Leadership in different era

The leadership style/role has remained different in different era according to their vision and their intentions and compulsions of leaders of particular era .

The human vision has developed gradually ,refined with the advancement of human civilization but it had not been rising in single direction of betterment and growth ,it has faced many setbacks/hurdles and many barriers withheld the development of human vision for long or had diverted the human vision in wrong direction led by the leaders of that time. 
The intention of leaders had played a major role in developing of leadership in particular era ,in the earlier era the leaders held the absolute authority as generally they were adorned with the sanctity of almighty ,some leaders in earlier era had been cruel ,autocrat ,some had been more liberal.
some leaders in earlier era has sought to perpetuate their vision for future humanity by gaining access to sacred status and glorification by investing the treasures of kingdom in building such monuments or by expanding their boundaries by force ,by invading other parts to populate their vision and immortalize it.
from the above points it appear that growth of human vision /development has not been much contributed by leaders of particular era ,as much contributed by the inventors ,its the role of some leaders to facilitate the invention ,which has provided them higher praise.
it has been the bane of humanity that some leaders had the narrow personnel intention as supreme and not the overall growth and development of the society ,some leaders had the desire to gain the leadership at any cost and means to fulfill their power hunger.
the compulsion of leaders has also led to different style of leadership in different era ,in the democratic era the leaders are generally guided by the vote bank politics but some has the courage and vision to fuse the vote bank politics with the development politics ,some leaders has been the regular supplier of opium to the masses ,so that they can retain their status ,further they had added the divide of the society to perpetuate their vote bank.
the compulsion of leaders in earlier era has been more dependent upon the strength of their own inner self plus the strength of their army and length/breadth of their kingdom.
the compulsion of leaders has been more related to the eagerness to hide their inner weakness,it is the desire of the leaders to project themselves beyond their capacities.
the interaction of leaders in earlier era was limited ,as the tribes alone were a nation of sort and leader thereof as supreme knowledgeable one ,there were no forums like what is available now ,the united nation ,the world bank /the parliament and many/many other forums.
the anarchy prevalent at particular era /at particular part of globe has also played a pivotal role in development of leadership in particular era .
in the era surrounding of anarchy the responsibility of leaders increases in the sense to control the anarchy but at the same time there are hardly much public forum which prods the leaders to act and leaders has not to care much about the public opinion.
in the mature and regulated societies the rolr and responsibilities of leaders increases as the public forums and public opinion matters much ,and leader have to prove their mettle in their compulsion to maintain their worth in their society/country pride. 

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: