The university of hard knocks?
Usefully, for me at least, two of my current interests have converged. On the one hand, there is my annual lecture with its thesis that the three major sources of social power – hierarchical authority, social solidarity and individual aspiration – have become unbalanced. On the other hand, there is the case Patricia Kaszynska and I have been building for a much more critical look at the political consensus behind social mobility as the primary route to address injustice.
In ‘The Twilight of the Elites’, Christopher Hayes see these issues are clearly intertwined. He argues that the modern American social elite has stitched up control of society using the rationale that those already at the top have a near- monopoly of the only talent that matters – a particular form of intellect. It is this narrowness of talent and the detachment of the elite from the rest of society which has led to a wide range of leadership disasters (from Enron to Katrina) and thus to ever lower levels of public trust.
That the question of how to restore and maintain the authority of leaders, particularly political leaders has been around for almost as long as political philosophy doesn’t make it any less important. The new dimension, in comparison to the times of Xenophon or of Machiavelli, is the coincidence of democratic Governments both elected by the people and, more often and not, despised by them. And, of course, this crisis of legitimacy extends to most other large and powerful organisations.
There are those who are not concerned. Some say it is a good thing that leaders are weak and worried, other argue that being distrusted does not impair the determined leader’s capacity to get things done. I don’t agree, believing not only that we need credible leaders to make wise decisions for the long term but also that feeling well led (whether in a nation, an organisation or a family) is important to our sense of fulfilment and well-being.
I have written before of Professor Keith Grint’s contrast between conventional leadership and that needed for many ‘wicked ‘ modern problems: he calls for leadership ‘about questions not answers’. ‘about relationships not structures and ‘about reflection not reaction’. I like these dichotomies and think they are important to making change happen, but in terms of winning consent for that change I think Grint underplays the need for leadership as authority. In these post-deferential times, the characteristics which experience and reflection lead me to prize most in political leaders are:
First: a leader who builds a compelling and noble mission (not just vague fluffy values but a tough minded theory of change) and then convinces us over and again that this mission can be achieved, but only if we too play our valued part.
Second, a leader who is secure in her own position and is not, therefore, endlessly weighing up how to balance the interest of inner circle and allies with those of the wider citizenry.
How might the absence of these qualities be linked to the increasingly closed circle of privileged, career politicians?
Is it perhaps that mere cleverness is by its nature rational, utilitarian, pragmatic and thus lacking in the conviction necessary to define and stick to a mission (albeit that pragmatism will be need to achieve the mission)? Is it also that the confidence and authority necessary to mobilise citizens and keep allies in line comes from having a biographical hinterland which gives leaders fortitude and impresses followers?
If so, it might mean that some people are just not cut out to lead (I will keep a diplomatic silence over whether this includes our current crop of leading politicians).
Comments
6 Comments on The university of hard knocks?
-
Robert Burns on
Fri, 7th Sep 2012 4:38 am
-
Carl Allen on
Fri, 7th Sep 2012 10:44 am
-
Robert Burns on
Fri, 7th Sep 2012 12:00 pm
-
Carl Allen on
Fri, 7th Sep 2012 12:43 pm
-
Robert Burns on
Fri, 7th Sep 2012 9:04 pm
-
Robert Burns on
Sat, 8th Sep 2012 1:42 pm
Hello Matthew and Patricia,
coming from a ‘New Labour’ background there is some irony to the fact that the only political leader in non-geriatric living memory to fit your description is Margaret Thatcher.
While there is certainly plenty of dead wood to be cut from the national tree the intractable problem is that the biggest dead branch on the tree is the currently entrenched ‘ruling elite’.
There, I’ve broken the diplomatic silence and said it for you!
…………………………………………..
It is not that the current elite and leadership have too much power maketh the problem.
It is the lack of effective means to challenge, stop or remove the activities of leadership and elites that is the problem.
This acknowledges that people have some mix of good, bad and evil in them which may or may not control their behaviour.
Ah, if only that where true.
Sorry, but again you make a distinction that is logically unsound.
By definition the existence of any power without the means to challenge and check it is a power that shouldn’t exist in the first place.
A vehicle without brakes is, by definition, unfit to be taken onto the public highway or used in the presence of any who might be harmed by it.
Perhaps what you meant was that it is not their activities that are intrinsically harmful, but the way they do it.
And as for:
“This acknowledges that people have some mix of good, bad and evil in them which may or may not control their behaviour.”
Remember that these are same people who bang on about the ‘badness’ of the Working Class.
They need to set the example of living out the values they espouse and would impose on others – they need to put up or shut up.
Being ‘nice’ isn’t being ‘good’ – a distinction frequently lost on the morally debased or those inexperienced in the world.
Adolf Hitler was a big favourite with his two nieces because he was so ‘nice’ to them.
Too bad he couldn’t have been a bit ‘nicer’ to the hundreds of thousands of their peers his system sent to the death camps because of the accidents their of birth and geography.
The evil in them will occasionally dictate their activities being intrinsically harmful even if not to the extent of death or worse than death. And by harmful it will give them delight.
There is a big element of that in modern celebrity culture.
On the face of it modern politics and politicians seem to be too debased in the eyes of the electorate to leave much opportunity for serious wrong doing.
But then look about and start worrying.
Torture and “classified” evidence are being normalised and this country has signed up to a treaty with the US that allows that country to demand the summary transportat
Carl and others,
For something to be intrinsically wrong/harmful/evil, etc. it must be wrong/harmful/evil in any and all circumstances and there aren’t many acts or intentions that pass the “any and all circumstances” test.
But this strand has drifted somewhat from the main theme, let’s try to get back……
The problems of loss of engagement and failing social mobility spring from (I contend) a series of critical logic and factual errors at the heart of the aspiration ideology.
So, what are these ‘critical logic and factual errors’?
(a) The Middle Class are the ‘bedrock’ of society
False, false, false.
The Middle Class can’t exist unless, and until, a primary elite and the mass of the population have done the political heavy lifting of working out what expectations and obligations will bind them.
Once such an agreement has emerged the Middle Class can exist and their
function is to make this agreement work at a level of effectiveness that satisfies both sides.
The status and benefits that accrue to the Middle Class should be a reflection of their effectiveness in service.
In the modern era this link between status, level of reward and effectiveness has broken down catastrophically.
(b) Everyone who could be should be Middle Class
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
The Middle Class are an overhead cost of the settlement that binds the primary elite and the masses.
This being the case, the Middle Class should be no larger than what is necessary to get the job done.
Many of the modern ‘Middle Class’ are unnecessary. They are the product of manipulated demand for ‘social promotion’.
Large numbers of them are employed servicing the problems their existence creates.
Well, I’ll stop there.
Suffice to say that the necrotic relationship between the political state, the economic elite and the mass of native electorate can be laid at the door of a self serving, incompetent and largely redundant Middle Class.
The Middle Class needs to be rationalised
Tell me what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
RSA Animate
RSA Mobile
RSA Comment- RSA Projects Blogs
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.