Dictator Versus Leader

Jim Harbison

What are the differences between a dictator and a leader, which do we currently have in office and which do we want to rule and govern us? My friend Jeff Carlton’s article in the Kingman Arizona Masonic Lodge bulletin gave me the motivation for this column. The ruling style differences he identifies below are applicable to all levels of government, private businesses, and political, social, and fraternal organizations. He writes the following:

King George III

"The Dictator drives his men; the leader coaches them. The dictator depends on authority; the leader on good will. The dictator inspires fear; the leader enthusiasm. The dictator say “I,” the leader says “we.” The dictator fixes the blame for the breakdown; the leader fixes the breakdown. The dictator knows how it is done; the leader shows how to do it. The dictator says “Go”; the leader says “Let’s go.”
Those of us who experienced military service realize that the greatest and most effective way to lead is by example. We all understand that leaders whose conduct is in conflict with their rhetoric are less effective than those whose actions mirror their beliefs. Often failure to follow this concept drives individuals away from an organization or its noble causes and renders both ineffective. I think we can make the same comparison of our political parties.

George Washington

Where is the “great national unifier” we all heard about, and many voted for, during the last Presidential election? To be a unifier you need to demonstrate true leadership and not impose your political will by dictatorial force. Real leaders get everyone involved working toward common purposes and goals. They do not have to find ways to circumvent the will of Congress or the people by creating Czars to administratively force change the Congress won’t legislatively approve or that the public didn’t want. True leaders use charismatic leadership to influence the positive changes society desires.

The actions of the current political leadership and environment on both sides of the political aisle have not unified the nation. Their actions have had the opposite effect and caused greater political, social and economic divisions in our society that exceed most of our personal experiences. Individuals of all political persuasions want civility and productivity from government and dictatorial leadership does not result in either.

The Democrat Party and its most visible leaders, Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi demonstrate these dictatorial behavior characteristics which have reduced their effectiveness and civility. Each has failed to acknowledge the difference between cooperation and coercion. Some symptoms of dictatorial leadership include negative public statements, arrogance, denigration of all opposing viewpoints, continually blaming others for their personal political failures, agitation of racial tensions, and efforts to fabricate economic class warfare.

Is this style of governing effective? No one can dispute their recent success in passing controversial legislation. Recent public polling revealing the extremely negative ratings of Congress clearly indicates the public does not approve of this type of governance. Their dictatorial style only hardens the opposition, increases political grid-lock in government centers everywhere and results in increased hostility and antagonism.

We need to reset the political environment and return to the concept of friendly opposition. It is OK to disagree. We do it every day with our spouse, children, friends and business acquaintances without creating a hostile atmosphere by simply agreeing to disagree. How do we get our elected officials, political parties, and other citizens to do the same and re-create a more positive, civil and productive government? To get there we are going to have to abandon the repressive dictator approach in favor of the inclusive leader model identified above.