| SHU-A5-GS Introduction Does the leader make history or does a historical moment make the leader? This is a very touch question, much alike as which came first the chicken or the egg? Which of the two has troubled many scholars and historians throughout the years. This paper will explain both sides of the quote and try to give a better and balanced understanding to what a leader is. Thesis The “Great Man Theory” claims that leadership skills are inherited; therefore the decisions a leader makes throughout time are very exceptional and unique. Along with those unique qualities that a leader possesses, he forms history. This leader naturally has the characteristics that regardless of the situation, he has certain gifts and is able to contact and create momentous moments in history. Supporters of this theory claim that if it had been a different leader at certain times in history then the historical moments that we have today would not have existed. An example of this is Thomas Jefferson during the American Revolution. The people needed a leader who would be able to unite them and keep the new country secure. Scapegoating comes into place when a leader proves to not be a “Great Man” such as Julius Caesar, Tito, and Chaucesku. Antithesis On the other hand, the situational theory describes the leader as one who is a product of the historical moment. Once a society’s equilibrium is upset and tangled, then the person who comes with a solution at the time of need becomes the leader. This theory says that the historical moment makes the leader. A prime example of the situational theory relates to Winston Churchill. Churchill emerged as a leader when history was ready for him. England needed a leader that would be able to emerge and rally through this rigid war. Throughout history, this theory seems to be the less popular of the two for the reason that people do not like thinking that destiny and outside forces are guiding them, but that they are guiding their destiny themselves. Being able to point a finger at somebody is much more preferable rather than admitting that what happened was unavoidable. Conclusion Concluding to this day, neither theory is backed up by a great majority. A more balanced compromise and view has been shaped that is more accepted. This view recognizes what leaders do today and also the time related impact of history on creating a leader. Once again a fair view is the logical way to look at it and represent leadership to date. |