I define leadership as the ability to apply specific strategies of communication, decision making, and problem-solving to address the challenges of leading people in order to achieve certain outcomes that align with ones personal values, goals, and objectives. Leadership involves taking actions that embrace the greater good. This definition is based on experience, knowledge, and skills acquired from holding several leadership positions and applying different approaches and styles to lead, motivate, and inspire people to exploit their potential and be their best.
My leadership philosophy is founded on several core values that include authenticity, self-awareness, integrity, lifelong learning, open-mindedness, passion, and service. These values have enabled me to develop effective leadership over the years and achieve many goals and objectives in my life. Authenticity and self-awareness enable me to constantly evaluate my life and determine what is most important at any specific time.
In that regard, I ensure that all decisions are true to my highest ideals. Moreover, being self-aware allows me to interact with people effectively and understand certain aspects of human behavior that affect leadership. Self-knowledge empowers me to develop goals and objectives that serve my life purpose and personal mission. Integrity is an important aspect of leadership because it fosters respect and trust. I act and behave ethically at all times, regardless of the complexity of the situation or the severity of the circumstance. Constant learning is very important because it improves my thinking, enables me to embrace diversity and handle the complexities of life, expands my mind and skills, and exposes me to numerous opportunities. On the other hand, it equips me with knowledge on how to face adversity and enjoy career achievements without being vain.
I am able to handle stressful situations without compromising my values and ideals because of the readiness to apply the strategies obtained from learning and pursuing my curiosity. Passion is a very important component of successful leadership. Passion enables me to inspire those around me by acting as a role model and exhibiting energy that makes people get attracted to me. I have discovered that passion is an important aspect in the achievement of organizational success because it promotes focused attention, hard work, teamwork, and persistence. It allows me to persevere during tough times and pursue different endeavors with energy.
Finally, my leadership is committed to offering the best type of service to every person I encounter or interact with. Serving others is the main role that leadership plays in any organization or context that involves interaction with people. A leader should strive to serve other people at all times. Service involves many sacrifices that are possible only if a leader is passionate about his/her work and has core values that govern their leadership.
My leadership philosophy is based on the fact that a leader should be a source of motivation and inspiration by acting as a role model and championing values and ideals that promote optimal exploitation of human potential. I am committed to serving other people, offering guidance, solving problems, making critical decisions, and ensuring that my leadership is governed by certain core values and principles. The aforementioned values enable me to empower my followers and inspire them to exploit their potential optimally. Effective leadership creates work environments that empower people to be their best by taking part in the decision and problem-solving processes.
Over the ages, a great number of people have spoken and taught about leadership, where it comes from, how to lead within a company or an organization and how to achieve good results (Newsom, 2010). It is a process where a person socially influences another individual or a group to perform a task and achieve a goal. Although the principles of Leadership, the role of character, and personal qualities may be difficult to fathom, they are very important because they determine the performance of a leader. Therefore, leadership needs to be guided by principles. This essay will explore the principles of leadership in relation to President George W. Bush.
To begin with, a leader should build alliances by encouraging teamwork in an organization. President Bush in his leadership created the right structure of teamwork. He ensured that both his inner circle and his closest advisers had access to him (Ohansen, 2010). Therefore, building a relationship with the workers is important since it creates the value of teamwork. An ideal leader should train the organization to work as a team (Newsom, 2010).
Secondly, a leader must be disciplined. As a worthy example, Bush was known for discipline in and out of the office. Unlike Clinton whose ideas were subject to change, Bushs ways were firm and controlled (Liu, 2010). He meant what he said or did and firmly stood by it. His work and schedules were timely and tight. It is important to note that great and quality leadership goes hand in hand with discipline. This becomes an admirable quality that customers, employees and even the public are looking for (Ohansen, 2010). Other qualities that a leader should add to discipline include prudence, humility, compassion and courage. If such a leader is in an organization or a company, employees will emulate him and draw inspiration that will propel them into good work. Many leaders today need the discipline to help them adapt to the competitive business environment (Ohansen, 2010).
Thirdly, a leader should use the departments and sections in the organization to their maximum capability in order to achieve results (Ohansen, 2010). A leader should be able to mobilize the departments to work harder and attain a goal (Newsom, 2010). Being a Republican, Bush knew that his policies and promises had to count for something and that he had to fulfill his initiatives (Newsom, 2010). This made him work harder to become the president. Similarly, leaders should adopt this system of getting results. They should know that the calculus of good leadership is about getting results. This characteristic should be passed on to the subordinates too.
In addition, another principle of leadership is to know how to bring in the right people for the job. Leaders need to be knowledgeable of the ability the staff they are hiring (Liu, 2010). It is important that every leader identify the areas of expertise and the abilities of their staff. In May 2003, Bush reorganized his staff, retooled them, and brought in his old-time Texas friends into his inner circle. This was a strategy that got him reelection in the year 2004(Ohansen, 2010).
Also, a leader should be organized. Clintons White House organization could be well described as oxymoronic (Liu, 2010). Unlike Clinton, Bush gave organizational strength top priority. He improved on the one that Clinton had. Likewise, a leader should be concerned about his day-to-day organizational activities and in so doing give them attention and respect.
