Many debates seem to boil down to arguing over who needs to be in charge, and who needs to do as they are told. Politics is the most obvious example, but the idea lurks behind a lot of conversations. In businesses, some managers expect to issue orders and the employees obey for efficiency. Others want feedback and even pushback to ensure blind spots don't go ignored.
This isn't new. Aristotle discussed the topic of slavery, and argued that some people may be "natural slaves." Scholars of ancient philosophy tend to theorize Aristotle meant either individual temperament or even explaining developmental disabilities, though I'm not convinced by the latter. He also had assumptions rooted in his experience of his own society with Greek city-states and their forms of government.
The idea of natural roles isn't exclusive to his time, of course. "Leadership" seminars are a big deal in the business world, and there was a trend a while back to adapt Sun Tzu's The Art of War as a business model. There's a perception that a boss needs to be an "alpha" to gets things done. Even Incel "culture" (barf!) has "alphas," "betas," and "sigmas," again assuming people have an inherent nature as leaders, followers, and lone wolves, respectively. The concept of fighting over being the pack alpha isn't even part of wolf nature, though, to say nothing of humanity.
I think rigid hierarchies of titles and political power are a counterfeit of healthy community structure. The healthiest communities seem to have not a total ruler, but rather trusted individuals who can assume a leadership role where they are best suited, and people are free to choose whether to follow
The best managers and bosses I have had were the ones who had worked as employees before, and led by example while always being ready to lend a hand. My department manager at my summer job in a theme park comes to mind, as do my library branch managers.
Some people have a pathological urge to be in charge no matter what. It could be as simple as planning a hike, and they want to treat it like they've placed themselves in commend of a military expedition. Suddenly, everything has to be done their way on their timetable. Disagreement is treason, and failure is punishable by death!
Other people believe blind obedience is good citizenship. I see this a lot in social media, especially in political debates. "So-and-so was elected, so do as they say!" Does that make them right? "The government says we must do X!" How does that prove X is the right response, especially if I have counterpoint Y? This kind of unthinking demand for compliance makes me wonder if Aristotle was right after all.
Some anarchists and communists argue humans should be completely egalitarian and non-hierarchical, but I disagree with that response because individuals differ in knowledge, experience, physical capacity, and virtue. Leadership is a fluid concept for me. I lean toward the idea that if something needs to be done, I'll take charge, but if someone else more experienced, I'll defer to them while doing my best to offer either support or criticism as needed. If I disagree too much, I'll stay out of the way unless they are doing something I must oppose directly.
What about you, though? Can you lead when necessary? Are you able to follow instructions from others? Can you challenge a leader without trying to seize power? Can you withdraw support when a leader goes wrong and won't change? What are your own experiences with good or bad leaders and followers?
I think personality types play heavily into leaders vs followers. Birth order often plays into it as well. For example: I have an older sister who loves to be in charge and tell others what to do. She has frequently clashed with a cousin who is also an older sister with an equally strong personality.
I am a good follower, but if I see what I think is a better way, I speak up.
Now that I have my sister fishing for me, I am the leader and I do not like it, she thinks I am on her case all day. I see what she is doing can get her hurt, so I have to be on her.
😀
If I challenge my husband, he thinks I am trying to take power.
I often see in others that the impulse to obey seems almost instinctual or subconscious rather than a reasoned or logical decision. Most often whatever they say seems to be an attempt by their conscious mind to justify that belief-system that they've adopted without really thinking it through. I can't say I'm a natural leader, but I do try to lead by example. But other than inspiring some people over the years to get more interested in Bitcoin and gold & silver, I think my impact has been pretty limited. But even if it's just my kids that try to follow my example, I'll count that as a win...
I've led when necessary but I haven't liked it. I had a job once and I didn't like that either. I'm neither a natural leader nor a follower.
I'm useless at following instructions.
I tend to shrink and do what I'm told, and relentlessly bitch about them behind their back 😜