Political Leadership Theory

1
Political Leadership Theory
2
Summary

• Two types of scholars - Classical Conceptions
  and Historical Causation
• Classical Conceptions consider views from
  classical Greek to mediaeval times
• Historical Causation considers views from
  scholars taking a view of leadership and its
  relation to history

3
Classical Conceptions

• 3 key theorists
• Aristotle
• Machiavelli
• Shakespeare (Henry V)

4
Aristotle

• Men need State and rule of law
• Built on idea of passionless reason
• Rule of the golden mean balance between
  oligarchy (rule of the few) and democracy (rule
  of the many)
• Platos concept of philosopher-kings
• These are the men who should rule - they are
  wise, educated and benevolent

5
Aristotle

• Citizens, collectively, surpassed the quality of
  the best statesmen, therefore citizens should
  make decisions about what they want and statesmen
  required to provide means to achieve the ends
• This view of leadership has been considered
  idealistic since it is unlikely to be achieved in
  reality

6
Machiavelli

• Italian political philosopher (1469-1527)
• No virtuous statesmen like Aristotle
  (Aristotles statesmen had moral purpose,
  Machiavellis appeared to have this but in
  reality driven by power politics)
• Leaders work to make public perceive them as
  moral and trying to lead towards common good, but
  in reality they just want power!
• This theory has been described as being realist

7
Shakespeares Henry V

• British poet and playwright (1564-1616)
• Despite not being political/historical theorist,
  the characterisation of leaders in his plays
  gives an insight into what he thought of leaders
• Synthesis between Aristotles search for idealism
  and Machiavellis dark realism (power politics)
• Politicians are good, but necessarily work within
  the political realm of power politics

8
Shakespeares Henry V

• His work has been described as displaying leaders
  as authentic
• He also includes psychological factors in his
  assessment, such as the importance of loss of a
  parent for his leaders
• Freudian view of psychology (people display
  certain characteristics because of the way their
  mother/father brought them up). It should be
  viewed with caution because of this, but
  regardless of the accuracy of his psychological
  assessment it demonstrates his inclusion of a
  variety of factors in determining how leaders
  react to certain situations

9
Classical Conceptions summary

• The relationship of these three theorists can be
  summarised (be aware this is a simplification) by
  looking at this scale
• Aristotle and Machiavelli form the extremes
  (idealism and realism), while Shakespeare uses a
  synthesis of their theories

10
Historical Causation

• 4 key theorists
• Thomas Carlyle
• Leo Tolstoy
• Fred Greenstein
• Jon Johansson

11
Thomas Carlyle

• Scottish essayist and historian (1795-1881)
• Wrote Heroes and Hero-Worship
• Great Man theory history is the result of
  great men shaping the forces of history

12
Thomas Carlyle

• His great men had two characteristics
• Original insight (perception similar to
  Aristotles philosopher-kings who had wisdom)
• Sincerity
• His view is somewhat idealistic (how many leaders
  in history display these characteristics?) but
  forms a coherent theoretical framework from which
  to analyse historical situations

13
Leo Tolstoy

• Russian novelist and philosopher (1828-1910)
• Wrote War and Peace
• Concept of man riding on the wave of history
• No matter who the leaders were, history was a
  result of all the acts of individuals, which
  together created an outcome
• Deterministic believed in fate and that man
  could not alter history (this is related to his
  belief in God if interested you could do some
  research on his religious beliefs, dubbed
  Christian Anarchism)

14
Fred Greenstein

• Emeritus Professor of Politics at Princeton
  University (1930-present)
• Asks the question
• What are the circumstances under which the
  actions of single individuals are likely to have
  greater or lesser effect on the course of
  events?
• Gives three interrelated points to consider in
  assessment of leaders, and uses the analogy of a
  billiard/pool table to clarify this

15
Fred Greenstein

• What is the situation/context like? E.g., maybe
  so many factors involved that removing one or two
  of them (including the leader) will still result
  in the same outcome
• Leaders strategic position important
• Leaders impact dependent on strengths and
  weaknesses of the leader (i.e. how talented,
  intelligent etc. is the leader? Is s/he able to
  manipulate the outcome to suit them?)
• Can you think of real examples for each of these
  scenarios?

16
Fred Greenstein

• Comparing this to a billiard/pool table
• The situation is the set up of the balls on the
  table. Nothing can be done to change the initial
  placement of the balls
• The leaders position is compared to the cue ball
  (the white ball). If the leader is in a good
  position his/her ability to control the balls on
  the table is strengthened, if the leader is not
  then the opposite is true
• The leaders strengths and weaknesses are
  compared to that of the person hitting the balls.
  If the person is talented they are able to sink
  more balls, if not then, no matter how good the
  situation and position they are unable to utilise
  it effectively

17
Jon Johansson

• Political Science lecturer at Victoria University
• His ideas are similar to Greensteins that a
  number of factors need to be considered when
  assessing the importance of a leader in a
  specific situation

18
Historical Causation summary

• Similar to the classical theorists, the
  relationship of these four theorists can be
  summarised by looking at this scale
• Carlyle and Tolstoy form the extremes, while
  Greenstein and Johansson provide the synthesis
  (which is more complex than either of the
  extremes)