Moreover, leaders must have a vision. Vision in this case would mean the ability of a leader to inspire (Liu, 2010). Unlike President Ronald Reagan whose vision as a president was focused on a handful of verities, Bushs vision was strong in that it fully covered consistency of viewpoint (Newsom, 2010). Leaders must be visionary and should not adopt a Reaganesque kind of vision.
A good leader must display strategic intelligence. This is vital when a leader wants to create success out of a complex problem. Even though Bushs press conferences had jumbled syntax, he was a genius compared to Reagan and Truman (Newsom, 2010). Leaders should maintain a standard of strategic intelligence that will make them effective.
The ability to display high quality of emotional intelligence is a prerequisite in leadership. Sometimes when things are not right in the organization or in leadership, leaders tend to display emotional mismanagement (Ohansen, 2010). They become predisposed to imprudent and impulsive behaviors because they tend to act on the spur of the moment.
Last but not least, leaders must display leadership skills in their areas of leadership. A leader is defined by his leadership skills. President Bush was defined by his political acumen (Liu, 2010). He was skillful about how to motivate, rally, and energize people. Leadership skills should be more than just a platitude. It should be deeply rooted in a persons character.
In conclusion, a leader must have better communication skills. He must be eloquent and experienced. Leaders need to put a lot of effort, diligence, and discipline to master the art of proper communication (Newsom, 2010). Even though President George Bush was not an excellent speaker at the beginning of his leadership, he improved with time and his debating skills during his presidential campaigns were remarkable (Ohansen, 2010).
References
Liu, C. (2010). Leadership: Qualities, Skills, and Efforts. Interbeing. 4(2), 19-25. Web.
Newsom, T. (2010). Developing African-American Leaders in Todays Schools: Gifted Leadership, the Unfamiliar Dimension in Gifted Education. Black History Bulletin. 73(1), 18-23.
Ohansen, B. (2010). Leaders Will Make the Future of Aging. Generations. 34(3), 20-22.
Thomas Hobbes attempts to explain and classify the nature of man into three categories. These are competition, diffidence and glory. The three classifications have been used to quantitatively describe the foundation of western political philosophy. In terms of the modern political power, Hobbes (57) notes that natural power emanates from either the body or mind. However, regardless of the source of power, the degree of eloquence, nobility, literacy as well as strength are prudent. Additionally, the author asserts that the way power is exercised in the current political world is largely divided into two main areas namely natural and civil powers (Hobbes 57).
The two types of powers constitute the commonwealth and largely depend on willingness of parties involved. However, the most predominant theme portrayed by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan is that the natural state of man in leadership is war. The latter is perceived as the point at which man can gain and cling to power whether legally or illegally. Most importantly, Thomas Hobbes highlights the overall importance of monarchy and its state of rule. On the other hand, Mills has also provided a very interesting perspective of power and leadership. It is against this background that this paper analyzes major ideas conceptualized by Thomas Hobbes on Leviathan and todays leadership as well as John Stuart Mills perception on modern leaders.
Leadership and condition of war
On leviathan, Thomas Hobbes is categorical that men live in awe and in a continuous state of war. In most cases, the concept of living in war is not all about hurting others. It refers to fierce competition that helps people rise to power and maintain the glory associated with leadership. War is described by Hobbes as the political and moral philosophy that men carry along in their quest for leadership. This is the kind of todays leaders and the nature of leadership as portrayed by Thomas Hobbes. The series Lost season 2 exemplifies this theme and it is played throughout to the end after a tumultuous 48 day period. Thomas Hobbes is categorical that civil wars are not only in battle fields. Neither is the act demonstrated in fighting per se. It is also evident during in-fighting among mankind as they try to sustain themselves in power. In the present world, there is a strong will to contend in the political battles even though the fruits are quite often uncertain.
Absolute monarchy as ideal form of governance
Thomas Hobbes advocated for unrestrained and pure monarchy as ideal forms of governance. According to Finn (66), the political agenda of Thomas Hobbes could be described as inclined to influence and political relevance. His philosophies were that a monarch government has the ability to exert lots of influence and real political relevance. However, Thomas Hobbes is clear that monarchy does not provide the much needed forms of governance that can result into targeted development. He continues to argue that most of the leadership challenges that come along with governance are not attributable to this form of government (Finn 65).
Most problems tend to be similar whether in aristocracy or in democracy. This form of governance is capable of producing security for the people and peace (Finn 58). The present leadership has leaders who can destroy peace and tranquility of a country. That is why Hobbes advocated for a form of governance that is centralized and that can counter selfishness and greed of political leaders.
Leadership and materialism of man
Todays political leaders are inclined towards gaining favors and material resources. Thomas Hobbes has a strong belief that all things and phenomena in the world can be explained using interactions and motions of the material bodies. That is what the present world of politics and leadership is made of. Participants engage in these leadership positions due to foreseen gains. Hobbes was influenced by the likes of Kepler and Galileo who had discovered laws pertaining motions of the planet. The teachings of Hobbes are that modern people pursue vested interests whenever they are seeking positions and mostly in the political arenas. They however do these by using all means attainable and at the same time trying to avoid pain as much as possible. Hobbes introduces the concept of common wealth or the society which operates as per the directions of men and people at the helm of leaderships.
