Save Me From Charismatic Leaders!

Re: # 39 quin re: US "empire" & Obama

Most readers understand what you wanted to say and, I'm sure many agree with the gist of your argument.

The real owners of America are not stupid. They are fuming at the huge global PR disaster that George W has created. They are mad because they didn't expect him to be such an idiot when they backed him. But he's pissed in their drinking well and they are going to have to do something to undo some of the damage he has wrought. They have, thanks to George W, realised that they can not continue to "dry sodomise" the rest of the world (including the US public)... they realise that from now on they need to use lubrication and use a condom.

Burraq Hussein Osama fits the bill prefectly. He is their lubricated condom.

...SR

41 contd...
The way Islam had proved to be lethal for Pakiland, Nehru and his daughter was far worse for India....

DM...
Nice written article. Nehru was born scoundrel and pure low life. His father was clerk to a moslem lawyear. His intention was clear; destroy India and wipe out its rich history, create good name for himself. The situation in USA now and India during 194x is different. Obama will not be able to make himself a destructive, self indulging leader due to the current, well built setup in USA.
Nehru got the free ground due to dirty politics of Gandhi (M K Gandhi). He hade removed most of the prominant leaders from Congress, who used to disagree with Gandhi....

I don't think that USA will be cursed with such a rascal like Nehru...

Re: # 36, It is a double failure (of expectations, we may say). Thanks for asking, if you wish to discuss this aspect in more detail, we have to do at some other time. I am getting ready for morning's ardous journey.

Re: # 35, I will keep working to improve my linguistic skills, Sir. But my basic argument is that USA's foreign policy has created a mess in the world as well as for USA. I am not saying USA is responsible for everything. However, like every big empire in the history, their policies have the biggest impact. Whatever mess they created for themseleve and for others will be hard to fix for the new adminstration. And I don't think this assertion is absurd.

Regarding popularity contest, we all here 'seems' to be for rather infamy contest, not for popularity contest. I have the right to say where I agree, and where I do not, so what's the big deal.

HP:

You are correct in assuming that I have not taken any classes in political science or international affairs; the three leaders that I have discussed, however, are routinely referred to as charismatic leaders in common parlance.

Nehru also seems to satisfy some of the definitions posted by you:

"Charismatic Leadership involves creating a self-image so powerful that people are naturally drawn to you."
This was certainly true of Nehru.

"Conger & Kanungo (1998) describe five behavioral attributes of Charismatic Leaders that indicate a more transformational viewpoint:
Vision and articulation;
Sensitivity to the environment;
Sensitivity to member needs;
Personal risk taking;
Performing unconventional behavior."

Some, if not all, of these characteristics applied to JLN,



"Musser (1987) notes that charismatic leaders seek to instill both commitment to ideological goals and also devotion to themselves."

This was certainly true of Nehru; he influenced a whole generation of Indians to commit to his vision of a socialist, secular, democratic, non-aligned India.
As far as loyalty, it has already went beyond him and passed on to three generations of his descendants.

"Max Weber distinguished three ideal types of political leadership, domination and authority:

charismatic domination (familial and religious),
traditional domination (patriarchs, patrimonial, feudalism) and
legal domination (modern law and state, bureaucracy)."

One could argue that Nehru met almost all of these criteria to a greater or lesser extent.

"Charismatic authority grows out of the personal charm or the strength of an individual personality. It was described by Weber in a lecture as "the authority of the extraordinary and personal gift of grace (charisma)"; he distinguished it from the other forms of authority by stating "Men do not obey him [the charismatic ruler] by virtue of tradition or statute, but because they believe in him."

This almost seems to describe Nehru.

pinku#29:

"Nehru's best contribution was creation of a political environment that was stable even if messy... "

I don't think that the political situation was too messy during Nehru's time, unless you are referring to the economy.

