Why Politicians Aren’t Leaders
Posted by Mitch Mitchell on Oct 13, 2011
I've been lamenting for a long time the performance of our elected officials, and I mean almost all of them. I'm not overly pleased with what's going on, and I'm not going to pick and choose who to blame. Instead, I'm going to castigate them as a whole for not doing what needs to be done to get things fixed.
What needs fixing? It's probably easier to say what doesn't need fixing. The economy isn't snapping back all the easily, even though a stat came out a couple of days ago saying the economy has actually grown 19 months in a row. If it's not noticeable then it's not enough. Health care; will we have universal health care or not? Heck, is the plan we have good enough to even call itself "universal"? The environment; racism; sexism; protests; Iran; Iraq; Afghanistan; banking; corruption; immigration; illegal immigrants (yes, a different issue); FEMA; housing; etc.
Many people expect elected officials to sit down with each other and find a way to get things done. But that's not how things are done in today's world. Instead, it's more about the party and not about people. It's about getting elected, then reelected. It's about planning how to get the newly elected person out of office as soon as they get there. It's about gumming up the governmental process so nothing gets done. And it doesn't matter which side you want to pick on or support; when the other side gets the higher number, the same thing seems to occur.
Politicians aren't leaders because of what they have to go through to get the job. Right now the Republicans that are running for president are beating themselves up. Strange as it seems, they can't get together to beat up on President Obama because they have to all find a way to separate themselves from each other.
Politics is a strange game that in its own way mirrors sports because you have different divisions and factions that have to play against each other, ponying up lots of cash, and then the victor has to court the support of the person he or she just beat, probably by saying a lot of nasty things, to move on to the next level.
Politics is uglier. In sports you don't often hear athletes talking a lot of smack because they then have to get out on the field and physically back it up. Some do, but there are many examples of an athlete getting knocked out or hurt really bad by someone they talked bad about, or by someone else on the other team. In politics, at least in America, people don't physically fight. They just lie and misrepresent and spend money and get others to spend their money trying to bash someone else instead of building themselves up. And if they get elected they start almost immediately because they want to stay in power.
But that's not leadership. Leadership was President Johnson convincing southern Democrats to vote for a Civil Rights Bill in 1964. Leadership was George Bush the 1st increasing taxes and getting his party to support him, even though he promised he wouldn't, because the country was in a financial mess. Leadership was Franklin Roosevelt pulling people together to pass the New Deal, then leading us through World War II when most people in this country wanted to adopt an isolationist policy.
Those example are far and few between nowadays, at a time when this county really needs true leaders that care more about us than just about getting elected, or than getting rid of someone who's already got the job because they're afraid someone else will get the credit for doing the right thing. Imagine if every business in every industry worked that way; where would we be?
Politicians as leaders; no, I don't think so. What say you?
A great post again Mitch–lots to think about.
My first thought is how different the stories behind the leadership examples you cited: LBJ and Civil Rights–LBJ knew every last congressional skeleton and what buttons to push: he had run the joint for so long. He also played the JFK card: I’m doing what our martyred hero wanted. Bush 1 really was leadership, getting his GOP folks in line–but he had the glow of the 1st Gulf War victory behind him. FDR was working in a time of such desperation that people were happy to do anything. But he also had tension within his own admin. on stimulus v. deficit (sound familiar) and had setbacks like the recession he caused in ’37 by cutting spending.
My second thought is on who should be a leader. I think back to the statement attributed to FDR (perhaps apocryphal): After meeting with a group in the White House and listening to their take on an issue, FDR announced: OK, I agree with you. Now go out there and put the pressure on me that will make me do it.
Americans too often treat politics like a spectator sport. We should all DO politics. Voting every couple of years is ok, but it’s the minimum effort you can do. Go to meetings, send letters, organize events–put the pressure on the politicians–THEY ARE OUR EMPLOYEES!
Good take Phil. I’ll admit that I don’t go above and beyond when it comes to politics for probably the same reason many others don’t; time. I’m on 3 boards and do a lot with all of them, and I work for myself, so stretching my time even further isn’t in my best interest. Also, I’d have to admit that I expect very little from politicians in general and pretty much get what I expect. The promises are fine, but I know the realities of working with a group of people that really have no interest in working with you. Heck, that’s sometimes what being a consultant is all about. lol
Actually it’s the parties themselves. Now both parties only align support with those who include all the fringe elements of the party so moderates don’t get a chance to run. The splinter groups on the far right insist that every bill has an anti-abortion agenda tacked on. Another far right group insists that taxes on the wealthy be cut. Then the far left answers with their tax the rich attachment, only to be joined with the right to gay marriage groups agenda. Each group along the way wants it’s own personal whim fed on each bill or they will not support it and they tell their representitive so. The sad part is that with this group of a**holes getting in everyone’s way nothing gets done and the country has slipped to the point we would be lucky to be counted in the top ten of most important factors.
Thanks Sonny; that’s my point exactly. We need our politicians to get together and do what’s good for the country, not themselves. All of them need to realize that they weren’t elected with a mandate; goodness, our local official won with less than 500 votes. That’s not a mandate; that’s scraping by. It means we want you to do something, prove to us that you care about us, and maybe they we’ll give you more support than the first time around. The individual groups outside of politicians… I don’t blame any of them because they want what they want. Goodness, I want stuff as well. But I want to see true leadership; I want to see these people actually talking, actually trying to compromise on something. No one in politics should ever expect to get everything they want; if they do, let them get out of politics, find a real job, and see how that type of thing works out for them.
This is interesting point, Mitch and unfortunately I think you are right. Or at least they are leaders until they get elected. I think it is not only the USA, but worldwide. Probably if every politic used to be a bit more responsible, world economy will not be in recession for about 5 years. Just judging by my friends that are in politics, well I think this can be related to one of your previews posts, why people change. Before they was in any parties, I think I could definitely depend on them and work with them, after that I doubt that I would hire any of them to be my dog keeper, seriously.
It’s always fascinating to see the types of jobs politicians end up with when they leave office. Most do very well indeed, even outside of their fields of knowledge that they had before they got into politics. It’s a great thing to have on one’s resume it seems. 🙂
This is an excellent way of conveying what exactly is NOT expected of leaders, no matter which field they belong to. Thank you Mitch. Because we lead by example, it makes for an interesting example of how people feel and how much they care about those who are only “designated” leaders and not “leading” leaders. Shall share your views above with those who have the potential to understand the difference. Thanks again.
Thanks Amit. Leadership is more than position; it’s doing what’s necessary for the betterment of others.