Leadership and the appetite of evil
Evil is not a practice that anybody would love to undertake. However, it is has become a common phenomena for purposes of gaining material wealth, power and political influence. Hobbes had a belief that quite often, mankind tends to remain in the natural state, and that moral ideas are not present in real sense. In cases whereby morals are absent, it becomes apparent that evil dominates. According to Martel (112), Hobbes equates sovereignty to necessary evil.
Whenever power and politics seem to be coming to a dead end, men refer to evil for the sake of containing it. Martel (112) writes of Thomas Hobbes who noted that any state continues to lie on crucial matters. These lies are put in a way that they are seen as favorable or preferable for development of the society. The theme brought out is that man is in perpetual evil society. This is the kind of society that is present in the world. The trend is real to an extent that some leaders keep themselves into power for unnecessarily long.
John Stuart Mill and todays leaders
John Mill introduces the concept of liberty of will. Mill was a strong believer of sovereignty and argues that a society is comprised of legitimate persons. In the present world of leadership, men have progressed to a point that they have derived the kind of desires they had of legitimate societies. Nonetheless, minorities have exercised tyranny in the practice of liberty and that is how few men have turned liberty into oppression. According to Daniel (2), liberty is a measure of power exercised by people in the society. Liberty is a perfect example of opposites of monarchies that were advocated by philosophers like Thomas Hobbes. However, John Stuart Mill refutes that democracy in the present world brings in liberty in governance. This paper analyzes the concept of liberty as argued out by John Stuart Mill and correlates this with the present form of leadership as exercised by leaders.
Civil or social Liberty and todays leaders
John Stuart Mill advocated for what he termed as civil liberty. He argued that restraining people to do what they desire goes against social liberty or freedom of choice. According to Daniel (65), civil liberty can be equated to social liberty whereby there must be a line and boundary between societal legitimacies and individual liberty. The society should not interfere with individual liberty. As well, individual liberty should not interfere with what the society is obligated to do.
The society can only interfere with individuals liberty when this liberty is bound to harm others. This is the ideal situation John Stuart Mill conceptualized, where, everyone has the right to do something. There should be a clear demarcation between social liberty and freedom of individuals. This is contrary to what the world has in some quarters. Leaders are known to violate rights of individuals, and where the society or government should facilitate individual rights, some violate these choices. The teachings of John Mill are against such kind of violence on the majority.
Liberty of will and todays leaders
Mill advocated for free will and personal liberty. Daniel (72) expounds that while liberty and society cannot be separated, free will may never be ignored. This is what is violated by politicians and society leaders in the present world. They fail to respect the will of people, and instead, invoke and impose their rules on people without their consent. While social liberty exercised by leaders is important, it is crucial to link with the desires of people. Hamburger (3) notes that John Stuart Mill intended general liberty to embrace control. However, this control should not exceed limits and violate the desires of people in society. In essence, any exercise meant to control liberty should augur well with what people desire. It should be a planned authority and civilized control.
Unitarianism and liberty
John Stuart Mill advocated for universal suffrage. On the same note, he was a spokesman for liberalism, while on ethics; he was supportive of utilitarianism forms of governance. The lesson learnt from this concept is that each member of society should act in a way that will not offend other people. Utilitarianism can be argued to be another form of governance which makes use of liberalism. This is whereby powers that were initially vested in a monarch being significantly reduced.
In its place are peoples power and freedom of people to choose their leaders. According to Hamburger (154), John Mill gave a revised version of utilitarianism as recognizing superiority of pleasures over self indulgence, low and pig like pleasures. One of these pleasures is happiness. Mill teaches that it should be reasonable and which does not violate the rights of others. This is the kind of future leadership that he foresaw. However, todays leaders take maximum pleasure as everything when it comes to leadership. They do this with total disregard of the feelings and liberty of the majority and the society at large.
Living together, liberty and todays leadership
In all the concepts advocated by John Stuart Mill, the basic theme is that of respecting other peoples freedom and which in the long run, enhances living together. In the series lost season 2, the characters seem to be working towards an end of living together. Nonetheless, there are various challenges which emerge on the way resulting into disintegration of the society. A stratified society is incapable of building itself. Therefore, the present leadership combines all of these concepts. However, some developing societies are still practicing autocracy and monarchy form of governance. They go against the basic principle of enhancing.
Works Cited
Daniel, David. John Stuart Mills on Liberty. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Web.
Finn, Stephen. Thomas Hobbes and politics of natural philosophy. London: Continuum International Publishing, 2006. Web.
Hamburger, Joseph. John Stuart Mill on Liberty and control. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2001. Web.
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. New York: Forgotten Books, 2008. Web.
Martel, James. Subverting the leviathan: Reading Thomas Hobbes as a radical democrat. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007. Web.
