Since time immemorial, leadership across the world has been reduced to the paradigm of strength: weak versus strong, even when effective authority can be manifested and exercised through different channels. The Myth of the Strong Leader was written by professor Archie Brown of Oxford University, published by Basic Book in the Arizona United States in April 2014 and it has 466 pages in volume. Comprising of eight chapters, it covers world affairs by highlighting different management styles while it concludes with a question to the audience on the type of leadership, they find desirable. Furthermore, the author says that “when more power is accumulated in a person’s hands, he begins to believe in his indispensability” (24). The author’s purpose in the book is the unification of different discussions on authoritarian, democratic, revolutionary, and totalitarian types of authorities across the globe. This paper reviews the “Strong Leader” ideology by reviewing the book and exploring the central idea Brown wanted to pass to the readers.
While people are accustomed to blaming and praising leaders depending on their success, they seldom take time to reflect on what constitutes one’s failure, especially in economic development. In this well-thought political survey book, the author challenges the myopic and wistful belief among people that dominant leaders are those who manage to pass their policies by outwitting their colleagues. As such, they are the most admirable and desirable among the citizens. However, Brown argues that people are unable to realize that too much power in an office or position changes the behavior of the occupant (Brown 65). The author is successful in highlighting that there are many parameters to look at when one is analyzing the qualities of a good manager. He gives examples of past presidents in America such as Roosevelt, Truman and Reagan; Great Britain Premiers; Blair and Thatcher to illustrate how individual characters determine the type of a leader.
Although citizenry around the world is presumed to be in favor of a strong form of authority, the book contradicts this view by asserting that autocratic leaders are ineffective as compared to democratic ones. The title, “Strong leader” symbolizes those in authority who make decisions even in areas they are not experts without consulting experts. As such, the author gives examples of fascism in the 1930s and communism especially in Russia by Stalin, and the current regime in North Korea (Brown 27). Conversely, these styles are prominent in democratic states by specific individuals where their personal decisions result in far-reaching consequences for the people. Through the book, he argues that despite the political system in a given state or country and the physic of a leader, personal decisions from such leaders are bound to be faulty. Further, it discredits the practice by premiers to applause and credit themselves on party achievements. For example, he highlights the use of media by Tony Blair at the expense of the ministers.
Furthermore, the far-reaching assertations by the book present an analysis of regimes ranging from the 20th to the 21st centuries. Consequently, the author contrasts the leadership styles by expounding that people prefer charismatic and strong individuals. “The rule of Adolf Hitler and Mussolini in Italy are incidents that show that such individuals cause more problems than finding solutions” (Brown 43). However, going through the book one is likely to encounter the occasional uncertainty by an author who is torn between carrying a survey on leadership styles among politicians or writing an overview of personal characteristics of those in authority and how they shape governments.
In summation, the book sheds light on the essence of consultation, persuasion, and negotiation by those in authority. By giving examples of past presidents, premiers, and current leaders, it sets a background from which readers can relate and evaluate the people they elect into office. The assertions about the 20th-century governments are factual and well-articulated, thereby showing how Brown’s work is authentic. Lastly, the book challenges one to reconsider those they elect by asking, “What is the future for leadership and which is the best style for the people?”.
Work Cited
Brown, Archie. The Myth of the Strong Leader: Political Leadership in Modern Politics. Basic Books, 2014.