There’s a war going on outside no man is safe from and the cry for true leadership in such potentially explosive times is deafening.

Some long for the comfort of familiarity. The prospect of change is frightening for them, “since it is not always an indication of progress”, they explain. They look for someone they’ve become accustomed to, flaws and all. Someone experienced. They realize leadership is twofold. That sometimes one must be selfish-and perhaps duplicitous-in order to accomplish the greater good. For how can one lead unless others follow? So they excuse the dual manner by which their leader politics, seeing both faces as necessary. For them, it is an inherent aspect of recruiting followers to flash a smile, but in this game, people must also be reminded that they can be crushed, if need be. Allies and opponents alike. However, the danger in ruling by fear is being pounced once one is no longer considered fearsome. And as the masses remain fickle, sure footing is tough to come by. Also, speaking to people in their own language may win limited support, but by nature of that, does not one’s own identity become a mystery? Does it even exist? The trouble in trying to be all things to all people is that eventually, the questions pile up-including the manner by which one came to power-until they have nearly eclipsed the candidate. But for some those questions do not matter. In such uncertain times, excellence is excellence by any means.

Others say “f*ck that”. They long for true change. “Something I can feel”, they pine. They look for someone with potential. Not only for an immediate replacement, but ultimately for how the game is played altogether. And they believe they’ve already seen the changing of the guard. Dismissing any concerns of their leader’s youth, they proclaim that being green in the ways of a deeply flawed game is no concern at all. It is a blessing. They are captivated by a charm and talent so intrinsically genuine and powerful that it must mark the dawn of a new era. Right? An era stating that leadership by committee is a sign of strength, not of weakness. That in this game, no man is an island. Right? However, the danger in sharing leadership is that it isn’t long before one realizes that no one wants to share responsibility. Is that not the essence of the aforementioned singular approach? Was that essence not born from a subjection to years of criticism? Is The trouble with potential is that it never truly belongs to the possessor, but to the observer and until it is realized to everyone’s satisfaction, there will only be questions. But for some those questions do not matter. In such rocky times, progress is inevitable.

That being said, pick a side.