Should a leader lead or listen?

Question

What do you make of:

We elect a leader who we think shares our views the most, so in this way, we are effectively deciding how we want to be led.

Yet, at the same time, the reason any group of people has a leader is because that person is entrusted with the responsibility of being the person most capable of doing what we take to be the right thing.

Essentially, the point of voting in a democracy is to have a representative government, yet in entrusting a person with leadership, a population is also submitting itself to the direction of the one person amongst themselves that they think is the most capable.

Are presidents representatives or leaders? Do those terms contradict? Can they be both? Can a representative, because he or she also has the power to lead, effectively betray and *mis*lead the population? Is this really betrayal, if the population entrusted the representative in leadership?

Answer 1

A leader should lead because that's their job. They were elected as a leader because people thought whomever can direct a community. But, while they are commanding and what not, listening always helps. Without input from the community, there could be a downfall.

Answer 2

Listen first, get all the info you can.

Then Lead by making a decisive decision based on the information you were given.

Answer 3

Both.  But that's not all.  Not by a longshot.

A leader has to be able to think quickly and react strongly and confidently in a crisis situation.  However, most situations don't require split-second decisions.

Most of the time, the leader has plenty of time to figure out a plan of action.  A good leader will ask questions, solicit advice and opinions, adjust his plans to take into consideration the abilities and limitations of his subordinates, research the details of the project, do cost/benefit analysis, both best-case and worst-case, then figure out at least two alternate strategies, just in case the plan he decides on isn't successful.  He will figure out the exact costs then triple them for the worst-case scenario.  Once he makes the plan and tells each subordinate what their roles are, he asks them if they can see any obvious problems or any reason that they won't be able to do their parts of the task.  Sometimes, he will have to switch jobs between employees because somebody isn't capable of doing the job they're supposed to do.  It's better to figure that out before you've committed to the plan of action than later.  It's a lot harder to fix problems on the fly than to prevent them before the job even begins.  Once the plan has been put into action, the leader assesses the situation and tweaks the plan constantly to prevent small problems from developing into major ones.  I've managed a small construction crew in the past; running a country would be much harder.  But the basic principles are the same, no matter what the job is.  A good leader takes care of his crew, treats the people he deals with fairly and honestly, and tries to maintain a great reputation.  He listens first, so that he can confidently lead his crew to successfully complete the job.

We're a democratic republic.  The founding fathers created three equal branches of government.  Both Congress and the Supreme Court were designed to be vested with substantial power to prevent the President from having total control of the government.  One of their worst fears was what would happen if we had a President who had no opposition and had free rein to do whatever he wanted without having to answer for his actions.  The first 6 years of President Bush's reign were the only time that has ever happened.

President Bush managed to keep more power than practically any other president in history, because he had a Republican senate, Republican house of representatives, and 7 out of the 9 Supreme Court justices had been appointed by Republican presidents and were generally conservative.  Since the other two branches of government wouldn't do anything to oppose him, he had almost total power for 6 years.  But the country wasn't designed that way.  

Generally, the government works best when one party controls the White House, the other controls the Senate, and there are enough independents in the House of Representatives that neither side can claim a majority and the majority of the Supreme Court justices are moderates, not conservatives or liberals.  That's also why so many votes in the Senate require a 2/3 majority.  

The founding fathers rightly believed that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, so they made sure that there were plenty of checks and balances to prevent one person from having too much of it.  That's also the reason for having elections every 2 years:  if the government isn't working, we don't have to wait too long to do something about it.  We can replace the entire house of representatives and 1/3 of the Senate every 2 years.  The way the elections are set up is just one more curb to a president's power.

Answer 4

First off, we have a representative republic. Not a democracy.

A leader is one that leads. Which means making decisions that may or may not be the most popular.

Parents are leaders. Five kids can want to go to McDonald's for dinner, but a parent can choose to go to a restaurant that actually might have a vegetable that wasn't fried in oil.

Leadership comes in many forms. And it can betray. It can be misdirected or flat out wrong without any intention of being wrong.