The 10th Sergeant Major of the Army (SMA) Gene C. McKinney was born in Monticello, FL in 1950. Being 18 years old, he entered the US Army and was trained Fort Knox, KY. His service lasted for more than 30 years, which provided him with an opportunity to perform his duties at different positions. McKinney had already revealed his outstanding skills when he was Scout Leader. With the course of time, the professional managed to become Command Sergeant Major. In 1969, he served a year in Vietnam. In addition to that, McKinney was an armored cavalryman for more than 20 years.
Even though SMA started focusing on the military service at a young age, he decided to leave the army after his tour in Vietnam in order to continue his education and enter a college. However, financial issues made McKinney return to service and continue his career. Due to these unpleasant events, the man managed to become the first African American individual who obtained a position of SMA.
Leadership
Used his understanding of the army to support soldiers.
Revealed his interest in both soldiers military and family life.
McKinney started revealing his outstanding leadership skills being Scout Leader. With the course of time, he improved his performance and contributed to combat arms. The man understood what the army is and tried to assist his fellow soldiers and their families. SMA listened to them and cared about them, providing every individual with appropriate answers to their questions and required support. Having realized those issues that were critical to soldiers, he successfully managed to resolve them. McKinney visited those who were in the field to speak with them about both military- and family-related themes. As a result, soldiers understood that they were cared about but not only treated as a workforce.
Mentorship
Helped soldiers to reach balance and peace of mind.
Treated everyone with respect and was open to new ideas.
Shared his values regarding duties, formations, discipline, and training.
McKinney had well-developed mentor skills and used them to make others feel like a part of a big and friendly team. He cared about soldiers so wanted to enhance their professional and social experiences. McKinney paid much attention to the quality of life of these people. He wanted them to reach peace of mind because the balance was critical for their well-being and performance. At the same time, McKinney wanted soldiers to understand that he used his authority to facilitate them but not to make unnecessary changes. He focused on a neutral perception of the army and was open to consider others ideas.
McKinney recommended the use of a new headgear and shared his values. He stated that soldiers are to do their best during service, but they should not forget about their families. SMA emphasized that everyone should know their responsibilities and be disciplined because the character is the soldiers most significant quality. Finally, he underlined that soldiers need to train hard for them to be able to act properly in tough situations.
Contribution
McKinneys contributions were recognized with numerous awards and decorations.
However, he faced several sexual allegations and was reduced in rank to Master Sergeant.
SMA McKinney obtained numerous awards and decorations for his service, including the Legion of Merit, Bronze Star Medal (with Oak Leaf Cluster), Meritorious Service Medal (with Three Oak Leaf Clusters), Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, NCO Professional Development Ribbon, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, and the Parachutist Badge.
Even though the professional proved to make outstanding contributions to service, he had some flaws. In particular, SMA faced several sexual allegations. Female recruits stated that he made sexual advances. As a result, McKinney was suspended and convicted of obstructing justice. He was made Master Sergeant and retired soon.
Summary
The 10th Sergeant Major of the Army.
Entered the US Army having been 18 years old.
Wanted to leave the military to continue education.
Returned because of financial problems.
Served for more than 30 years.
Proved to be a great leader and mentor.
Obtained numerous awards.
The 10th Sergeant Major of the Army (SMA) Gene C. McKinney revealed his interest in the military service at a young age and entered the US Army having been 18 years old. Right after training, he had a one-year tour to Vietnam and wanted to leave the military as soon as he returned in order to continue his education and start studying at college. However, financial issues made McKinney return to the army and focus on his military career. SMA served for more than 30 years and proved to be a great leader and mentor for other soldiers. He understood their concerns and tried to assist them with any issues they faced. McKinneys contributions were recognized with numerous awards even though he was suspended because of sexual allegations.
Conclusion
McKinney contributed significantly to the US Army.
He managed to become the first African American SMA.
McKinney valued both his family and professional life and shared these views with other soldiers.
Thus, it can be concluded that McKinney was a great soldier who contributed significantly to the US Army. Being interested in the military affairs during his adolescence, the professional entered the army right after graduating from the school. He managed to become the first African American SMA in the USA due to his leadership skills and active participation in military tours. McKinney valued both his family and professional life and shared these views with other soldiers.
Generally, high performance requires an appropriate leadership style that values the interest of followers. For instance, in the military, the leaders must have an unselfish mindset to enable them to encourage the aspect of diversity within the camp. Following the demanding nature of military operations, soldiers should be able to work in harmony to support the goals of the intended mission. Therefore, it is important for leaders to comprehend the facets of followership and servant leadership to integrate the teams effectively into the organization.
The term followership refers to the ability of the followers to be active team members, take required direction, and show their commitment towards the management. In other words, the juniors are capable of executing the assigned responsibilities as stated by the leader. On the other hand, servant leadership is a headship style that describes the interaction between the supervisor and the subordinates. The approach allows the frontrunner to address the needs of staff to enhance their commitment towards achieving the set objectives.
