I recall reading in 2016 an article of the Huffington[1] post which was highlighting a leadership crisis over the continuous misunderstanding among world leaders related to many conflicts on which they could not find a common ground and sustainable solutions. It was true before the world wars. It is true today. And I believe this will be the curse of the humanity, unless there is a reverse in the hierarchy of value/interest in the world of those who holds the power in key areas of the world governance: the Political leaders.
In many parts of the world, we still face challenge in building sustainable and resilient communities which are characterized by empowered citizen who deliver and live-in full respect of rules. We fail to have political and social structures that guarantee peaceful and socially responsible interactions which brings wealth and broad added values to each and everyone. The obvious diversity of problems could be either explained or solved by only one thing: The quality of political leadership.
Every community, every political or social structure has within itself a potential. Only the quality of leadership defines the product that could be taken from that potential. The story of football clubs, Countries, Cities, CSOs, that has known a quick metamorphosis widely explains the role of leadership in change process. The leadership is key in quality governance, vision development, empowerment, accountability etc. If we look at the root cause of the challenges, we are facing nowadays such as poverty, conflicts, environmental degradation, discrimination, unemployment, etc. we could easily relate them to the problem of leadership. Our challenge is to having leaders who, either they respect the social and political systems/rules governing their communities, or they make them better for the common good. Finally, one could only wonder if our society is prepared to prepare leaders who ensure that the social, political, and individual potentials are optimised towards sustainability and shared wealth? How do we make sure that in next 10, 20 or 30 years, better leadership is upheld? Which principle and values shall be the backbone of that process? How do we build future political leaders?
In this article, we strive to answer to the above question through a thorough analysis of the root’s causes of the current leadership crisis and looking at the current development patterns made of processes, principles and values which drives our current social and political structures. We look at following three elements to guide our exercise: first, we looked at the gaps which appears between the desired society and the current realties (1), secondly, we checked underground forces and the popular educational channels and contents which explains the choices of younger generations (2), and lastly, we explored the potentialities and opportunities of the current social and political structures for a greater leadership standard that could be offered (3). From this exercise, the tendency which comes straight is the necessity to identify relevant values, principles, as well as public figure (models) that could carry the high demand for renewed political leadership which does not only respond to our current challenges but also are ensure our preparedness to respond to future ones.
Key words: Community, Political Structures, Leadership, Common Good
I. Looking at today’s leadership challenges.
Before a look at the type leaders, we need for the future and how we ensure their advent, it is essential to look at current trends. The global concealed war-like geopolitics backing an economic order hardly hides the accumulation and individualistic mindset which is widely adopted by our society. This entanglement of social, economic, and political order crossed with human issues can only raise questions about priorities in the urgency of acting. Building leaders for the future means grounding the abilities of candidate for change oriented leadership in envisioned challenges. It is a process which shall come with a clear understanding of the trends associated to global climate crisis and deteriorated political systems.
I.a. Climate change, political systems, and current gaps
In fact, it is hard to evocate ongoing tremendous crises such as conflicts, disasters, global refugees’ movement, without questioning the applied leadership in each context and the accountability measures. If some of the crises are not human-caused, most of the recent one could have been either avoided or having their impact mitigated by good policies quality leadership.
Our systems fail to converge for common good. Instead, we see politics almost mashed by the economics and we all witness the illusion of runoff theory (Framont, 2017).
A comprehensive logic is built on this theory to explain the failure of leadership which is primarily designating the capacity not only to talk, motivate or even think smartly, but work for others and for an end going beyond personal interests.
There is a need to identify the false perceptions of the power and the leadership as we know each attitude comes from representations (Abric, 2004; Jodelet,1989). And when we think of where these representations of leadership come from, we can potentially design successful programs to lead to what we want. The 2022 democracy report of V-Dem Institute has shown that “dictatorships are on the rise and harbor 70% of the world population – 5.4 billion people”[2].
The analysis of data on migration, conflicts, disasters, poverty, unemployment, crimes, which are direct consequences of the above two big ones demonstrates an increasing trend. The goals of the Paris Agreement [3] and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have been difficult to be respected by governments. During the COP26 in England, states reiterated their will to keep the warming under keep alive the hope of limiting the rise in global temperature to 1.5C[5]. In 2021, the UNHCR reports an increasing number of internally displaced people and refugees in the world since 2000. For instance, in 2021, the number of forcibly displaced people because of persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations or events seriously disturbing public order is 89,3 million[6] (53,2 million are Internally displaced People and 27,1 million are refugees).
The increasing vulnerability scope, triggered by the above crises, further increases the gap between high classes protected from effects of crisis and keeping their assets, and low classes exposed to damaging consequences of disasters and conflicts. The reflection on the political systems and responses opposed against the global warming could therefore be translated in systemic response to inequalities.
I.b. Inequalities
According to the World Inequality report (2022), the richest 10% of the global population owns 52% of all income, while the poorest half owns just 8.5%[7]. The top 1% has captured 38% of all additional wealth accumulated since the mid-1990s according to the same report. This inequality in wealth is the same, if not worse, in areas such as income inequality, gender inequality, ecological, poverty, and debt (for countries). Briefly, “Disparities today are about the same as they were in the early 20th century”[8] and development claimed or hailed seems to be either fallacious or widely unfit to the needs of our times.