Is leadership listening to the mob and doing what it demands? NO. Especially when it comes to political policy. Sticking your finger to the wind and steering the truck in that direction might be easy, however, its not leadership.

Answer 5

Disclaimer: Due to the subject matter, and the accepted idea that both sexes of humanity are indeed equal, I must preface this with "In the absence of a gender-neutral pronoun in the English language I am going to use the word 'they' and its various conjugations out of context to avoid typing 'he/she' or some other convention to express same". Hopefully this will avoid any flames for usage of gender-connotations and dispel the notion with those so inclined to think that I am somehow 'gender-biased'.

Now, my answer:

A good leader makes it their business to know who is the most qualified to give advice on a particular subject, and listens to that advice. They then use the advice from all areas of their particular influence to make a decision for the best course of action to take. They may put in their own opinion, but only from their own viewpoint in their position at the top of the process. This to me has proven to be the best way to make decisions that affect others. Unfortunately, not everyone in their chain of command is honest and trustworthy. This again is the leaders responsibility. In a perfect structure, leaders would choose the perfect people to in turn lead their particular domain. In the end, leaders are responsible for any outcome that results from any decision. This is the hard part of being a leader - accepting responsibility for ALL actions, because they are after all, the leader.

In the case of leaders who cannot choose their direct subordinates, it must come down to getting to know the mind of each one, applying weight calculations based on their assessment of that subordinate's honesty and integrity, personal views, ability to lead effectively, etc.  and making their decisions accordingly. It is in this way that the people can lead the leaders, but only if each level of leadership in turn listens to it's constituents.

Answer 6

Look in the real world.

Decode this lyrics "Upside Down"

How we have the blind, deaf and dumb in leading us with self lack of knowledge without being aware of it.

While some even get the dead Mummy with whiff of rotten stench of empty skeleton of skull and bones with two empty eye sockets in leading them too with self lack of knowledge without being aware of it.

While everyone kick the butts of God in not worshiping God.

With Batman and Robin with Catwoman, The Joker and Mr.Penguin all got themselves kick on the butts in " Got-them city" in " Funky town" with all "The electric dreams"

All hanging upside down blind as a bat still living in caves in the 21st century in moving backwards in time without being aware of it with self lack of knowledge.

Luke 6.39-40,41-45,46-49

What do you think?

Answer 7

A president has very little power so as long as they are following the constitution it should almost be a matter of indifference who gets in the White House. Bush has over reached his power many time through executive orders and misuse of signing statements which would make one think the president actually has more power than they do.

It is a presidents job  to command the troops (congress is supposed to declare war but they do not anymore - this gives the president power he isn't supposed to have also)

Veto bills he may find objectionable (but even that can be over ridden)

And to show strength and leadership.

The president is our countries representative and he takes his orders from the constitution and congress.

The president also is responsible for dealing in foreign affairs by meeting with other leaders.

The president really not supposed to set the course for the country. We the people do that through our representives in congress.

The problem is our country is so off track right now that we don't even follow our own laws. The presidents of lately just seem to make up rules as they go along.

American citizens have immense power to change our leadership by participating in local politics where our representatives in congress and Senate are decided. These representatives have much greater power to restore the country than the president. If you want to change Washington it must be done from the ground up. The president can not do anything without approval from the congress and Senate - both of which are full of people who should not be allowed to serve another day. The only reason they are in there now and our country is in the shape its in is because of the complacency of the American people.

Answer 8

FOR SURE BOTH.

Answer 9

Both. Those terms can conflict. They can also mesh. It really depends on if the person was disingenuous when running for election. Any given variable can change the outcome. It is why vetting the candidate is such an important process. McLame is being forthcoming so that you can get a feel for what to expect. I feel Obama is keeping quiet so that he can do what he wants but not be on the hook for having said something different previously. He keeps quiet, then you only have yourself to blame if things go wrong. If he opens his mouth in the beginning, he is now held to what he said.

Answer 10

They should do both!