As a leader, three basic principles drive leadership: freedom, agency, and learning (Robinson, 1999; Rao, 2013; Tucker, 2001; and Ulrich, 2008). Three inviolate laws are also present, these inviolate laws are: respect, engagement, and preparation; these laws are guided by the principles of freedom, agency, and learning. Hand-in-hand, these three principles of leadership and the three inviolate laws govern society. We are learning by sad experience that many, especially on college campuses and in professional sports arenas, consider respect to be a one-direction demand, where accountability is not enforced and where the hooligans and terrorists of thought, demand and punctuate their demands with violence. A person, who tries to curtail the thoughts of others with physical, verbal, or emotional abuse, has crossed the line into thought terrorism, and their voice is reduced to nothing, even though mainstream media (MSM) outlets provide these people a soapbox to reach a larger audience. A person, who demands respect to flow to them and refuses to give respect to others, is abusing verbally and emotionally those they refuse to respect.
Leaders, who embrace the freedoms of their followers, allow them full possession of their individual freedoms, encourage them to employ individual agency, and allow them to be guided by a thirst for learning (Broskowski, 1984; Ekanayake, 2004; and Hoppe, 2006). The engaged learner prepares fully in a constant cycle of learn and teach and needs to be supported in this cycle in order to remain a learner preparing to teach and a teacher preparing to learn. The leader has responsibility for teaching correct principles and embracing the need for the learner to govern himself or herself. Thoughts and beliefs, opinions, and personal preferences cannot and should not be litigated, forced, or coerced. Those, who choose to act in a manner not conducive to a quiet and orderly discussion, diminish themselves, harm themselves, and place themselves outside civilization, like the rabid dogs of the west. The proper response by civilization for those placing themselves in this category, rabid dogs or wolves, remains the same: permanent separation and removal.
The successful leader is morally obligated to embrace loyal opposition found in those being led and to take and give counsel and guidance to improve plans, implement ideas, and garner the individual buy-in from free agents ensuring integrity, responsibility, and accountability are not lost or forgotten. The leader is a teacher and a teacher is a leader. The cycle for learning and teaching does not become lost or less significant as rank is increased. The inverse occurs. The greater the rank the higher the responsibility to remain engaged in the learning/teaching cycle (Kumle and Kelly, 2006; Maehr and Braskamp, 1986; Nibley, 1987).
Imperative to those with greater authority are the requirements to oversee those to whom authority has been delegated. When those possessing delegated authority use that authority to denigrate, deride, and destroy, that authority needs to be publically stripped, and the individual forced to make amends concurrent with the laws of the land and the expectations of society. We have come to a point in the laws of America where those with money and powerful political connections (Anthony Weiner) can receive pitiful punishments for dangerous crimes, and those without powerful political friends and money receive far harsher sentences for crimes committed, where standard sentence guidelines include some portion of all of the following: 5-10 years in prison, registering as a sex offender, and fines starting at $50,000 (Lorang, McNiel, & Binder, 2016).
Consider the IRS Scandal, the VA Scandals, and the continuing news cycles where politicians make promises and renege on those promises before the ink is dry on the election result forms. The staffs to whom authority has been delegated are being allowed to run rampant, and those selected to be leaders are doing nothing to curtail the abuse of power being inflicted upon the population (Perez, 2015).
America, President Trump is a leader, whereas many of the House and Senate are less than the poorest managers ever vested with delegated authority. Consider Senators McCain, Feingold, and Collins, where Obamacare is concerned, they campaigned on repealing Obamacare, and they continue to actively thwart the legislative process for personal gain (Prokop, 2015). Leaders, regardless of their field of endeavor and political environment, act, work, and their actions are logically tied to their work. While one might disagree with the actions based upon personal opinion, the actions taken signify their leadership. Managers, do not act, are not tied to their actions, and never are held accountable; whereas, the leader and their actions are inseparable. Hence, while McCain, Feingold, and Collins, among others, will thwart the needs of America for personal gain, Trump will be held accountable for their inaction. The same is true for the inaction and legal quandary Obama created at the IRS and the VA, managers performed tasks that were incongruent with the law, were not held accountable, thus the president remains culpable.
Consider how many times “deals” have to be made just to get common sense, helpful, and proper legislation out of committee and in front of the current sitting president. In real life, “deals” would be considered bribery, collusion, inducements, kickbacks, and blackmail; yet, the citizens accept these legislative maneuvers in the hopes of improving America through legislation. We are told as children that politics is a dirty business; it has become a dirty business, because those in power and those with delegated power have refused to honor, sustain, and support the laws of the land, the expectations of the citizens they purport to represent, and the illegal use of tax money to conduct these bribes is reprehensible at best.
