We saw, Friday, how self-styled intellectuals maintain a prickly sensitivity to who may, or may not, be esteemed as worthy of their “rank” in society. This would be harmless enough – but for their not-so-hidden ambitions and agenda. Intellectuals feel inherently entitled to rule – and to a privilege that extends to them freedom from the constraints they would (for the latter’s good, of course) impose on others. Consider our traveling intellectual’s chilling revelation of these during a discussion . . .
The overseas visitor travels about the United States, recording his impressions, examining them to divine the very meaning of the country, to psychoanalyze its current condition. But like many psychoanalysts, he reserves to himself – not to his subjects – the right to determine what constitutes psychological health. For you see, as he does not hesitate to make abundantly and repeatedly clear, he is an intellectual . . .
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
There is a rising debate about the role of intellectuals in modern society. Some decry the attack against intellectualism as arising in populism. It’s an odd idea, which presumes that intellectuals are solely possessed of rational enlightenment, and that the rest of us are merely the ignorant, drooling mob vulnerable to manipulation by any passing unenlightened, anti-intellectual demagogue. But the truth is that populism isn’t a state of intellectual development . . .
The intellectual – especially in Europe -is a modern-day pretender to the throne. Or, at least, to the elevated role of the noble – particularly after the Enlightenment – as the secular interpreter, guide, and even director of the affairs of the benighted masses. But as we have come to know, the royals were not exceptionally intelligent. . .
One of the more popular analogies used to describe a leader is that of an orchestra conductor. The image has everything the most ardent leadership guru could want – flair, style, sophistication, artistry, commanding presence, mastery of the material, complete control over the process. There are two other key elements strongly emphasized . . .
Have you ever been to a sporting event, and seen someone try to initiate a wave around the stadium by himself (it’s always a “he”)? Looked pretty silly, didn’t he? Sometimes he will become indignant at the unresponsiveness, and attempt to motivate the crowd, first with passionate exhortations, then with scolding reproaches, and finally with desperate pleading. At last he resumes his seat, surrounded by averted glances and embarrassed silence. Wave over. . .
A common assertion about the power of superlative individual leadership is that corporate culture emanates from it. There are those who advise such leaders on how to “create” or “change” culture to suit the latter group’s evolving needs or the former group’s passing enthusiasms. Have you ever tried to do that?
