Boris is a Leader

Boris is a Leader

Leadership and management

A useful combination.

A leader can point towards a far off place

That is full of danger;

Arouse a crowd to fury,

Inspire them to follow,

And lead them off in haste

To struggle through swamps,

And poisonous terrain;

To starve, weaken and despair,

On their way to disaster.

A manager studies the destination,

Addresses the map,

Sorts the route,

Calculates distance and time,

Collects provisions,

Organises transport

And enables everyone to arrive

Properly equipped.

Even if he could not get many people to follow.

Boris is a leader.


Why is it that we are always in thrall to nincompoops who lead us into disaster? Did we learn nothing from the charge of the Light Brigade?

What is required is a combination of the two. Seemingly that is an exceedingly rare commodity.

The lust for power propels the megalomaniacs to dupe us all the time with their rousing speeches and lack of substance!!

I fear the country lurches to disaster!

4 thoughts on “Boris is a Leader

  1. Opher, the problem is actually far more fundamental than you seem to think. You demand “leadership” – but leadership towards WHAT? You and I agree that Johnson is an idiot, imbecile, moron, psychopath. As are most politicians. Some people – like me – want maximum individual freedom for everyone, consistent with living in a civilized society. Others – socialists, fascists, communists, tories, environmentalists – just want to impose their particular view of the world on those around them, by force if necessary. Which side are you on, Opher?

    1. I’m on the side of social justice, personal freedom, social responsibility, global perspective and the protection of nature. That requires compromise, empathy, respect, tolerance, responsibility and compassion.

  2. Well Opher, I’m not sure what you mean by “social justice” and “social responsibility.” I know what justice is – the condition in which every individual, as far as practicable, is treated as he or she treats others. And I know what responsibility is – if your voluntary action causes objective harm to someone, you must compensate them. But add the word “social,” and the phrases become meaningless to me, or even misleading. Perhaps this may be because I do not accept the idea of “society” in the singular; only of societies, which each of us can join if he or she sees fit. In particular, I don’t accept that the people who live in a geographical area form a society, and still less do I accept that they have a “general will” which unites them into a political bloc.

    Personal freedom, yes, of course. But global perspective, and the protection of nature? Of course, I take a wide view of human nature, since many of the cultural differences which some find important mean very little or nothing to me. I see all human beings worth the name as being brought together by human nature – which includes trading with each other, and building civilizations. But I have no time for politics of any kind, global or not. And as to “nature,” my view is that if it doesn’t bother me, I won’t bother it; and if you want to “protect” some particular part of nature, you are at liberty to do so yourself if you can, and to join with others in doing so if that’s what is necessary.

    Your bucket-list in your second paragraph sounds good, but the devil is in the details. You should compromise with those with whom such compromises bring about mutual gain; but you should never compromise yourself or your natural character. Empathy, respect and compassion are fine; but they are two-way processes. If others don’t allow these things to you, you have no responsibility to show these things to them in return. And, while tolerance of difference is good and necessary, there are some things you should not tolerate. These are things like aggressive violence, lying and deceiving, and fraud, all of which go against civilized human nature.

    1. Justice requires fairness and equality. A society which is unjust treats different people differently.
      You deny all social responsibility yet are utterly dependent on the society you live in. Without the society you deny being part of you probably would not be able to survive let alone live to any high standard.
      We are interdependent with people and nature. You are not an island. You also cannot choose to be apart from society unless you give up everything, every interaction, every benefit – and you clearly do not. You use all the things that society provides for you – safety against crime, security against invasion, laws, roads, amenities, electricity, food, clothing, goods, internet. I could go on with a huge list.
      You are mere abdicating responsibility while availing yourself of the benefits.
      Freedom is not an absolute – it is a compromise between all interactions. I want a society that provides me with maximum freedom within the constrictions that have to be imposed – the laws. They should be devised to maximise freedom and protect us from those who would harm us.
      I do not need to compromise myself or my character – other than curtailing the destructive impulses.

I'd like to hear from you...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.