Servant leadership and followership have some key aspects in common. For instance, in the approaches, the followers and servant leaders value commitment. The soldiers in the military are dedicated to serving and executing the commands given by their supervisors (Barry et al., 2021). Similarly, the supervisors are devoted to ensuring the officers obtain what they need to keep them active throughout their missions. Furthermore, there is an element of loyalty whereby the armed forces are dependable and willing to perform any activity that meets their objective set by the commander. In addition, in both cases, there is mutual respect and trust between the leaders and their juniors. For instance, when supervisors are giving orders and guidance, the officers are confident and ready to follow their directives given. Similarly, the Generals always believe in the capabilities of the soldiers and accord the necessary respect. Moreover, followership and servant leadership portrays the tendency of wiliness to take action. In the military, leaders and juniors are ever ready to undertake any mission despite their situation. They are driven by the need to serve the people and achieve their goals.
Despite having similar attributes, followership and servant leadership still differ significantly from each other. For instance, the responsibilities of leaders are more unlike the ones of followers. The Generals in the military must ensure the operations are successful by coordinating and inspiring the junior officers to concentrate and deliver the required services (Lee et al., 2020). The subordinate has less commitment since they are not much concerned and do not need much awareness and conceptualization of the whole operation processes in the camp. Furthermore, servant leaders are known for giving orders and performing other necessary operations to enable the subordinates to comply effectively. On the other hand, followership embraces the culture of following instructions and strictly executing the commands from the commander.
In the military, followership and servant leadership are crucial approaches for ensuring effective performance to achieve objectives. Soldiers portray a high level of loyalty by following the orders given by their leaders without questioning the commanders actions. Similarly, the supervisors trust the activities of the officers and assigned them duties knowing that they will deliver. However, on the basis of responsibilities, servant leaders have several tasks to perform that demand more attention from them as compared to the junior officers.
The topic of politics and leadership has been discussed for millennia, bringing new perceptions. Among the models of political leadership are the views of Sophists and Socrates. While both of the thoughts are strong and share some similarities, they are still different in their perceptions of truth and devotion. As for the similarities, both models of political leadership emphasize knowledge and philosophy.
Discussion
Sophists and Socrates emphasize the importance of these aspects in politics. Yet, the focus area that stands out from Platos judgment of the sophists is the exaggeration of the power of speech. In his work, Plato reiterates the distinction between genuine and erroneous speech that aims to deceive the audience. In this sense, Sophists are efficient persuaders of their audience and not more. They have the end goal and might not care for the means to achieve it.
Moreover, Plato made an argument that the Sophists live in a world of untruth and take advantage of the difficulties of argument by creating subjective impressions of reality. Sophists were characterized by Plato as hired murderers of the affluent and youthful, traders of wisdom, competitors in verbal combat, and soul-purifiers. While Sophists might remind philosophers who respect knowledge, they are not in pursuit of the truth. In this sense, they cannot differentiate between good and evil, right or wrong. In turn, the perspective of Socrates lies within the truth of the matter. Therefore, truth navigates in punishing and repudiating evil and accepting and performing good deeds.
Conclusion
As a result, the model of Platos Socrates is the most preferable in terms of political leadership. The objective of both politics and leadership must be based on truth and good deeds, devoid of personal gain. Whenever political leadership starts to be driven by deception, evil, and self-gain, the system begins to erode. In contrast, with clear perceptions of good and evil, it is possible to build a robust system that will promote justice, equality, and freedom rather than delusion and trickery. In this sense, the model of Platos Socrates reminds us of democracy, wherein the truth is the power.
John Howard became the Australian Prime Minister in 1996. During his time in office, he accomplished many things. His first accomplishment was the introduction of a program that reformed the countrys economy. This was achieved through reduced costs in the provision of public services. In addition, his decision to privatize Telstra cut unnecessary costs. The second accomplishment associated with Howard was the implementation of industrial relations reforms and the adoption of new tax systems. Changes in international affairs that he introduced were driven by regional crises that affected other countries. For instance, the terrorist attacks that hit the US in 2001 and the war against terrorism that followed changed Australian politics. His third accomplishment was the restructuring of taxation systems in Australia.
In terms of leadership style, Howard was described by many people as a reformer. During Frasers third term in office, Howard disagreed with the cabinet after it rejected his attempt to introduce policies that were aimed at deregulating the economy. In a bid to adjust his policies, he adopted a conservative style of leadership that went against simple labels or descriptions. He differentiated himself from his predecessors by advocating for policy changes. This earned him support from the public, although it was difficult to convince the opposition to support his reforms. Howard used his deep knowledge of the conservative style of leadership to exercise great caution during his first term in office, something that disappointed his close supporters. He advocated for economic reforms and took advantage of the fact that the electorate was afraid of change. After the US was attacked by terrorists in 2001, Howard got an opportunity to establish strong leadership strategies that facilitated his leadership style. In addition, he applied a reassuring style of leadership that succeeded because most of his closest supporters were not in politics by the time he ascended to power (Grattan, 2010).
John Howard was a loyal member of the Liberal Party that was led by Fraser. Fraser failed to reform the Australian economy; hence the Liberal Party was divided. After divisions emerged, Howard battled to become a superior party member. This was due to the fact that Liberal Party leaders evaluated their success by considering what the founder of their party valued. As a result, Howard considered Menzies, founder of the Liberal Party as his role model. He, therefore, distanced himself from the leadership style of Fraser. Menzies and Fraser used the Liberal Party to exercise the conservative style of leadership. Since Howard believed in the leadership of the party, he exercised strong leadership. His political ambitions did not allow him to remain dormant since he wanted to earn recognition in the party. He, therefore, maintained a good relationship with its leadership but remained aggressive.
