, 2014, 07:55:46 PM
Interesting. I hope I'm not waxing flaky too often, although I am sometimes trolly.

Leadership in the modern sense is presented as a social quality. "He has leadership, people love to follow him."

In actuality, it is a discipline more like the martial arts. One may have natural genius, but that alone doesn't do much, unless disciplined.

Then it can work magic. But again, it will work through organization/hierarchy and not a bottom-up vision of us all getting hippie happy with each other.

Life requires force. In all ways. It is the ultimate love: clarity and realism. That alone represents a form of unity with the cosmos which can reveal its true beauty.

Interestingly, one does not become a leader without being forceful within oneself to the same degree. It is how we can separate the tyrants who get up at noon while their men are dying in snow from the kings of old who were there, in the snow, with them.

Re: What is leadership?
March 13, 2014, 08:37:59 PM
Well. I had to say something slightly negative about you, didn't I?
Lest the differently-abled accuse me of sucking up, or something equally savoury.
A thousand pardons.

Re: What is leadership?
March 13, 2014, 08:41:00 PM
I have a hard time discussing anything related to 'spirituality'. I look at it more like Plato's Forms than anything concrete [concrete as in physicality]. I think that it's logical to believe that everything derives from one source; whether it be an abstraction, simulation, etc. I ultimately think that reality is an illusion and any logic I try to apply to it is flawed because I'm a flawed creature.

This is DMBM's territory so it's rather natural for him to lead its movements.

I'm sure I'll eventually get banned as well. Though this is the only forum that I can remember signing up to and chatting.

Re: What is leadership?
March 13, 2014, 08:47:04 PM
Hey, it's the in-thing to get banned from here. Everybody's doing it. Not like it's ever permanent, or anything, anyway, unless one has a sub-900 IQ.
Sadly, I've never seen anything from you that even comes close to being bannable. Try harder!

Re: What is leadership?
March 14, 2014, 03:08:06 AM
The problem with modern 'leadership' is, that everybody wants to be 'the man'. But in order to be 'the man', everybody feels they have to 'stick it to the man'.

In other words: The great chaotic mass of sheep, rebelling against each other, in order to appear powerful and leader'ish in their own minds. Effectively not leading anyone - but being led by anything, that makes them feel more independent, individualistic and powerful (lifestyle products, rock music, fashion etc.)

Being young (under 30) myself, I acknowledge that I do not have any ability to lead. But being a leader in itself isn't a real goal anyway.

The real leader is someone who derives power not from himself, but from that which he represents and understands: Order, wisdom, in short: The ways of reality.

I think there's a long lost art of being a follower, that is worth rediscovering: Not following in the sheepish sense, but carefully seeking out and determining that, which is actually worth following, as an alternative to immense sea of 'be independent'-type crap crashing all around us.

This is why I have such respect for Prozak/Stevens and crow: They both represent something subtle, yet undeniably real and powerful. Something I myself want to represent. Which is why I rarely feel any need to question what either of them say: Not because I don't consider the deeper implications of their words, but precisely because I do.

Re: What is leadership?
March 14, 2014, 05:03:50 AM
Well. I had to say something slightly negative about you, didn't I?

I was more hoping for editorial tips. I am also trying to be less trolly because while it's fun -- as intended, for all parties with brains -- it can create ambiguity.

This is DMBM's territory so it's rather natural for him to lead its movements.

I should clarify this concept. I do not view a forum as owned. I can prove it to you that this is so. Without the interaction of users, a forum is just computer space (RAM, disk) and processor time. The only time a forum exists is when it is being read and/or used for interactive purposes.

Thus, while myself and others provide the physical aspects of this forum, that's not the forum. The forum is the people here. We are its guardians, but we're also guardians of blogs and other concerns, so sometimes we lag.

There may be a metaphor for mind::brain, body::soul, thought::nerves, etc. here.

The only reason a forum administrator in honesty issues a ban is if the person is acting in such a way that's a threat to a community. Communities are fragile... very fragile. One bad actor can prompt everyone else to respond in such a way that they end up acting badly.

Thus, you need a fascist. I don't refute fascism, nor do I refute totalitarianism; I see them as methods. I have another method, but it's a method that relates intrinsically to a goal, which is the organic society.

Here's one good summary of something like it:


It's anarchic in that it rejects the State. It is not anarchic in that it affirms strong leadership in the style of kings. It is not socialist in that it affirms the need for ownership of self and property, and grants most property (land) to its aristocrats, who did an excellent job of conserving that land.

It has a dark side too. It affirms that most people need to be in a state of pseudo-slavery (serfdom) or they'll buy giant pickup trucks and fill their backyards with plastic garbage. I don't see this as a race-related claim, and as a nationalist reject all mixed-race societies (within reason... ), but as a Bell Curve related claim. Below a certain IQ, and with certain personality problems, people need to be managed. It turns out better for them as well.

Traditional England had vestiges of this system lasting up into the 1960s-1970s. Servants were servants who were tied to a household and essentially had their big affairs in life managed by it. In return they received lifetime employment, barring some drastic failing, and retirement. Large holders owned most of the country and kept it stable through conservatism. Upper classes saw themselves not as victorious geniuses but as servants of the country itself.

Even the Bible acknowledges this: leaders are servants. They are just a very specialized type of servant. We are all servants, in a way. The reason for this is that civilization is fragile, and worth preserving, and if we don't actively fight to banish evil and promote good, it starts breaking down. Thus we all serve, but in different roles.

In a small way, in a small community, forum admins are guardians and servants of that community. When its users disappear, we go away.