On Leadership Yet Again

Contrast.

Following up on this, I would like to contrast what I term political leadership vs. functional leadership. By political I do NOT mean electoral politics or political parties per se, but instead Yockey's definition of politics as "activity in relation to power." Instead, what I mean by political is the activity of people to obtain and maintain positions of power/leadership.  There typically is much political (broadly defined) maneuvering required to obtain and maintain power, with skill in handling/influencing/controlling people being essential. This can be contrasted to functional leadership, which describes how effective the person is once they are in the power of power/leadership.

As I have written before, the two types of leadership are rarely seen in the same individual. The type of dark triad psychopath well fitted to obtain and maintain power, is not well suited to put the good of whatever they are leading above that of their selfish personal issues. Further, such people may simply not have the abilities to be effectively functional leaders; they may simply be good at promoting themselves but not very effective in actually doing well as a leader.  You may suppose that a lack of effectiveness would delegitimize the leader and endanger their position.  But ask yourself how often inept leaders keep on rolling along (Der Movement is a good example of this), protecting their interests, sabotaging more competent subordinates, gaslighting their followers to make them believe all is well, and attacking critics.

On the other hand, the type of efficient, often personally disinterested, competent individual most often does not have the personality type and character to obtain and maintain power to begin with. Such people are often outmaneuvered by, and sabotaged by, more politically savvy types. So political leaders outcompete functional leaders leaving us with people in charge who are selfish psychopaths who inevitably lead their followers to disaster.  Now, there are some rare individuals who couple political and functional leadership and those are very valuable people. But that is rare. Can competent people rise to power based on competence alone, even if they don't have strong political traits?  How often has this happened?  Almost never.

Just like it is difficult to dislodge incompetent leaders who are skilled politicians, as described above, it is difficult - nearly impossible - for competent "technicians" to rise to power if they are bad at political maneuvering. Keep in mind that in order to be an effective leader one must first become a leader to begin with.  And if obtaining power requires strong political skills, and if such skilled politicians are often incompetent at effectiveness at other things, then we can see why leadership niches are typically filled by psychopaths whose only skill is self-advancement. It is this temporal effect - that one must first become a leader to be an effective leader - is one underlying reason why political leaders constantly outcompete functional leaders.

On "movement" "leadership" - 

Ignoring the estrogenic vocal patterns and focusing on the content here.

...orders from Moscow...

Yes, re: the Holodomor, “orders from Moscow” coming, to a large extent, from non-Europeans (e.g., Georgians and Jews), not from ethnic Russians.

...people who gave you the Holodomor...

Really? Russians?  No.  The leadership of the USSR that caused the Holodomor was for the most part not Russian (or Ukrainian), not Slavic, and not European.

Johnson criticizing Der Movement – well, I agree with that, but when I do that, I’m “paranoid” and “insane.” I note that some of the people that Johnson says who have the “stupid” takes - but who he won't name - on the subject are folks he is buddies with and has on his livestreams.

Much of it that has good sense in it was what I had already wrote here. That was written two months before the current conflict; further, I had earlier wrote other things on this topic. See this.  And this.  On Putin.  See this. Jewish neocons and Russia. Standing with Russia against Asia. I can continue, but I'm getting tired of going through my blog archives. But, hey, keep on ignoring EGI Notes and praising Johnson's "insights" and "good sense," because, well you know. Gee, Greg, that "non-existent" ethnic affirmative action program is really working wonders for you, isn't it?

Thus, all of the Johnson sycophants praising him for his "good sense" should note that there is nothing original in his comments. I agree with much that was said about Putin, Zelenskyy, and NATO, since I have been saying the same all along.

As one prime example of "Johnsonism" – first he says that it makes sense that Ukraine be in NATO, then he says at the end that a neutral Finlandization of Ukraine would be good. So, having nations in NATO is understandable good sense, but then Finland’s neutrality is also good sense

Bad judgment, self-contradiction, coupled to a complete lack of self-awareness.

Gee, it seems Strom is no longer a Putin fanboy. That's great, Kevin. Except some of us were wise to Trad Vlad from the beginning. But, unfortunately, we can't all be ethnically Norwegian, so who cares if we're right and you're wrong, eh?

Contra my critics, my recent comments here about Johnson and Strom are not "insane, bitter, and paranoid," nor do they contradict my recent pledge to focus more on "big picture" "movement" issues. This IS a big picture issue. A weak dissident movement requires prudent leadership that exercises good judgment, not people who make one mistake after another and who lurch from one catastrophe to another.

Activists need to stop trying to parse the words and actions of public figures like Putin, looking for hidden signs of implicit support. No, we need to look for, and demand, open, explicit support. Stop deluding yourselves that some public figure is "secretly on our side" but is "playing a deep chess game."

If the authoritarian "strongman" leader of a major nuclear power cannot openly speak his mind on issues of race, culture, and nation, then no one can, and you may as well give up and close up shop.

It's actually worse than that - the Putin regime has long been actively persecuting Russian racial nationalists. Really, at what point do we all agree that the entire "movement" is a perpetual "face palm?"