The direct consequence of deteriorated political systems in the world can be called Inequality. It is a renewed and hidden classes’ struggle triggered by the capitalism in which the powerful transform the weaker in money making machines and influence accordingly all the structures and systems that advances accumulation agenda. The critics of neoliberal democracies question this tendency which has shown its limit and further reduces the considerable capacity of action of rulers. The World Social Science Report (UNESCO, 2016) pointed out an important link between inequalities and the current challenges the world is facing. Among these challenges, the most damaging are conflicts and wars, as they reduce the resilience capacity of communities involved in conflicts, letting them in a situation of vulnerability.
Kofi Annan, in his speech accepting Nobel peace prize lamented that “humanity had entered the new millennium through “a gate of fire “(Kegley C. W. & Raymond G. A., 2005: 02). More than a decade after this affirmation, the situation became even worse, especially with the increasing extremism in which are rooted with several conflicts in the world.
Talking about extremism is not only a religious matter. It concerns every situation in which individuals and groups fails to think beyond specific beliefs for shared space in diversity. The conflicts raising in many parts of the world are due to a limited capacity of dialogue and selfless decision.
II. Redefining Quality Leadership: Navigating Ethical Dilemmas in a Diverse World
The question of quality leadership is complex due to the diverse perspectives on the world and the different interpretations of leadership. Leadership is fundamentally linked to one’s worldview, as it involves guiding a process towards an end goal. Often, we define leadership by the ability to motivate, inspire, and successfully manage a process through various essential qualities. However, many leaders, including those of terrorist groups and gangs, have achieved their goals by making their collaborators feel valued. This suggests that while we recognize the skills that make a goal achievable, it is equally important to evaluate the underlying principles and values of that goal. If the goal fails to meet a basic moral standard, it is not worth celebrating.
a variety of theories visions, beliefs, and paradigms drives our society today. Some groups or individuals find fulfilment in actions such as killing innocent people for their beliefs or political agendas, while others justify taking what does not belong to them to fulfil their own visions and goals. As humanity slowly devolves into a state where the powerful dominate, it becomes clear that unless we adopt a unified hierarchy of values, our ability to address social, political, and cultural challenges remains questionable.
The universal principles of dignity and human rights, which should drive human behaviour, often seem superficial in the face of contradictory economic and political theories and practices. The true test of our generation’s ability to drive change will be our capacity to reconcile capitalism with human rights and dignity principles, even though they are fundamentally opposed. This involves shifting from a focus on competition and profit, which often excludes justice and fair wealth distribution, to a more human-centred approach.
The prevailing economic order influence and often control our current social and political structures. This economic order dictates policy reforms, political decisions, geopolitical strategies, conflicts, and observed inequalities, as well as the predominant mindset shaped by mainstream media under its influence. The dynamics will only change when the primary motive behind all decisions is the achievement of human rights for all, and when power and resources are allocated to organizations recognized as custodians of human rights and development mandates.
III. Modalities for selfless political leadership
When we talk about the leaders we need, we often overlook the unsung heroes who never held high-profile positions or wielded significant power. Yet, we know the stories of José Mujica[10], Kofi Annan[11], Thomas Sankara[12], Julius Nyerere[13], Patrice Lumumba —figures who sacrificed for social justice. These leaders, from diverse backgrounds and different eras, share core values: integrity, vision, and selfless engagement.
From a widely shared perspective, we could affirm with specialists that the challenge is transforming leadership into a role of service rather than selfishness. This is why I intentionally exclude the world’s wealthiest individuals often labelled as leaders. Corporate leadership focuses on accumulation, while political leadership should be about sacrifice and service. We face a stark contrast: economic success versus the willingness to give up wealth for the greater good. Some may engage in « social washing, » which contradicts the values essential for transformative political leadership.
Discussing future leaders should prompt us to rethink politics. The dominant version, often called « real politics, » has persisted for decades. But is this what politics should be? Have we failed to transform a flawed system, choosing instead to accept it as it is? Is politics a realm where lying is normal, where people harm each other? Or should it be a space for eco-friendly individuals who value tolerance, truth, justice, and equality?
Building future leaders means creating conditions for the emergence of socially accountable and engaged individuals. From our analysis, two key areas for improvement emerge: enhancing social communication and fostering social and political institutions that nurture future leaders.
III.a. Social communications on leadership
The development of communication networks has brought about many transformations, with the most significant impact being on human representation. As previously highlighted, social representations of leadership shape leadership attitudes. These representations result not only from education and training but also from social communications and interactions. Therefore, the public image of leaders and the systems governing people play a crucial role.
Key questions to consider include:
- Is the image of current political leaders portrayed by mainstream media informed by international law, ethical standards, and universally shared moral values?
- Do media highlight leaders who prioritize the common good over personal interest? Is there an emphasis on key human values and those who promote local and culturally centred resilience over the economization of vulnerabilities? Are leaders who view politics as a vocation and service to the most vulnerable and social justice shown as models, or are they merely exceptions that do not call for deep reforms?