Howard was described as a leader whose political language portrayed several themes. The first theme that was portrayed in his political language was his efforts to reform the Australian economy. He emphasized that it was important for the country to adopt different policy strategies, especially after hard economic times that were witnessed in the 1970s. The second theme in his political language was the need to cut public spending. Howard believed that a reduction in public spending was an important strategy in his reform agenda that served both political and economic purposes. In addition, he advocated for the adoption of free-market policies (Grattan, 2010).
Reference
Grattan, M 2010. Australian Prime Ministers, Routledge, New Holland, Sydney.
Ivo Andric is a renowned writer with a sense of patriotism explaining the difference between the general bond and interest in individuals. The authors reputation hangs on the fact that he seems to maintain a balance between the cruelty of some public figures and the commoners (Healy 34).
In this regard, the commander in question displays as an autonomous player in the constitutionalism of any establishment. It is with profound easiness that the distinctive characteristics emerge, with the main objective of a central system of assessment for any actions taken by superiors over the subjects
Brief Overview of the Story
The story focuses on a powerful outlaw leadeer who is caught by a commander. He has a serious infection and, therefore, he endures sufferings. The commander is presented a dynamic character who is torne apart because he should place a loving husband willing to return to his wife and a strict leaders should should destroy enemies. The commanders wife contronts a real challenge as she sees her husbands cruel attitude towards the prisoner (Andric 110).
Main Body
Criticism of the Story
The writer seems to center too much attention on the commander such that, no much attention describes the captive held. Therefore, critics are often against the idea that the whole story rotates around the commander. The womans role is not extensively defined as she is only entitled to views and opinions (Bozovic 29). She might be empathetic of the captured outlaw but is of no much help since she is afraid of the husband. Hence, opponents are of the view that the happenings should not be tailored towards similar location.
It is beyond a reasonable doubt that since, the captive is a substantial head in his group that his villagers and troops must be on the look for him. It is not quite striking as to why the writer should only concentrate on the commander while it is clear that the fundamental principle is conflict. For any officer, who feels betrayed by the guards corrective action is taken promptly (Bozovic 29). Once the leader is aware of Zhivans relationship with the captive, logic has it that he should be at least punished if not fired.
Revelations Related to the Story
Bearing in mind the critics opinions, some features clearly highlight the leadership endured in some communities. It is evident that Lazar was a substantial leader and a threat to the commander, which explains why he kept him in a secluded place to ensure he does not disappear. They seem to have been enemies for quite a while, and whenever an opportunity pops up, revenge would be inevitable. She is eager to follow up on the happenings and the husbands intentions towards Lazar, by ear stopping on the conversations.
Lazar possesses a strong personality with intense courage to endure the trauma imposed on him. Even so, at some point he feels overpowered by the pain and almost gives in due to the mounting pressure (Andric 111). He exhibits qualities of a true leader, who never sacrifices his allegiance at the expense of his subjects. However, many questions arise on the range of sacrifice he is willing to do, and disclaimer of the agony.
Supposing there is no controversy at all, then how will the leaders exert their influence on the people. What then should be the way out for conflicting parties, and how should they settle their differences for the mere advantage of the people at the stake. For sheer satisfaction of all and sundry, limitations are enacted so as to secure a better living environment, obtain better living conditions and a tranquil surrounding to maintain a conventional coexistence.
Key Messages/Themes/Symbols of the Story
Use of Imaginary
The key messages displayed in this article are leadership and cannons of undesirable authority. Regardless of the conflict involved between parties, there is a harmonious way of solving problems, not necessarily involving torture and abuse. The main image shown is the fact that there has been feuding between the two leaders. There is also a feature of wife submission to the husband, as the commanders wife is extremely passive to correct him in case of any mistakes done.
There is the use of imagery in the story, as it explains the foul smell coming from the outlaw wound and the different ways he tries to get concern for his situation (Bozovic 29). Cruelty is shown both by the commander and the bandit, in that the outlaw has been relentless in dealing with those opposed to his ideas and opinion, while the commander seems to use the full practice of justice by initiating ways of compelling the outlaw to disclose his friends whereabouts and denounce their deeds.
The outlaw is believed to be the head of a retaliating group from the government or the administration at hand. There is no other explanation as to why people must rebel against the constituted laws. On the other side, the government may be misusing state funds; this propelling rebels amongst the subjects. It is evident with the rivalry that is showcased in the story. The commanders wife is a trademark of a treasured family setup involving a generous and well-hearted wife who submits to the husband.
Opposition to the Critics
It is not appropriate for the critics to bring about the issues of the outlaw friends since, by them showing up, the story will shift focus to the entire group. The wifes place in the story is not clearly defined, and her job is not to question the husbands decisions regardless of whether they oppose the moral values (Talmor 86). She is only seen to reflect deep on the atrocities committed, and the way she can help is by keeping her own mind as the husband has a bitter attitude.
Simply put, the commander should look into the reasons as to why the outlaws function rather than torturing the victim which might even lead to his death without the mere knowledge of the other banned group members. The commander lacks the virtue of tolerance and understanding, all he does is to persecute the outlaw with agony (Norris 272). May be if he gave the outlaw a chance to explain his activities then, the other troops could be caught without compromising any situation.
My Opinion
This story simulates to disillusioned happenings of the commanders attack activities and coarse boldness. It points to the cruelty expounded by leaders on any delinquent found guilty of any offence. With such a view of things, then the problem would have been resolved without anybody being hurt. Lazar is a self-proclaimed person, and his ego drives him towards causing trouble to the civilians who go against his wishes. In essence, it should not be too hard to get them if only he did not use harsh punishment on them (Talmor 90).
Lessons Learned from the Story
In my generation, this story can be easily read and understood. Nevertheless, to say that they will enjoy is categorically different since, the story does not seem to bring about the passion expected from an attractive piece of writing. For, any feature to engage the readers opinion, it should have a steady flow of events and a powerful humor. The idea of the outlaw being tortured every now and then does not bring the purest view of events, and is also tiring and boring to read about the same issue with no amusement at all.
May be if the story was centered in more precise setting and characters then the value of humor would be employed. Nonetheless, lessons can be learned from the entire story, of exercising persistence and lenience to the inferiors. For the leaders, they should not dwell so much on punishing those who wrong them but, should be determined to find a solution so as to circumvent problems. Dialogue is the best alternative to retrieve individual differences rather than fighting.
This article also depicts the qualities of an exemplary leader which enable them to exercise their mission effectively. In this regard, different fields of disciplines should be taught so as to encourage people to trust the leadership. If people have confidence in the leaders, then no rebels will be encountered. Honesty, trust and integrity, should be the virtues exercised by the leaders. On the other hand, people should exercise patience on their leaders and follow their decisions, which are based on their content (Bozovic 29).
Works Cited
Andric, Ivo. The Slave Girl and Other Stories about Women. Central European University Press, 2009. Print. pp. 107-112.
Bozovic, Marijeta. Rev. The Slave Girl and Other Stories about Women. by Ivo Andric. Central European University, 2009. Print.
Healy, Tim. Forum: What Shall We Read?: These Stories Are Ours, Ivo Andric, The Bridge on the Drama. Conversations on Jusuit Higher Education, 30.26 (2006): 34.
Norris, David A. Ivo Andri: Bridge between East and West [book review]. The Modern Language Review 82.1 (1987): 272. Print.
Talmor, Sascha. Europe Ends at Travnik: Ivo Andrics Bosnian Chronicle. European Legacy 3.1 (1998): 84-99. Print.
The Prince is a story written by Niccolo Machiavelli after his downfall in the government as a diplomatist and political consultant. Machiavelli directs his pieces of advice to both readers and leaders assuming that all of them have similar leadership skills or strategies.
Although it is an ancient story, personally it is a revelation to good governance and enables me to understand the behavior of our current leaders.
During his tenure in the government, Machiavelli rubbed shoulders with prominent politicians in his country. His role as a diplomat and political consultant enabled him to study politicians and governors. Therefore, The Prince is not only advising the princes, but also anybody else (reader) with intentions of acquiring leadership positions especially in the government.
In addition, Machiavelli intention is to enlighten the public or his readers on governing skills and the common behavior observed in leaders or princes.
Machiavelli career as a politician and diplomat motivated him to write about princes and governance. At only twenty -five years old, he joined government therefore, being fully involved in politics.
Unfortunately, he did not exhaust his role in politics when the ruling government was overturned leading to his imprisonment, harassment, and eventual exile. The hopes of rekindling his political career motivated him to write the story, The Prince.
The prince is a story set in the ancient republic of Florence in which Machiavelli once worked. According to Machiavelli, princes who receive praises from their subjects have different ruling qualities from those who continually receive opposition (1513, cited in Kishlansky, p.17).
Anger, oppression, and cruelty lead to opposition, while humanity and humbleness promote good governance. On the other hand, Machiavelli calls for princes to distance themselves from their subjects because close ties lead to insecurity (cited in Kishlansky, 2002, p.19).
Furthermore, he advises princes not to fully trust military or mercenaries because they might overthrow them. Finally, princes should honor their subjects through holding parties or festivals and giving them awards.
When Machiavelli was writing his story, he assumed that princes who rule all the states in the West have a similar method of governance. Additionally, he assumed that all subjects, army, and mercenaries under the governance of a prince have similar behavior. He also assumed his readers are political aspirants with intentions of acquiring political offices.
Personally, Machiavelli doctrines are true because he describes the consequences of good and bad governance. The prosperity of a kingdom or government is always in the hands of the ruler whether a prince or any other leader.
In summary, Machiavelli directs his doctrines to readers with intentions of leading in future. His hopes to continue his career as a political consultant motivates him to write the document, which explicitly outlines leadership skills.
