Liberal Leaders and Conservative Spokesmen

Liberals often ridicule the lousy leaders produced by Conservatives and point to the outstanding Liberal leaders as an example of their superior intellect. It is absolutely true that Liberals produce better leaders than Conservatives, but it has nothing to do with intellect.

As I pointed out in earlier postings, Liberals are intrinsically divided into interest groups and exist as a potent force only if they join together in a coalition. This is because by definition, Liberals are people who want to change things because they are unhappy with the way they are now. By the Anna Karenina Principle (explained by Jarod Diamond in his extraordinary book, Guns, Germs, and Steel) there are all kinds of ways for people to be unhappy, hence the natural divisions among Liberals.

Liberals need leaders. They want to go somewhere. They want to change. Liberals need leaders to focus and direct them to achieve this change.

Since Liberals are divided, they need leaders who can unite them. Each Liberal interest group needs leaders to drive their interests, but Liberals as a group need sort of super-leaders to coalesce the disparate interests groups into a single powerful party group that can get political power. Otherwise, they will amount to little. Without and overall leader, they will expend as much or more energy competing with one another as with pushing their agenda.

Necessity is the mother of invention. Liberals need leaders; therefore, they will produce them. And they produce good ones, and lots of them. By “good” ones, I mean, effective, successful, not necessarily morally good. Look at good or great leaders currently or throughout history. Nearly always they are Liberals. Not necessarily Liberals by the modern day list of issues and position, but Liberals in the definitional sense, they are leading change to the system. It is virtually a tautology.

Conservatives are quite different. Conservatives are people who are more or less happy and satisfied with the current structure and functioning of their society. They don’t want to change it, they want to preserve it and benefit from it as it is. They don’t want to go anywhere. They don’t need or want leaders.

In fact, in general, Conservatives don’t even like leaders, although they make claims to the contrary. Remember what leaders do, they lead. They lead you somewhere different from where you are. Conservatives are happy where they are. They are more or less satisfied with where they are. They do not need someone to take them somewhere else. As it turns out, if someone purports to be their “leader” tries to take them somewhere else, they balk. They reject the leader. They abandon him as followers.

What Conservatives want are not leaders but spokesmen. Conservatives want someone who will articulate their point of view well and make their case. This is something Liberals often fail to realize. Conservatives already know their views and opinions, their position on issues. They want someone who will express these views articulately and will give good explanations and justifications for them. They are not interested in someone telling them what to believe. When Liberals hear some Conservative “leader” like Rush Limbaugh express Conservative views and then find Conservatives adhere to those views, they mistakenly think that the Conservatives are “getting their marching orders from Rush Limbaugh.” Not so, it is the other way around. Rush Limbaugh is getting his orders from them, in a sense. He is merely articulating very well their position. If Rush Limbaugh were to try to lead Conservatives to new points of view, they would abandon him.

Look at President George Bush’s attempts to lead Conservatives in different directions away from where they already stand. It hasn’t worked on immigration or any other such issue. However, they rally to him when he espouses their views.

Liberals on the other hand, do need someone to tell them where to go, what to believe. Being unhappy is not enough to clearly know what you want. Neither is wanting to change. Liberals need leaders to coalesce and direct their views and agenda. Furthermore, since Liberals as a group are a coalition, they are full of disparate and contradictory opinions. They need someone to somehow suppress all this and give them a clear vision. Such people are ready at hand. There are many volunteers. The best of them rise to the top. Thus Liberals have outstanding leaders, and lots of them