Currently, the solution remains in the hands of the voters re: stop electing the same old names over and over again. Why have Senators McCain and Collins become so powerful; tenure in the Senate, McCain since 1981 to present and Murkowski since 2002, and Collins since 1996, they have been living off the public taxpayer for too long! I am not advocating term limits. I am advocating an informed and motivated electorate willing to be the leaders they wish to see in office, and holding those in power accountable for the power that has been delegated from “We the People” to those who temporarily hold elected office. I am advocating for voters to make the election box more important than the TV box, the cubicle box, or the social media box.
I am advocating for the return of a highly charged and logically powered electorate to take back the reins of power from those currently in office, especially those who have continually proven they cannot handle our authority. For example, Senator Collins has continually proven a weak link by taking positions anathema to her voters, but lacking a viable alternative, her voters return her to power every six-years. In fact, having lived in her district, I know for a fact there are many of her voters who despise Senator Collins, and hold their nose and vote for her anyway. Having lived in Senator McCain’s district, the same is said of him when voting every six years, no viable alternative, send the same old name back to power.
Much noise has been made about professional sports players and the refusal to stand for the Anthem and the American Flag. Under the three principles of leadership and the three inviolate laws, these players do not deserve the jobs they hold, let alone a position of respect. The reason is simple. The flag covers all. Standing for the flag means respect for all, honor for all, and will, regardless of the other person, stand for America as the last bastion of liberty, freedom, and a republican form of government. The liberties demanded to allow you to sit are the same liberties you are rejecting every time you sit for the anthem and flag ceremony. All kneeling sports players and flag burners should answer this question: “When you are in trouble, do you want American police, firefighters, EMT’s, and or the American Military personnel to help you?” If so, why would you contemplate sitting when standing for the flag symbolizes you will help others and sitting proclaims you will not help others. Since you will not help others, as signified by burning the flag and kneeling or sitting out the national anthem, where should help come from?
I cannot stress enough leadership is needed. Leadership begins with those who selected their leaders demanding an accounting for the authority delegated to them. Use the principles of leadership mentioned and the inviolate laws to correct yourself, your family, and then demand from society the same. When we do this as a nation standing for liberty, we will succeed, and those naysayers and whiffle-whafflers will be held in eternal contempt because of their actions against us, the citizens of this Republic, the United States of America!
© 2017 M. Dave Salisbury
All Rights Reserved
The images used herein were obtained in the public domain, this author holds no copyright to the images displayed.
Broskowski, A. (1984). Organizational controls and leadership. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 15(5), 645-663. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.15.5.645
Dandira, M. (2012). Dysfunctional leadership: Organizational cancer. Business Strategy Series, 13(4), 187-192. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17515631211246267
Ekanayake, S. (2004). Agency theory, national culture and management control systems. Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge, 4(1), 49-54. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/222857814?accountid=35812
Hoppe, M. (2006). Active listening improves your ability to listen and lead. Greensboro, N.C.: Center for Creative Leadership.
Kumle, J., & Kelly, N. J. (2006). Leadership vs. management. SuperVision, 67(8), 11-13. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/195598300?accountid=458
Lorang, M. R., McNiel, D. E., & Binder, R. L. (2016). Minors and sexting: Legal implications. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 44(1), 73-81.
Maehr, M. L. and Braskamp, L. A. (1986) The motivation factor: A theory of personal investment. Lexington Press, Lexington, MA.
Nibley, H. (1987). Management vs. leadership. Executive Excellence, 4(12), 9. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/204630361?accountid=458
Perez, E. (2015, October 23). First on CNN: DOJ closes IRS investigation with no charges. CNN – Politics. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/23/politics/lois-lerner-no-charges-doj-tea-party/index.html
Prokop, A. (2015, September 25). The GOP can’t quit Obamacare repeal because of their donors. VOX. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/25/16339336/graham-cassidy-republican-donors
Rao, M. S. (2013). Soft leadership: a new direction to leadership. Industrial and Commercial Training, 45(3), 143-149. doi: 10.1108/00197851311320559
Robinson, G. (1999). Leadership vs management. The British Journal of Administrative Management, 20-21. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/224620071?accountid=458
Tucker, R. (2001). Innovation: The new core competency. Strategy & Leadership, 29(1), 11-14.
Ulrich, D., Smallwood, N., & Sweetman, K. (2008). The leadership code: Five rules to lead by. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.