Leadership & Liberty
September 21, 2016 at 3:57 pm #100038
I have been mulling over some thoughts since I read several blog articles that disparaged the idea of leaders / leadership and how leadership applies to the Liberty sphere. I’m not even going to link them. I get so tired of what I see out there in the ‘community’ that I have very little to to do with it, other than sticking my head out to see what crap people are putting out.
(I’ll say this now: I do not see MVT as a training resource for ‘the community.’ This is a training resource for Free Americans, within which individuals residues the philosophy of Rightful Liberty, and the ideals of this country. My goal is to simply offer the best training available, that is not closed to citizens, and that is attended by those attempting to be the best they can be. Don’t lump MVT in with the ‘Patriot Movement,’ whatever that is).
The gist of the argument has been that:
1) Too many people seek organizations and leaders in the Liberty Movement that often lead them wrong, and prevent them from truly being free, because they only seek orders from leaders, and do not think for themselves. This refers to many National level Patriot organizations and similar. I agree, but that is also human nature, and why we have so few rationalists here on the MVT Forum, versus idiots out there on the webz.
2) You cannot be free if you have leaders, because leaders will use you for their nefarious purpose, which is not your free will.
3) Confusion over positional authority, such as at the various levels of government, being leadership. It is not. It is perhaps management, or perhaps bureaucracy, or both.
This is all so much bullcrap, and just feeds the rationale of those out there who will not associate with others to achieve simple goals. It feeds the myth of the ‘rugged individual’ and is in fact opposed to much of what we talk about in terms of the benefits of community / tribe etc. One thing that community / tribe is, is society, and people have historically gathered in groups for a better chance of survival. Simply look at the numbers of rugged ‘mountain men’ versus those who settled near, and interacted with, communities, in the formation of America. If you believe in the principle of Individual Liberty, you do not give that up by simple association with others for mutual gain. If you are the Blacksmith in the village, you do not give anything up by trading with the Baker. You gain.
The primary thing that these posts did was fail to understand what Leadership is, and what the benefits of it are. Leaders take groups of whatever size and purpose and lead them to achieve the goal. If you understand that we should have equality before the law, but we are not actually equal in ability, then you will also understand that some are better at things than others. We use the strengths of those who can lead to achieve group goals, not simply the goal of the leader.
I have talked before about allowing people to ‘command in their own sphere.’ This means let people follow their talent and lead where they feel they can. If you have a survival group, we all usually think about tactics first. Well, there may be a tactical leader. But someone will be running the kitchen, and maybe the livestock, and maybe the maintenance of the vehicles etc. Not everyone can lead. For selection to be a British Army Officer, you go to a 3 day assessment board which has one determination: do you have leadership potential, along with as the necessary physical, intellectual and moral characteristics? If you do, you are offered a place at Sandhurst. Not everyone does. Some are not equipped to lead, and will best follow. They still have their own rights and freedoms.
I have been building a barn at my house with Mike. He knows how to build barns. I train him at MVT. At tactical training, I teach him and lead him, but he retains his own fee will. No doubt, attending tactical training was for him a scary prospect. But he did, and got good at it. Building a 36′ x 48′ barn is not something that I can do. It is too much for my mind. Without Mike, I would never have attempted it. But he teaches me, and leads me in the building. Now I have more skills at building, but I am not a leader in that field. I would follow someone else and lend what skills I do have to the overall effort. We each lead in our own sphere, and other spheres are often intimidating to us, which is why we need a leader to help us through it.
Leadership is essential in tactical and survival operations, if we have any sort of group. It is a skill and a talent, and people go about it in different ways. You have to ‘Be , Know, Do.’ Be the part, know the subject matter, do your job effectively. To dismiss leadership, and make it somehow at odds with liberty, is foolish, and is just more of the static I see vomited up on these ‘Liberty blogs.’
September 21, 2016 at 5:07 pm #100039TParticipant
September 21, 2016 at 6:04 pm #100040wildbillParticipant
Most “leaders” are really dictators who will surround themselves with yes men and those that want to be “lead” i.e. told what to do. Whereas like you said REAL Leaders know when to lead and when to get out of the way and let others step up and lead in the areas that they know the most about. Unfortunately there is an over supply of dictators and a short supply of Real Leaders.
September 21, 2016 at 7:31 pm #100041CorvetteParticipant
Unfortunately there is an over supply of dictators and a short supply of Real Leaders.
I fear it is a lot more pathetic than that. Most of what will be needed post SHTF is hard manual “Unskilled” laborers and skilled labor, especially broad based skills like a Millwright.
Sadly America has shipped most of that to foreign countries over the last three decades. What we have is, an abundance of is useless lazy food-tubes.
And millions of former Government Employees that will want management-Leadership positions…..with an “Important” Sounding Title.
September 22, 2016 at 8:30 pm #100042tangoParticipant
^It seems you guys missed the point.
