OOTS #1062 - The Discussion Thread

[Snails]

And the answer to your question is no: The test of a leader isn't that she ruthlessly punishes subordinates who don't toe the line. The test of a leader is that the crew follow the leader without the need for such measures. If you're having to hang subordinates for mutiny, a big part of the failure lies with you for failing to head it off.

The ancient Chinese philosophers enjoyed debating this issue.

On one extreme, the Confucians argued that authority of the ruler comes from manifest virtue -- that their superior wisdom will persuade that the best bet for peace, justice, and prosperity is their rule.

On the other extreme were the Legalists, who argued that authority is only maintained by unflinching and relentless enforcement of the law, by any means necessary.

IMO the problem here is both views are fatally naive. (Not that even these philosophers necessarily literally and truly believed either position. They did enjoy debating, however.)

Regarding Confucianism, without the explicit possibility of negative consequences for unreasonable behavior, debates about virtuous future paths can devolve into arguments where whining absent strong reasoning is encouraged.

Regarding Legalism, with a shared concept of justice guiding goals and actions, simply a set of rules encourages rampant "whatever I can get away with is fair" attitudes, which promotes myriad kinds of corruption.

IMHO, you are arguing too close to the Confucian extreme. Andi is a whiner who fails to demonstrate any kind of superior insight. The crew does not show any notable respect for her either -- her opinions are so great only in her mind.

Bandana's main error is she is trying too hard to be the leader that you want her to be, by hesitating too long to impose any negative consequences on Andi for her tawdry behavior. That is not to say I think you necessarily agree with Bandana's actions in detail. But Bandana does keep thinking that reasoning has anything to do with Andi's position, when that is probably incorrect.