speech about a great leader
Answers
Answer:
here u go!!
Explanation:
many great leaders acquire their knowledge through leadership, but was is leadership?.Leadership is quite a word in itself and I can very much relate with it because I am myself holding a position of senior manager in my present company. If given a chance, everyone would want to lead and be followed. But has anyone ever realized how difficult this task is and what roles and responsibilities come with it?
First of all, please understand that leadership doesn’t involve domination or subjugation of the weaker sex. The world is already full with such people who have an ardent desire to rule and take charge of other peoples’ lives. But this is not the trait of a good leader.
The true leader is someone who earns respect through his rightful actions and mass following without any dictatorship. He inspires others to follow his footsteps and become the guiding light for the humanity. The great leader is someone who carries the torch of wisdom and enlightens the society thereby leading people to the path of progress and growth. Besides, the true meaning of leadership is having the requisite ability to enable people want to follow you while being under no compulsion as such to do so. Leaders are those people who set certain benchmarks and try to achieve those benchmarks by allowing people to judge them according to their actions and endeavors. The goals are set and all might is put towards achieving those goals, but without compromising with the ethics and morals – this is the true mark of a great leader.
Leaders who possess great leadership qualities effectively channelize their energy and devote themselves for the growth and progress of humanity. The restrictions or obligations that he/she imposes on himself/herself enable him/her to rise against all odds and never bow down to the circumstances. Always remember that the love of supreme excellence is found in a great leader. Thus, a true leader is someone who is able to establish a connection with the almighty and realizes by faith that he/she is a mere instrument in the hands of Him and dedicates his entire life to become an inspirer and guide of the higher sentiments and ambitions of the people.
He/she who is a leader in the true sense of the term has to pay the price for his forbearance and moral restraints. He/she does good to the society selflessly, i.e. without expecting anything in return. This leads to further enhancement or cleansing of his/her soul and keeping a check on his/her personal desires, which in turn allows him/her to become an extraordinary being.
You can add a small para one great leader after this too.....
I hope this has helped you..
mark me the. brainliest please friend!!
Answer:
Sanskrit literature identifies ten types of leaders. Defining characteristics of the ten types of leaders are explained[by whom?] with examples from history and mythology.[6][need quotation to verify]
In the field of political leadership, the Chinese doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven postulated the need for rulers to govern justly and the right of subordinates to overthrow emperors who appeared to lack divine sanction.[7]
Pro-aristocracy thinkers[8] have postulated that leadership depends on one's "blue blood" or genes.[9] Monarchy takes an extreme view of the same idea, and may prop up its assertions against the claims of mere aristocrats by invoking divine sanction (see the divine right of kings). On the other hand, more democratically inclined theorists have pointed to examples of meritocratic leaders, such as the Napoleonic marshals profiting from careers open to talent.[10]
In the autocratic/paternalistic strain of thought, traditionalists recall the role of leadership of the Roman pater familias. Feminist thinking, on the other hand, may object to such models as patriarchal and posit against them emotionally attuned, responsive, and consensual empathetic guidance, which is sometimes associated[by whom?] with matriarchies.[11]
Comparable to the Roman tradition, the views of Confucianism on "right living" relate very much to the ideal of the (male) scholar-leader and his benevolent rule, buttressed by a tradition of filial piety.[12]
Leadership is a matter of intelligence, trustworthiness, humaneness, courage, and discipline ... Reliance on intelligence alone results in rebelliousness. Exercise of humaneness alone results in weakness. Fixation on trust results in folly. Dependence on the strength of courage results in violence. Excessive discipline and sternness in command result in cruelty. When one has all five virtues together, each appropriate to its function, then one can be a leader. — Jia Lin, in commentary on Sun Tzu, Art of War[13]
Machiavelli's The Prince, written in the early 16th century, provided a manual for rulers ("princes" or "tyrants" in Machiavelli's terminology) to gain and keep power. In the 19th century the elaboration of anarchist thought called the whole concept of leadership into question. (Note that the Oxford English Dictionary traces the word "leadership" in English only as far back as 1821.[14]) One response to this denial of élitism came with Leninism - Lenin (1870-1924) demanded an élite group of disciplined cadres to act as the vanguard of a socialist revolution, bringing into existence the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Other historical views of leadership have addressed the seeming contrasts between secular and religious leadership. The doctrines of Caesaro-papism have recurred and had their detractors over several centuries. Christian thinking on leadership has often emphasized stewardship of divinely provided resources—human and material—and their deployment in accordance with a Divine plan. Compare servant leadership.[15]
For a more general take on leadership in politics, compare the concept of the statesperson.
Explanation: