leader (noun):

• One that leads or guides.
  One who is in charge or in command of others.
  One who heads a political party or organization.
  One who has influence or power, especially of a political nature.

My class was told to write a paper on a leader of our choice. Martin Luther King, Jr. was one suggestion, Mother Teresa another - there was a mention of Jesus, I believe. All good people, I can agree. However, I had another thought of what a leader was.

So I wrote my paper on Adolf Hitler.

Some people argued that Hitler wasn't a leader, he was a dictator. "Is a dictator not a leader? Hitler had influence, power, command. Who less than a leader could lead such a..." Here I faltered for words. I still do.

Nevertheless, that's beside the point.

I ask you: What makes a leader?
Mustn't both the sides of bad and good (for lack of better terms) have outstanding leaders?

A leader leads but has the love of his people.

That is the key difference I think between your definition of a leader and the definition in the minds of others.

A leader doesn't kill a godzillion Jews for shits n giggles.

I think you probably pissed off a bunch of people by deciding Hitler was a leader, because the term you chose or your teacher chose, is changing.

In the past it may have not included anything about the leading via fear versus leading via loyalty and love..

But in most contemporary people's minds, yeah...Hitler's a dictator, a murderer, but not really a leader. Not the kind we believe in anyhow.

But Hitler WAS a leader. Crazy, yes, but the fact that he did a lot of evil things did not stop the fact that he was a GOOD leader. Back in the day, the Germans LOVED him.

And with good reason. When he came into power, Germany's national economy was FAR worse than America's was. They were so battered down from the regulations of the armistice that ended World War I. Seriously. Do some history homework. Stories tell that their money was so worthless, a wheelbarrow of money was what was needed in order to buy a SINGLE loaf of bread.

And you know what? Hitler got them out of that. He got his country back on his feet. Germany prospered. Why shouldn't the Germans love him? Yes, he was twisted in some of his ways. Yes he was crazy. But he knew how to lead, and how to make his people love him.

And for the record, no, I'm not a Nazi. Nor do I support their ideals. But don't just write off a group of people because of the bad things they did. Learn from them. Learn the good as well as the bad.

And HELL, Stalin was a ton worse than Hitler was. Yet I don't see people talk shit about him nearly as much. Hell, Stalin killed a lot more of his own men. What was it... 6 million from his purges (at least)? 10 million in all (from what we know)? HM.

He was a leader in the objective term that one who is in charge of other people is a leader. Whether or not is a good one is a very different issue. A dictator is a subset of a leader by said definition.

Alegretto has a number of key points, though. He killed millions of people, and yet he revitalized Germany after WWI. It's a mixed issue - one that... would be very complex to address in a simple school ppaer, you'd think.

By my own terms, a leader is anyone whom can give advice and provide those under him/her with as much help as he/she can while knowing what limitations exist. A leader can understand what the people under he/she want and where exactly to stop when they want something jeopardizes the well-being of others (This refers back to mentioning knowing limits). He/She must also be able to speak for the one's whom are under his/her guidance and not leave out the minority opinion in favor of only the majority.


By my definition, Hitler was in fact a leader. He led those under him in the wrong direction through his own madness, but he was still a leader of the people. But as Alegretto did mention he did good for a country that was troubled. Though given how open the teacher left the topic, you could have really chosen worse as your choice of topic and still called them a leader.

I'm not saying he didn't lead.

I'm saying the reason you probably got mixed results when you presented your paper to class is that our current not completely dictionary definition of leader usually includees soem kind of loyalty attachment rather than fear.

A lot of the times, dictionaries do not keep up to date well enough, nor do they take into consideration definitions that only say, 75% of the population agree upon. They only put things in print that they're like 99% sure of or some such. It isn't just a "majority" thing, it's that the definition needs to be completely accurate, even if it doen't reflect the way a lot of people sort things differently.

If you put the following question on any quiz and hand it out to people, say a sample size of 100 in Germany and a sample size of 100 from the United States, you know what? I bet more than 100 out of 200 would pick C, even though Hitler's the most recent of those.


"Which one of these is least a leader?
A. Alexander The Great
B. Moses
C. Hitler
D. George Washington
E. Mars, God of War"


As for being a Nazi or not, I don't assume people are or aren't unless I ask and they answer or they somehow specify. Don't assume things about others; like how you assumed I know nothing about history and told me to go read up more about history... That's insulting, rude, and arrogant.

I dunno. I guess overall, I just don't think leader says nothing about personality. I don't really consider Bush a leader, for example. x.o'

...

"Mars, God of War" ????????

ANd yeah, I tend to go by exact dictionary. An, me and my discrete math. Everything is definitions pure and objective, lol.

