Your headline asks, “Why do we keep choosing the wrong kind of leaders who are the wrong kind of strong?” While you address some thoughts about what is wrong about some leaders I think we have to look more at ourselves to find the reason.
Our society has now made sport of attacking the character of anyone that dares to aspire to leadership and especially governmental leadership. A person engages themself in the pursuit of an elected office and suddenly the public and press begin to delve into the candidates personal life and highlights every flaw that can be found from real character flaws to cheating on a science test in middle school. The candidate, no matter how far they have put who they used to be behind, will see their character besmirched and smeared with vehemence in the public square of the media.
If the person does have any character, they generally wouldn’t incline themself to be treated so and therefore, do not pursue public office. If the person has a flawed character or lacks character, they won’t care and lustfully pursue the power of the office. The result is that the choice often left to the voter are people lacking the proper character and motivation to serve the community well. We don’t choose the right leaders because often they aren’t in the race.
It is our fault for engaging in that sport of character assassination and media is all too happy to feed the frenzy that we are all too eager to swallow.
you raise a fair point and I appreciate the perspective. The media environment absolutely incentivizes spectacle and makes it costly for thoughtful people to step into the arena.
But even within that reality, voters still choose.
Candidates adapt to what wins. If outrage, aggression, and constant combat are rewarded with attention and votes, that is what more candidates will model. If humility, reflection, and measured strength were consistently rewarded at the ballot box, you would see behavior shift quickly.
The system has incentives, yes. Media plays a role, yes. But culture ultimately decides what traits are elevated.
My core point is this: leaders rarely rise above the character traits we collectively reward. If we want different leaders, we have to examine what we are choosing.
Your headline asks, “Why do we keep choosing the wrong kind of leaders who are the wrong kind of strong?” While you address some thoughts about what is wrong about some leaders I think we have to look more at ourselves to find the reason.
Our society has now made sport of attacking the character of anyone that dares to aspire to leadership and especially governmental leadership. A person engages themself in the pursuit of an elected office and suddenly the public and press begin to delve into the candidates personal life and highlights every flaw that can be found from real character flaws to cheating on a science test in middle school. The candidate, no matter how far they have put who they used to be behind, will see their character besmirched and smeared with vehemence in the public square of the media.
If the person does have any character, they generally wouldn’t incline themself to be treated so and therefore, do not pursue public office. If the person has a flawed character or lacks character, they won’t care and lustfully pursue the power of the office. The result is that the choice often left to the voter are people lacking the proper character and motivation to serve the community well. We don’t choose the right leaders because often they aren’t in the race.
It is our fault for engaging in that sport of character assassination and media is all too happy to feed the frenzy that we are all too eager to swallow.
you raise a fair point and I appreciate the perspective. The media environment absolutely incentivizes spectacle and makes it costly for thoughtful people to step into the arena.
But even within that reality, voters still choose.
Candidates adapt to what wins. If outrage, aggression, and constant combat are rewarded with attention and votes, that is what more candidates will model. If humility, reflection, and measured strength were consistently rewarded at the ballot box, you would see behavior shift quickly.
The system has incentives, yes. Media plays a role, yes. But culture ultimately decides what traits are elevated.
My core point is this: leaders rarely rise above the character traits we collectively reward. If we want different leaders, we have to examine what we are choosing.