Individually, people are strong, creative, and driven. As a community/populace, people are like naive children, in dire of need of leaders to steer them in the “right” direction.
This is a philosophical perspective and I’d like to hear your opinions. I’d suggest for you to sit back and think about it for a bit before being too hesitant to write your reply. I’m attempting to apply my perspective from a very general perspective, not as a stereotype to any particular group of people.
Re: Society
^ Not if the community is built around strong, creative and driven sets of people.
Re: Society
Ideally, yes. Do you feel such a society exists anywhere today? If so, where?
Re: Society
If one person…an individual…comes up with a creative idea, let’s say something that needs to be built for the betterment of society…the individual will rely upon a group or community of people that will help with the formation of it. In other words, the individual needs the group. The individual has leadership qualities, but he’s dependent upon followers. You need both types of people in society.
From within a community that may already be following a leader can spring forth people who disagree and choose to do their own thing. Going against the majority would be difficult, but it can inspire others as well.
Re: Society
What you’re describing is the foundations of a democracy. Even traditional (not modern) shar’iah is based around a democratic system of governance.
But I’m going to ask the same question I asked Exodus: do you believe such a society exists today? If so, where? If not, can it exist in a modernized society as society is today?
What if I said I believe that one of the biggest reasons why society is “failing” is because today’s leaders act only in their own interests? Several arguments may spring from that comment, such as the common folk being responsible for electing them into power or that people individually are responsible for their own actions (which is true too).
But just how much influence do leaders have on those under their leadership? I’m all for personal responsibility, my father painted that into my head a bit too excessively as a child, but I feel many people overlook the influence leaders have/can have and how people as a group are weak in today’s world, incapable of applying necessary change where needed.
Islam teaches a lot of individual embetterment, but then there’s also shar’iah laws which are there to ensure proper leadership over a people.
Re: Society
Are you sure that it’s only the foundation of democracy and traditional shariah and not society/civilization in general? Would there not be chaos in society if everyone did their own thing? Aren’t there reasons behind a group being weak and unable to challenge or overthrow a leadership…reasons such as lack of money, fear of safety, limited by laws, etc?
Re: Society
Well, I mean it in the sense that power is given to leaders through popular vote by the common folk, i.e., being elected into power and not through birthright like much of the ancient world practiced.
But I’m also not implying that we shouldn’t have leaders - my apologies for the lack of details. I think we need leaders who are more traditional yet understand both the modern and traditional worlds. Some of the most corrupt leaders in the world are in Saudi and Pakistan (excluding those in the West), two examples of many more.
My perspective is that no matter how self-sufficient we are, we still need just leaders, something the modern world is completely deprived of. We live in a world where criminals are made to be heroes and heroes are made to be criminals. This is because we’re incapable of ruling ourselves without a single person or governing body, but we’ve allowed corrupt leadership to rule over us.
They say true power lies in the hands of the people. In an ideal situation, yes, but I believe that the modern world only provides that as an facade.
Re: Society
There are strong, creative people in every society. No one society is exclusive of them nor is any society without them. Some societies do a better job of creating said people than others.
The leaders play a big role in that but not all of it is reflective on the leader. Courts play a role, so does religion.
I don’t know how I feel with the theory that as a group of people we are like naive children in a dire need of a strong leader. As I see it, leaders have to fulfill the demands of its people not be there to tell them what their demands should be. When the leaders become servants that’s when the society benefits the most. But I don’t think one leader is sufficient to shape how strong a community is/isn’t.
You’re totally right when you say we have appointed through free will leaders that are unfit to rule over us. For one reason or another. But I don’t think the concept of true power lying in the people’s hands is a facade. Arab spring is a recent example. People still can make noticeable impact through participating in the process. We just choose not to. Options are there, though.
Re: Society
Good thread and discussion.
But I am sleepy. 
Re: Society
yes very good discussion going on…
Re: Society
There are far too many moderates in Society. Those who pride themseelves on being balanced, but actually stand for nothing. In every country, the conservatives reach for the past, the liberals for the future, while the moderates are smugly in the middle.
Too many wars have been fought due to initiation by conservatives, with the moderates weighing “both sides” while the liberal scream at the top of their lungs to stop the cycle of madness.
Re: Society
Thank God!
Re: Society
In an individual sense, people can be creative and driven, however, as a community people do need right leaders. We all would like to look up to something. Take a look at our leaders, be it a politician, a CEO, or the owner of the small grocery shop down the street, there are different types of leaders and there are also different types of leadership, a commander is not the same as a politician yet they both must know and understand one thing, and that is how people work, what makes them tick, knowing this one can attribute a certain position to a certain person, one can recruit the right people to aid oneself.
I would like to demonstrate an interesting example, suppose you have the brightest mathematician in world and an army soldier you are all on a desert island to which one are you going to listen to? It is not the mathematician, nor the army soldier, you are going to listen. However you’re going to listen to the one that seems more likely to help you survive.