During his writing, he assumes all states in West are under the governance of princes while all subjects have similar behavioral conducts. Personally, I believe in the documents doctrines because Machiavelli compares failure and achievements of leaders. Therefore, all leaders should adapt humanity, equality, appreciation, and peace for prosperity of their kingdom or areas of jurisdiction.
Reference
Machiavelli, N. (1513). The Prince. In M.A. Kishlansky, Sources of the West Reading in Western Civilization (4th Ed.). (pp. 17-20). London: Longman.
The book explores the ways of leaders especially in the American perspective. It deeply analyzes the quest by leaders to contain people through tools that bar them from enlightenment for fear of the consequences. It exposes the leaders selfishness and desire to remain in control and wealthy while suppressing the citizens to remain in their state of poverty and weakness. It comes as no surprise that the constitution is the tool used to serve this purposes of oppression. While there is an underlying belief that the government is fair and just, the reality is contrary. The citizens too lack the will to have a confrontation with the government. This paper gives a summary of the authors expression of selfish desire exhibited by leaders in their quest to uphold themselves at the expense of the citizens. The authors main theme is the fear of citizens by the leaders. The authors thesis statement says I shall present additional evidence about the lives of the Framers, the Constitution, and the period in which it was written which supports the contention that the Framers were profoundly anti-democratic and afraid of the people (Jerry Fresia Chapter 1)
The republicans see a possibility of converting men into what they call republican machines. They consider it an important thing to be done for people to perform the functions they desire them to do. They believe that by doing this they will be able to create millions of republican machines. (Jerry Fresia Chapter 1) This summarizes the authors agenda and also basically puts all the contents of the book in one basket. Its an indication of the misuse of the people by the leaders in a bid to bar them from enlightenment and also keep them in manipulative positions. This enables them to stay in position of power and control. Their fear for the effect of the citizens being enlightened guides them to do this. This is also well depicted when they say that men who are destitute or lack property have little acquaintance with public affairs hence are not able to make righteous judgment. They further believe that these men are always dependant on others to make decisions for them (Jerry Fresia Chapter 1). This was used by the same people who participated in the making of a constitution. Its aim was to bar the ordinary people from vying for elective positions or even preventing them from directly electing their leaders. This is just a kind of evidence on how the constitution as used to bar citizens from making important decisions of the nation. This was a bid by these same people to maintain positions of power. Constitution thus was a regular tool used to oppress the citizens. In a further elaboration to these CarMax expressed the power relation within constitutions that is keen on protecting the power wielded by the powerful (Jerry Fresia Chapter 2) further the author elaborates the failure by the government to protect the interest of its majority population in a bid to meet another obligation of protecting the corporate business empires across the country. These same people end up participating indirect elections thereby electing those who can protect their interests. Up to date, Americans dont elect their president directly. ((Jerry Fresia Chapter 4-5).
Their bid to keep power to themselves is further depicted in the book that refers to the barons who are powerful and surprisingly held offices during the colonial period as the same people who also signed the declaration of independence (Jerry Fresia Chapter 1). The same people who had held office are the same who signed the declarations despite their vested interests in it. It is just but a clear indication of how biased the document could be. It further depicts how people who have previously held office strive to cling to it. This is further depicted by the succession of leaders from the same families witnessed across the political divide. The poor and the weak are made to believe that they are in no position to join the quest for these higher offices while on the other hand anarchy is promoted. In addition to the sources the author has used, he could have also cited historical books which cover a vast of cases of abuses against the weak by the rich. Their fears are built on the effect of an uprising by the weak. Such is like the uprising experienced and their devastating effects illustrated in the book through by the mob tat set ablaze up o fifteen houses, mostly belonging to the wealthy barons. This is described as a war of plunder that has the general aim of leveling the difference that exists between the rich and the poor (Jerry Fresia Chapter 3) this depicts the foundations of the fear that these wealthy individuals harbor. They counter these by spreading propaganda to keep the citizens in check. Such are the foundations of their fears. And need to spread propaganda and keep the citizens calm and in darkness. Further, the book illustrates how the development of the constitution reflects the dawn of a new and advanced system of monarchy that would indeed keep the poor poorer and the rich richer(Jerry Fresia Chapter 3). Ultimately the book also illustrates the power wielded by the poor through their numbers and the threat that they present to the few rich if only they could get the enlightenment they deserve. (Jerry Fresia Chapter 6)
In conclusion, its important to note that the authors depictions in this document are true. Contrary to the circulated beliefs that the constitution-writing process gets its final writings from the public, this has never been true. The final authority regarding constitutional writings has always been put on the governance bodies like parliaments or senates. These bodies always harbor the same individuals who are keen on protecting themselves against the possible rise of the poor to challenge their authority. They have over time vested final authority to themselves while claiming the contrary. The book also highlights a very important aspect of trying to enlighten the public against the deceit and malice of leaders. Its an important book that highlights the endeavor of the rich and powerful to keep the poor weak and vulnerable to their treachery and malice. The book has definitely widened my view of history to cover the underlying aspects of things that pass out as procedural yet have underlying intentions.
Works Cited
Fresia, J. Toward an American Revolution. Boston: South End Press, 1988.