#31 quin: and you say about your immigration to Canada: "If I am given another life, though I may arrange things differently. We are all wiser in hindsight. "

Is this because Canada failed to live up to your expectations, or because you yourself failed to live up to your expectations?

quin: This is what you wrote to what you objected to: If he wins, he will regret it in his old age like hell. No fundamental 'change' is possible in the face of realities on the ground. If he tries to make any fundamental change, the hounds will ground him in no time. There's is an evil empire. On the other hand, if he does win, I wish him best. His failures will expose a lot about USA..

This is what you now say you wrote: All I said was the mess which USA has created in the world will be a hell to deal with for any new adiminstration which is not totally committed to those principles from which their messy policies ensued.

Your first statement is long-winded and absurd. Your re-stated view is not as lengthy and still absurd. It is absurd because it gives the impression that if it was not for the US, the rest of the world would be a peaceful place. And it is absurd because it implies that despite the fact that the democratic nations of the world are allied with the US in its just fight against mullah thugs (i.e. cleaning up the mess created and sustained by Pakistan), it is the US that is on the wrong side in this fight.

PS: I am criticizing your views only, you will note. I have no reason to doubt that you are anything but a fine gentleman. Also, please dont look for applause from other posters, even distinguished Nobel Prize winners like Masadi. Neither you nor I are running for popularity contests in chowk - lets just try to stick to the views, like you said and like I am doing.

Re: # 27 "Blaming" is not a pasttime, since for those that suffer from the effects of what America does, as it is doing in pakistan, there are life and death consequences"

Well said, Masadi. I just responded about personal attack by tahmed32. Thanks for telling the spade a spade.

Regarding Obama's presidency, I agree what you have said in your next post (#28).

HP # 30

You are an idiot. Charisma is not defined by lame writers of dictionaries and quoted by morons half a century later. Charisma is EXPERIENCED by kids (DM) while growing up under the myth building of freedom fighters.

Another witness of Nehru's 'charisma' was Qudrutullah Shahaab who could not understand why Ayub Khan (no slouch himself) gave so much coin to Nehru during negotiations and his conclusion was that Nehru's stature as a pioneer freedom fighter scored heavily on Khan who in turn accorded unmerited disrespect towards Shastri during Tashkent summits.

Josh's account of Nehru was also of polished sophistication coupled with love of culture etc.. something that idiots of haari background cannot appreciate.

Re: # 26 DM, You said that right, "Obama would be more belligerent to "prove" his patriotism"
That is why I am not too excited, though I would love to see a black, a woman, a jew or a muslim or any one from disadvantage groups, contesting the ticket. Rather I pity, in a funny way, Obama will save his face if does not win. But that is my personal opinion and I am not sharp enough in political analysis.

Re: # 22 tahmed32, I did not say all of our problems are caused by USA. All I said was the mess which USA has created in the world will be a hell to deal with for any new adiminstration which is not totally committed to those principles from which their messy policies ensued. So the point was that Obama will be facing huge difficulties even it is all a charade - almost all (just being rehtorical).

Anyway, it surpise my why we cannot keep our discussions focused on the issue and not start personal attacks. I am not an illegal immigrant. I am hard working middle class professional who immigrated to Canada only because I could not see opportunities of professional growth in Pakistan. If I am given another life, though I may arrange things differently. We are all wiser in hindsight.

Nehru was a charismatic leader and his daughter was charismatic too? What kind of joke is that? I think the author needs to take classes in political science and international affairs to learn about Charismatic leaders. If that is not possible then a little search on the net or even wiki would have helped him learn a few things about Charisma and Charismatic leaders as defined in politics.

Here is some info which I have pulled from the Net in less than two minutes. I will discuss this in details after the author explains what he meant by charisma!

All quotes below are from the net.

Charismatic Leadership involves creating a self-image so powerful that people are naturally drawn to you.
Conger & Kanungo (1998) describe five behavioral attributes of Charismatic Leaders that indicate a more transformational viewpoint:
Vision and articulation;
Sensitivity to the environment;
Sensitivity to member needs;
Personal risk taking;
Performing unconventional behavior.

