Instinctive Leadership

It is hard wired into our genetic makeup to seek out a leader that is dominant, commands respect, and can provide adequate food, shelter, and safety to those lower in the hierarchal structure. While humans have evolved beyond being ruled exclusively by the flight or fight response it is still necessary to qualify the instinctual inclination for picking a leader before moving into the more complex and humanitarian side of leadership. To be a great leader you must first fulfill the primal leadership requirements, the two I chose to discuss are dominance and security.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

The first requirement for primal leadership is that the person must have a antinomian personality and command the respect of the people to be lead. This is a fairly easy concept; submissive personalities just cannot lead with out they themselves being led. History is filled with dozens upon dozens of figurehead leaders and puppet monarchs, but rather than dwelling on their failures I’d rather prove my point by an example of a truly great leader with a hell of a back bone. Queen Elizabeth I reigned for 45 years and “… Is considered one of England’s best monarchs. She controlled every aspect of the goings on of her country while being kind and just. She was the ultimate decider and was able to determine issues of her nation’s religion, when Parliament would sit and what it would discuss, when and if her country would go to war, matters of education, welfare of her citizens, what food they would eat and what clothes they could wear. ” Though she did have advisors (numbering from 50 to 19 to finally 13) she still made her own decisions while being fair, clever, and compromising.

As well as dealing with the affairs of the state population and religion. As far as needing to command respect of the people being governed, it goes without saying that thou people to be governed the leadership role would be non existent. People are less likely to follow a leader they do not respect given a choice. Mutinies arise, subterfuge runs rampant and eventually the people will either ignore or move against an ill respected leader until a better respected replacement is found and followed.

A leader that cannot provide safety and security for their people will be abandoned. If we jump back to the days before people were the ‘top of the food chain” and controlling everything in our environments to cater to comfort rather Han survival if a leader could not provide safety and security for their people they simply were not leaders. The safety and security of the people is vital for their survival. Now I know that sounds like a common sense statement but it seems to get lost in the modern debate about leadership.

Hitler is one of the most widely hated and controversial leaders of recent history, however he played off the needs of the German people for safety, security & reassurance. After WWW Germany headed into a massive depression; people were out of work and many of the “skilled and trained” men had been killed during the war, “leaving entrained people to run obsolete machines”. As a result of the war the country was also outcast by much of the global community.

Hitler came along and promised “to put bread on every German table”, “money in every German pocket’, “and a husband for every German woman”. After WWW the Germans wanted someone to blame and someone strong to lead them Hitler stepped in and fulfilled both requirements. Germany had a long history of anti-Semitism as it was which Hitler used to his advantage. People felt safer and more secure when they had jobs and someone to blame for their problems. Through these remises of security and safety he was able to set himself up not only as leader of the country but Fuehrer to the people.

He was strongly loved by his subjects, respected by the military and understood the importance of influencing the youth (who are always looking for strong leadership). The following quotes show the people’s love for their Fuehrer: “In the presence of this blood banner which represents out Fuehrer, I swear to devote all my energies and my strength to the savior of our country, Doll Hitler. Am willing and ready to give up my life so help me God. ” – Jung-folk Oath He who serves Doll Hitler, the Fuehrer, serves Germany, and whoever serves Germany serves God. – Balder von Scratch Washboard 4 “Fuehrer, me Fuehrer, give me by God. Protect and preserve my life for long. You saved Germany in time of need. I thank you for my daily bread. Be with me for a long time, do not leave me, Fuehrer, my Fuehrer, my faith, my light, Hail to my Fuehrer! ” – Hitler Youth Prayer Queen Elizabeth I and Doll Hitler probably aren’t usually put in the same sentence unless we are talking about opposites, however given slightly closer inspection we can see that they actually do have a few things very much in moon and were very successful in their leadership endeavors.

They both presented extremely dominant personalities which made it possible for people to look towards them with confidence that they would be taken care of. Each took care of their people and were able to fulfill their promises to their people whom looked to them with love, respect, and trust. There is no denying that each in their own way were great leaders to the people they lead, partially due to the fact that they played into the instinctive needs of people to be lead by dominant people providing security and safety.