- It is not enough to create awards, build monuments, or designate days to commemorate great leaders. We must create more fellowships, contests, and media initiatives under the names of these leaders to promote the values that made them great. Focusing solely on their statues while neglecting the values that made them great will have the opposite effect.
III.b. Promote value-centred leadership from small age
For many generations, parents, and families the indicators through which parents have measured the worthiness of their children was their marks, their intelligence, and their skills. If the objective of our time is about preparing clever and socially engaged and accountable citizens, it might be also the time to reinvent the education systems. From the small age it should therefore become about building leaders who are socially conscious, politically aware, and culturally grounded to take up issues affecting the most vulnerable ones. Building future leaders will means not only having intelligent leaders, but also and most importantly, good leader who are conscious and courageous to confront a system ready to crush any dissidence. Prepare visionaries, influential, incorruptible, and selfless leaders is lifelong but revolutionary approach which on which rely a hope for resolute hope for change.
The spirit of detachment is crucial for any leader who truly puts himself at the service of the happiness of others. The higher one’s position of leadership, the more one will need to leave room for simplicity and the spirit of detachment without which it is impossible to work for the good of the mass being under our responsibility. This philosophy of life leads to freedom and efficiency of decision and action suffered by several leaders (especially political) and echoed by various researchers. Without it, it will be impossible to avoid compromises that aims to enrich leaders (especially political leaders) who unfavourite the poor people and advantageous to small groups and individualities.
III.c. Empower social movements
Talking about social movements at this very moment the question of political leaders can seem intriguing. Nevertheless, there is a double-logical argument to the evocation of this perspective. First, the link between the crisis of leadership and the systemic weaknesses in the forms of governance. In this perspective, it has been shown that “Power relations are framed by the domination that underlies social institutions” (Castells, 2009: 39). Then the identification of the elite as unsuited to taking responsibility on behalf of leaders.
Talking about social movements at the time it is asked the question of leaders can seem intriguing. Nevertheless, there is a double-logical argument to the evocation of this perspective. First, the link between the crisis of leadership and the systemic weaknesses in the forms of governance, then the identification of the elite as unsuited to taking responsibility on behalf of leaders.
On the one hand, it is therefore a question of supporting the counter-power, the only one able to stand up legitimately to the destructive forms of responsible citizenship, in frameworks dedicated to the cause of all, especially the most vulnerable. On the other hand, it is about giving the opportunity to these executives to be a nursery with socially committed leaders and therefore able to take greater responsibility in society.
In the strictly political context, the proximity of the leader to his social base is a requirement especially as even those who are not of poor origin are even forced to play the usurpation of social identity. This one consists of “disguising one’s social ancestries by impoverishing the story of one’s origins and imitating the gestures or the ways of speaking of the middle and popular classes of which it is not yet a part” (Nicolas, 2017: 55). That is why the empowerment of social movement in the way they could produce political leaders is a key element to be integrated in the policies of decision ‘makers.
Conclusion
The article highlights the need for holistic leadership training, arguing that intellectual abilities alone are not enough for effective leadership. True leaders should prioritize the common good, embrace simplicity, and serve selflessly. Decision-makers, social movements, and corporations should promote and model leadership through fellowships, contests, educational curricula, and media to ensure core values are upheld.
Additionally, it is crucial to nurture socially accountable citizens from an early age to develop future leaders with moral courage. Empowering social movements is also important, as they create leaders who are connected to their communities and ready to take on greater responsibilities. A comprehensive leadership training approach that includes intellectual, moral, and social aspects is essential for addressing modern challenges.
The distortion of human values by capitalism, which promotes accumulation over the common good, individualism over solidarity, and corruption over social justice, is a social, cultural, and political wound that our generation must heal. The involvement of political leaders and key economic actors in perpetuating this system has led many to believe there is no alternative. However, recent events are causing some in the capitalist sector to reconsider their beliefs. The problem is that the propaganda machine supporting capitalist ideals has created a generation that believes in these destructive theories. Therefore, it is not enough for a few to think differently; the apparatus supporting these theories must be reassigned a new role or dismantled. The first step is for the majority of the world’s nine billion inhabitants to believe that a new way of operating, a new world, is possible.
Bibliography
- Abric J-C et Al (1994), Pratiques sociales et représentations, Paris, PUF
- Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (2007), La reproduction, Paris, Les éditions de minuit.
- Jodelet D., (2003), Les représentations sociales, Paris, PUF.
- Jodelet, D., (2015), Représentations sociales et monde de vie, Paris, Éditions des archives contemporaines.
- Nicolas, F. (2017), Les candidats du système, Paris : Le bord de l’eau.
- UNESCO. (2016), World social science report, Paris: UNESCO.
- van Cuyck, A. (2015). Manuel Castells, Communication et pouvoir : Trad. De l’anglais par M. Rigaud-Drayton, Paris, Éd. De la Maison des sciences de l’homme, coll. 54, 2013 [2009], 668 pages. Questions de communication, 27, (1), 364-367. https://www.cairn.info/revue-questions-de-communication-2015-1-page-364.htm.
