Malcolm X's Leadership Style Essay
DIFFERENT STYLES OF LEADERSHIP
Is there one perfect style or quality that defines good leadership? No, leadership can be represented by many different styles or qualities. Every leader has a different perspective and different ways to achieve their goals. For example one leader is patient and another is impatient, both of these leaders will be able to achieve their goals in these two different ways. The impatient one will make his or her followers work faster in order to achieve something, while the patient one will move slower but at the end of the day will achieve his goals too. From the the book of Tree Shaker Life of Nelson Mandela, we see that Mandela was a nonviolent, patient, caring and thoughtful leader. Not every …show more content…
oppressed political leader needs to be nonviolent or even participate in peaceful demonstrations. A good comparison would be one of Nelson Mandela and Malcolm X. They were both political leaders who wanted change and their rights to be respected. They both had different ways of approaching the situation, both had their advantages and disadvantages, and in the end something was achieved by both of them. Malcolm X’s leadership qualities were the opposite from Nelson Mandela.
He did not have the patience to tolerate what was going on in his country and so he chose a somewhat violent way of handling the situation. He cared for his people and he would go the extra mile to make sure they got what they deserved immediately. His leadership relied on what he could do right then and there, to stop the unfairness in his country. On the other hand Nelson Mandela was thoughtful in very unique ways. He chose the nonviolent way because he thought it was a more effective and a safe way of handling tough situations. In an interview he said, “Nonviolence was not a moral principle but a strategy; there is no moral goodness in using an ineffective weapon.”(43, Bill Keller). Mandela must have been the most patient leader to ever live. Even though a lot hardships fell along his way, he never showed any sign of impatience. He acted quietly and slowly, and deeply cared for his people. At his trial before he was sentenced to life in prison he said, “I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. it is an ideal which I hope to live for and see realized. But if it need be , my Lord, it is an ideal which I am prepared to die for.” (44, Bill
Keller) These leaders had very different styles and qualities, but still took the steps that fit them to get the job done. Everyone’s point of view counts. Leadership is all about being yourself, and following the direction that fits best with your own unique style. There is not one set way to be a good leader. Every leader has a different perspective and different ways to achieve their goals.
Is there one perfect style or quality that defines good leadership? No, leadership can be represented by many different styles or qualities. Every leader has a different perspective and different ways to achieve their goals. For example one leader is patient and another is impatient, both of these leaders will be able to achieve their goals in these two different ways. The impatient one will make his or her followers work faster in order to achieve something, while the patient one will move slower but at the end of the day will achieve his goals too. From the the book of Tree Shaker Life of Nelson Mandela, we see that Mandela was a nonviolent, patient, caring and thoughtful leader. Not every …show more content…
oppressed political leader needs to be nonviolent or even participate in peaceful demonstrations. A good comparison would be one of Nelson Mandela and Malcolm X. They were both political leaders who wanted change and their rights to be respected. They both had different ways of approaching the situation, both had their advantages and disadvantages, and in the end something was achieved by both of them. Malcolm X’s leadership qualities were the opposite from Nelson Mandela.
He did not have the patience to tolerate what was going on in his country and so he chose a somewhat violent way of handling the situation. He cared for his people and he would go the extra mile to make sure they got what they deserved immediately. His leadership relied on what he could do right then and there, to stop the unfairness in his country. On the other hand Nelson Mandela was thoughtful in very unique ways. He chose the nonviolent way because he thought it was a more effective and a safe way of handling tough situations. In an interview he said, “Nonviolence was not a moral principle but a strategy; there is no moral goodness in using an ineffective weapon.”(43, Bill Keller). Mandela must have been the most patient leader to ever live. Even though a lot hardships fell along his way, he never showed any sign of impatience. He acted quietly and slowly, and deeply cared for his people. At his trial before he was sentenced to life in prison he said, “I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. it is an ideal which I hope to live for and see realized. But if it need be , my Lord, it is an ideal which I am prepared to die for.” (44, Bill
Keller) These leaders had very different styles and qualities, but still took the steps that fit them to get the job done. Everyone’s point of view counts. Leadership is all about being yourself, and following the direction that fits best with your own unique style. There is not one set way to be a good leader. Every leader has a different perspective and different ways to achieve their goals.