23
« on: May 31, 2016, 09:27:10 pm »
Balance is key.. But if there has to be an imbalance, it's better to err on the side of being loved.
I generally tend to think that mankind cannot truly lead or control itself in any perfect way as we are, as there will always be injustices. Man dominates man to his own injury, so to speak, and even the most loved leaders will be forced someday to make decisions that cause them to lose rapport with some of those they'd worked so hard to gain respect from. It's one of the harder pitfalls of being a leader.
Contrastingly, feared leaders may be able to create the biggest shadow and farthest-ranging dominions, however, since fear, adrenaline, and need for self-preservation spreads more readily in subordinate minds than feelings of love created by dopamine and being comforted. Physically speaking, you're more like to get action from a fight-or-flight response than you are to sit down with each one of your subordinates and make them feel special and know that they're loved (in the grand scheme, this is not possible).
So, that said, the great leaders of the world that we remember today have often been the most terribly feared. This isn't to say being feared is easy or that being a loved leader is the absolute best choice. Loved leaders are seen as weak and must gain their respect (and keep it!), while feared leaders will be more likely to have uprising leading to violent ends to their regimes, often with no hope of recovery.
So, I guess the picture I'm painting is one of these:
The loved leader whose power grows slowly, and may be mistaken for being weak more than often, stepped on, and must gain their respect on the basis of powerful interpersonal skills that must be continually honed. If successful, this one may be remembered vaguely in sentimentality. This works at the smaller scale. It is less sympathized with in the larger scale (again, I believe it is because mankind was never meant to rule itself in the first place).
OR
The feared leader whose power is not to be questioned, but will likely be met with force in response, and likely little forgiveness once caught at a disadvantage against rebellion. This one will certainly be remembered for their terror--but they will be remembered. This tactic is used again and again throughout history. It works, but works with dystopian, imbalanced results.
I'd rather err on the side of being loved, even if it means that you will be perceived as weak and face challenges of being misunderstood and occasionally even being stepped on. The strong continue to thrive, and often, the loved leader will grow to develop a rapport of respect with their subordinates that prevents most problems from beginning in the first place, as their subordinates also feel loved and appreciated for what they do.
(But this is just in the big scheme. It's too intricate to discuss in full here. ^^")
Show Posts
(Hahah~)