Sometimes the best way to be a leader is to be a follower. Detach for a second a realize you’re not just leading yourself. By following whoever has taken the point in that situation and doing a great job you are leading THE GROUP further ahead as a collective.
It’s been said here before and it appears needs to be regurgitated: Just because somebody is telling you what to do does not mean it is an affront to your sovereignty.
There’s no shortage of leaders, there’s a deep chasm in the ratio of followers. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to be lead. In my limited time on this earth (in comparison) I’ve seen people of all ages and walks of life fail to volunteer to lead only to piss and moan about what the leader does. Never said a word, never offered anything constructive, the leader walks away, and wah wah wah wah wah. What the leader wanted to happen didn’t work? Maybe it was because you sabotaged it with your narcissistic perspective taking offense to something trivial rather than working harder to accomplish the task.
Dealing with insecurities and detaching enough to be able to realize you’re being selfish in-the-moment is an ongoing task for most people. Some better than others. I won’t claim to be a saint and neither should you.
You don’t respect the leader because you didn’t elect him/her? Get off your high horse. Elections are a luxury afforded to civilized society. If you’re under attack you don’t have a civilized society! Shut up, get on the bandwagon, and go do some work. You will have the luxury of playing tribal politics IF you win the fight.
Every single one of your interests and goals do not need to align to work with people. You need a single common objective. “Hey, we all want the freedom of self-determination without coercion.” END OF STORY. Stop looking for a reason not to work with somebody because they’re atheist or pro-life or anything else completely irrelevant to the current situation.
The lack of application and understanding of all that is going to be a death blow to the “patriot movement” if they don’t wisen up lickety split. The supposed adversaries of such a group exercise decentralized command rather frequently and are quite effective at accomplishing their goals. If the “patriot movement” doesn’t get their heads out of their ass they’re going to spend all their time crying at eachother while they get picked off 1-by-1 because they couldn’t bother to shut up for 10 minutes and make some friends.
September 22, 2016 at 9:08 pm #100043wheelseeParticipant
Leaders and managers, there is a difference. Leaders tend to be out front, managers tend to be in the rear. As Max alluded to above, managers attempt to ensure the smooth running of an endeavor, such as the kitchen or the livestock. Leaders stretch the boundaries, or even break them, by explaining an innovative idea or teaching a new skill and overcoming the obstacles found.
Official and unofficial leaders exist. To know the difference, look behind you/them. If people are following, leadership is present, regardless of titles. I distrust those who seek leadership versus those who have earned it.
It is through respecting one another’s talents and gifts, that we, as individuals expand our own talents and gifts.
September 22, 2016 at 9:23 pm #100044
@ Tango: excellent follow up, you have hit the nail on the head of what I was alluding to. There is a critical misunderstanding among the ‘liberty community’ of what leadership is, and this is likely why so many refuse to be effective followers.
@ Wheelsee: you misunderstand my point. I was not describing leaders vs managers in my examples of different roles. I was explaining that they are all leaders in their own sphere.
Unless ‘the community’ can understand leadership, and followership, and how it does not equate to a loss on individual sovereignty, then there will be no effective teams.
Does anyone think that the Resistance Company in Patriot Dawn could actuslly happen? Or to put it another way: would your attitude to followership allow you to take part in such a noble endeavor?
September 22, 2016 at 9:37 pm #100045wheelseeParticipant
Max, thanks for the clarification…
September 22, 2016 at 10:23 pm #100046egglestonParticipant
I think a resistance co would be possible . Members would self select. The hardships of soldiering would be to much for all but the most committed . Leaders would emerge and with so much work to do fighters egos would be secondary to staying alive . Plenty of opportunity would exist to lead , supply , comms , medical etc. Loss of leaders through combat , disease , injury would also place members in positions of leadership suddenly … Just my thoughts.
November 9, 2019 at 12:33 am #127026
Bumping this from 3 years ago given other threads which touch on this.
November 9, 2019 at 9:45 pm #127148gatlinggunParticipant
I think that the term “leader” has been corrupted in the minds of most people. As applied to the current crop of politicians (leaders) it means someone who is using you for their own ends. So most “patriots” can’t get past this corruption of the meaning. Being “gun shy” they shy away from anyone holding “power” over them. Especially if that “power” is given voluntarily.
The romantic myth of the “rugged individualist” has also been a corrupting influence on the meaning of “leader”. I remember discussions about this very thing in the “militia movement” back in the 90s. The agreement being that all of the “rugged individuals” couldn’t lay aside their egos and work together no matter what happens. It seems that hasn’t changed.
The problem, on a national level, with leadership and liberty is that the “leaders” are in it for themselves. They no longer have the best interest of the nation at heart. It has devolved into how they can loot the people/nation, advance their personal agendas, destroy liberty, etcetera, before they retire from public office.
In a combat/survival scenario, I would be happy to lay aside my ego/will and follow someone with combat leadership proficiency.
In the end, how can the corrupted view of the term leader be changed? Or can it?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.