The Charismatic Leader and the Transformational Leader can have many similarities, in that the Transformational Leader may well be charismatic. Their main difference is in their basic focus. Whereas the Transformational Leader has a basic focus of transforming the organization and, quite possibly, their followers, the Charismatic Leader may not want to change anything.

Musser (1987) notes that charismatic leaders seek to instill both commitment to ideological goals and also devotion to themselves. The extent to which either of these two goals is dominant depends on the underlying motivations and needs of the leader.

Max Weber distinguished three ideal types of political leadership, domination and authority:

charismatic domination (familial and religious),
traditional domination (patriarchs, patrimonial, feudalism) and
legal domination (modern law and state, bureaucracy).

Main article: Charismatic domination

Charismatic authority grows out of the personal charm or the strength of an individual personality. It was described by Weber in a lecture as "the authority of the extraordinary and personal gift of grace (charisma)"; he distinguished it from the other forms of authority by stating "Men do not obey him [the charismatic ruler] by virtue of tradition or statute, but because they believe in him." This form of authority can be seen in populist dictatorships where one individual exerts control by virtue of their personal popularity and following. Many states based on this model do not survive the death or fall from power of their original leader.
•
William Aberhart(Bible Bill for his religious preaching, was a Canadian politician and Social Credit Premier of Alberta between 1935 and 1943.)
Fidel Castro
Bill Clinton
Pim Fortuyn (was a controversial, openly gay, charismatic politician in the Netherlands who formed his own party)

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk (Founder of Turkey Republic)
Muhammad Ali Jinnah (Founder of Pakistan: The greatest force behind partition of India.)
Mahatma Gandhi (also involved in religion)(?)
Adolph Hitler
Winston Churchill (?)
Saddam Hussein
Gamal Abdel Nasser
Barrack Obama
John F. Kennedy
Rajiv Gandhi( yeah he is from the Nehru family but was no Nehru!)
Ronald Reagan
Lech Wałęsa
Yulia Tymoshenko (PM of Ukraine)
Ayatollah Khomeini
Sukarno (First Indonesian President)

bulleya gave some remarkable ordering of charisma, decision making and management skills.., He very accurately described the decision making ability of Indian businessmen..

For most of the charismatic people their biggest asset is their communication skill, their fluent and fast paced responses.. Language can be any....

The second characterirtics is their warrior like approach during any conversation, they try to win each conversation quickly and move to next..

What they lack most often is depth of analysis, they start quickly and won't go to great depths while giving their opinion... They can start with any bias and may not even know that they are strongly influenced by any bias..

There is a class of rare people which can be described as anti-charisma people,,, these people ignore almost anything initially and always look for depth in opinions, largely un-affected by the status or credibility of others, these people are often the ones who give hard times to easy life of charismatic people...

Mccain is somewhat like that except that he belongs to republican party which doesn't give him much option to show his uniqueness..

Mccain is sufficiently anti-charismatic to beat a charismatic candidate but his association with republican party doesn't suit him at present..

========

Nehru's best contribution was creation of a political environment that was stable even if messy...

His next best contribution was to popularize India in world politics, he was a very good orator and a good writer as well... and he made India a more or less socialist state..

The fact is,

(hello and greetings of peace friends and freindettes, baal? bacha, if you have any?, haal, chaal? isteqbaal?)

that just like the Pakistan Army, the US establishment is going through a legitimacy crisis and need some "shocking" legitimacy management. For the purpose of this they have thrown up a black man, the first, record shattering, history splattering, black president of the USA, who talks the talk of the white man from head to toe! So, those of you pinning your hopes on Obama, let me tell you what I told those jumping for joy in the Feb Pakistan elections, it is a farce, and just like you are being shocked so many months after it where nothing has occurred, (while to me its no shock, it was supposed to be business as usual), don't be shocked when Obama tries to outdo GWB in his militarism across the globe once in office. He is a mere stooge, though of higher standing than the White Man stooge the tahmed specimen we have on chowk,

Have a nice day,
Keep it in view, have some beef stew,join the cleaning crew, conspiracies do not brew, Same bs nothing new!

TNI Masadi