I went to a leadership 101 workshop for girlscouts and we discussed this. A leader is one who leads, considers the best interests of a group, and is disciplined. Whether the goal is morally good or bad, is able to lead his/her group towards the goal.

We had a little debate whether Hitler was a good or bad leader. Gladly for me, moral issues weren't reall brought up. We decided he was more of an inteeligent and persuasive person more than a leader.

Persuasion and leading is different, so keep that in mind.

A leader is someone who will devote himself to his people to try and make something better, a group, a nation, a goverment. In my opinion, that is. Actually, there are all sorts of leaders. Lazy ones, Harsh ones, stupid ones, and normal ones, etc etc etc.

I truly think there's a connotative meaning behind that word.
It all depends on what you think a leader is.
There's of course the dictionary term,
but anyone can be a leader if you pretty much think they are.
I mean my father is.
He's not important in the world of politics,
but he knows how to get his way.
I consider that to be a leader...

Originally Posted by Alegretto

But Hitler WAS a leader. Crazy, yes, but the fact that he did a lot of evil things did not stop the fact that he was a GOOD leader. Back in the day, the Germans LOVED him.

And with good reason. When he came into power, Germany's national economy was FAR worse than America's was. They were so battered down from the regulations of the armistice that ended World War I. Seriously. Do some history homework. Stories tell that their money was so worthless, a wheelbarrow of money was what was needed in order to buy a SINGLE loaf of bread.

And you know what? Hitler got them out of that. He got his country back on his feet. Germany prospered. Why shouldn't the Germans love him? Yes, he was twisted in some of his ways. Yes he was crazy. But he knew how to lead, and how to make his people love him.

And for the record, no, I'm not a Nazi. Nor do I support their ideals. But don't just write off a group of people because of the bad things they did. Learn from them. Learn the good as well as the bad.

And HELL, Stalin was a ton worse than Hitler was. Yet I don't see people talk shit about him nearly as much. Hell, Stalin killed a lot more of his own men. What was it... 6 million from his purges (at least)? 10 million in all (from what we know)? HM.

i agree with you. at the time hilter became a "leader" it was the time of the great depression. germany was suffering more than the united states. they had no idea where to look for help and thats where hilter popped in and as time grew on they didn't know what he was doing with the jews and i don't blame them since they were "desperate" for help.

and they took the easy way out. sure hilter was a great "leader" but he was a bit crazy in the mind and looked to have his "perfect world" but still he was indeed a leader. sure he isn't in some eyes but he was one but they consider him more of a dicator on the worlds of killing and what not but yes stalin did kill more than hilter i agree with you but yet you don't see many talk about stalin.

we have all grown up knowing the name of hilter more than stalin why? i have no idea. i guess the views of killing jews for the "perfect world" could be a part of it or just because they didn't seem to care about stalin but more about hilter? i have no idea

but yes to answer your question he was a leader

Someone who works better on their own. But may need some ideas and advice from the people in their group. Not selfish or greedy though may be tense at times for being a leader is hard. :]

a leader to me is someone who can gain the trust, following , and loyalty of the masses..whether its for something good or bad.... :P

Again I fail to read the above posts (although, I crucially ask for someone to read mine if you deem the topic of utmost importance.)

There are three general types of leadership.
Common Leadership
Organizational Leadership
Team Leadership
-I'm sure there are others, I just like breaking things down...-

Common leadership is where in times of need or even in lull someone has the brass to step above their own needs to make things better for a group... even if they have no interest in the groups well being them self (although an interest is definitely a good thing).

Organizational Leadership is where someone is set in place to keep things organized. They may step up out of rank to do so, or be set by a higher rank to do so.

Team Leadership is where someone in a set group of people is in charge of leading the group regardless of self-motive. Usually to a common goal...

The best leaders are Common leaders because when they care they are not doing things for the betterment of themselves, but for the betterment of everyone (group or not) as a whole... all the worlds greatest leaders are this type. Those who are generally not considered good leaders, generally fall into either an organization leadership title (ie: military or local official) or a team leader (business management or sports coach)

The bottom line.. Leaders have to recognize not their gain, but their people's gains, at the cost of their own sacrifice, whether it be time, money, life, something...

I don't know.. Leadership is an idea more than a position, and leadership is a moment in time, and a lifestyle.

(this is all just babble really...)

A leader is someone you respect & and charismatic in inspiring its workers.

Originally Posted by Flaregon

A leader is someone you respect & and charismatic in inspiring its workers.

I don't feel that it is a leaders task to provide inspiration for workers (or team members), the inspiration has to be there for them to even respecting the leaders opinions and decisions. Charisma is helpful but not necessarily.