Re: Society
The part I highlighted in bold is right on. You really hit the nail with that sentence. Ideally, this is what it should be. Even the word ‘government’ has its roots in Latin meaning “to control”. Democracy places power in the peoples’ hands but that doesn’t exist today. I’ve been living in the U.S. my whole life and I still feel like I serve the government and that that’s the mindset I’m supposed to have in order for me to be grateful for being able to live here.
People have the potential to have a lot of power but it rarely ever happens. The Arab spring is something that happened many decades too late. People allowed themselves to endure extreme conditions before finally uniting. Under normal conditions, that shouldn’t have taken any more than a couple weeks under a recognized leader. Regardless, the spring was temporary, not permanent. People need a permanent leader and temporary revolts don’t necessarily imply that people are able to rule over themselves, just shows they’re too pissed off and want to cause a ruckus to bring in a leader that they can actually look up to.
I believe we would all have to be perfect to not have leaders and be able to get by. All throughout our entire history, we have had leaders. Whether they were elected or born into power, society as a whole has always needed the image of a leader, of a single face. Even animals have leaders because it empowers them. It creates a sense of unity and protection, not just because they have to, but because they choose to by instinct. So instinctively, we humans are no different. This is why we elect town mayors, state/province governors, prime ministers, presidents, etc. - we need to place as many leaders as we can to micromanage our communities.
Unfortunately we don’t live in an ideal or perfect world, so my intention behind discussing this is to come to a consensus in the world we do live in today.
Re: Society
^So far you have made a case that people do need a leader to follow.
You have said the system of governance based on election of leader by people is flawed since the so called leaders do not deliver back to people what they expect.
True?
Re: Society
Ergo, dictatorship is the answer. Brilliant!
Re: Society
I believe certain elements of society are creative and driven while there are other elements which aren’t. There are elements of society that rather profit from misery, resentment and anger. Society as a whole is a mixture of good and bad with a whole lot of people in between the two fending for themselves. If society was egalitarian one could of course assume that the basic human tendencies of humanity like compassion, sympathy and the desire to help others would be far more common. Moreover there are people who just don’t care. There is a level of apathy in society based on the notion of us vs them. This is not unique to society now as it is a normal part of human history. That is why gentleman like Edhi or women like Mother Theresa are so rare and why so many aspire to be like them.
Our society is based on materialistic goals and desires. In that regard with a capitalist model in mind those who prosper are the ones willing to risk to succeed and in many cases cut corners and with money and wealth comes power. I disagree with the idea that a “leader” is needed when African and Asian societies have always focused on leadership councils for various men from various backgrounds and ages to decide what is the best course of action for a society.
After all power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Re: Society
You write so well!
Re: Society
Ideals. Couldn’t help but picture how different they ultimately could be.
If individuals do exist, like you said they do, give me one valid reason that explains why communities consisting of such individuals don’t?
Re: Society
Zafra, I agree with what you said except the part I highlighted in bold but I think you missed some of what I’m implying. Which societies are you referring to? We don’t have egalitarian societies because frankly reality isn’t a Disney movie. Every nation has “leadership councils”, some more than others. Regardless, it doesn’t negate the fact that there’s still always one figure head behind every ruling party, every council, every committee. What would happen to the U.S. if we had no president? Pakistan? Russia? China? India? Again I argue that it’s human nature to elect a leader because it gives us some sense of unity.
Lets say martial law was just implemented and you, along with many others, decide to form a small and well-organized resistance. Now you can all form a committee and assign responsibilities and roles, but how long will that work out for you? What will your committee do when there are major differences amongst you? What makes you think that the Republicans and Democrats here in the U.S. would continue to work together without a president? There’s a high risk that your group will end up splitting apart due to major differences. Eventually, a leader would have to be recognized in order to maintain that the committee itself is also kept together and vice versa, the committee could also serve to keep the leader’s power in check. Leaders are meant to inspire, bring hope and unite people. It’s much easier for this to be accomplished with a single face. Why do you think specific presidents’ and kings’ faces were sculpted or painted in history when it was the common folk who mostly shed their blood? Because people are incapable of organizing themselves in ways that a leader, or leading council even, can.
Whether we discuss about a leader or a leading committee, regardless, they still go hand-in-hand. They’re both still leaders, but again, there is always a face who gets credited for such.
Do I believe that we should all be strong enough to fix our own communities’ problems? Yes, of course; but human nature tends to say otherwise.
I don’t agree we have just leaders today save for a handful, and even those few are denied the power they rightfully deserve. Today’s world is centralized by a system of corruption and greed with no room for the righteous-hearted. As for people being able to govern themselves, it’s impossible because we’re not perfect. We need leaders to look up to, no?