Are you a leader or a follower

Understanding a Leader : There are only two types of people in the community: leaders or followers.

Most of us are followers with only a few amongst us with leadership qualities. A leader is the symbolic soul of a group who acts as a catalyst for change and transformation. The group may be a family, business, political party, community, nation, civilization or any other organization. The actions of the leaders are shaped by the memory and experience, propelled by desires.

The state of consciousness and their corresponding mind-body expressions determine the response to a situation. In every situation, there is one or more of the following seven responses, which decide the type of leadership, says Deepak Chopra in soul of the leadership.

The most primitive response is the response of “fight or flight”. Leaders with this response have no higher aims in life. They only believe in do or die.

The next type of response is “reactive, impulsive or egoistic response” and leaders with this response are egoistic, find fault in every failure and do not want to accept failure in life.

The next response is a response of “inner protection or restful alertness.” Leaders with this behavioral response are balanced, believe in meditation and do not react in gains or losses.

The fourth response is the response of “intuition or knowingness”. Leaders with a predominant intuitive response are not only relaxed and balanced but also take every adversity as an opportunity. They accept situations and persons as they are.

The fifth response is “creative response” and the leaders with this response exhibit creative behaviour. They create something new out of every adversity.

The last two responses are “response of visionary or higher guidance” and response of unity or sacred response. Most leaders with any of these responses have behaviour suggestive of sainthood. There are very few people today with these types of leadership qualities.

Just as there is a rising hierarchy built into us there is a rising hierarchy of needs. The needs are need for survival, safety, achievement & success, belonging, self-worth, expression, renewal, spiritual growth, vision and transcendence.

Leaders and followers co-create each other. Leaders exist to embody the values that the followers want and the followers exist to fuel the leader’s vision from within themselves.

Only those leaders who understand the hierarchy of needs and response succeed in life and those leaders who aim only for external goals such as money, victory and power falter when it counts the most.

 Depending upon the response, the leaders therefore, are classified as protector, entrepreneur or politician, team builder, nurturer, innovator, visionary and saint.

The leaders also respond differently during failure, when their needs are unfulfilled or end up in inappropriate responses. Leaders whose needs are survival and safety and responses are based on fight or flight end up with terrorist movements, corruption, gang wars and criminal activities.

Leaders whose needs and responses are based on achievement and ego, the failure will make them victims of empty fame and burnt out celebrities. They will also end up as corrupt politicians.

Leaders whose needs are based on belongings and responses are based on inner protection when fail ends up with hostility and divide and conquer strategies.

When leaders whose needs and responses are based on nurturing and intuitiveness fail, they end up with creating racial differentiations, welfare systems and social security systems.

When leaders whose needs and responses are based on renewal and expressions, fail, they end up with biological warfare, internet debacle, hacking, information sabotage and nuclear wars.

Finally when leaders with visionary and sacred needs and responses fail, they end up with religious fundamentalism, communalism, idealism and unionalism.

We in the community today are lacking leaders. The followers need someone with good leadership qualities with creative, visionary or sacred response. Only then the present status of violence in the community, suicidal blasts, all over, killing of innocent people, will come under control.

Making of a good leader

One of the main reasons for any conflict is engaging in “violent communication” on a daily basis. A violent communication is based on judgment and not observations. A violent communication can be in thoughts, action, speech or writings. A non-violent communication, on the other hand, is either based on observations or on individualized opinions. These observations or opinions are always written or spoken as quote-unquote.

“Congress calls Anna Hazare 'unelected tyrant' (TOI)”

“Hazare team targets ‘arrogance of power’ (Calcutta Telegraph)”

“Threat to democracy is from unelected tyrants, says Congress (TOI)”

These are few of the latest headlines in the media that reflect a war of words and hence, violent communication between the Government and Anna Hazare team.

If we look at the current scenario, both Baba Ramdev earlier and now the Anna Hazare team are violently communicating through the media.

The three ‘Cs’ of violent communication are: Criticize, condemn and complaint.

Using violent communication is expected of a politician, in this age of Kalyuga, but for a Satyagrahi team or a saint to communicate in such a manner is beyond comprehension.

Most of the recent statements of Anna Hazare team, through media, press conferences and during their Satyagraha demonstrations, have used phrases that give an impression of violent communication.

A medical perspective on this is that reading a violent communication incites negative feelings in the heart of the readers, which can even produce a feeling of anger.

Any righteous fight, which is based on violent communication like criticism, condemning and complaining will soon lose its credibility.

When Anna Hazare started his movement, he began on a positive note based on the Gandhian philosophy of non violence. Here, one must bear in mind that violence does not only stand for riots; it also denotes violence in your speech and thoughts.

The general public joined Anna Hazare in large numbers, especially, the younger generation, in his non violence approach to anti corruption. His non violent approach won the attention of the general public, media and the government and a committee was soon constituted. But, since then, the communication to the public by the Anna Hazare team has not been based on the principles of non violence.

In Sat Yuga and Treta Yuga, when the majority of the people were truthful and there was Ram Rajya, there too were people like Ravana and his team, though in minority, still created hell for the society. Similarly, the Dwapar Yuga, the era of Lord Krishna, had people like Kansa. Likewise, in Kal Yuga, when we have majority of Ravanas and Kansas, we are bound to have Satyugi people, even though in minority. Just as Ravana and Kansa created havoc for the society in their respective eras, in Kal Yuga too, some Satyugi people, even if in minority, can create havoc for the Kalyugi people in majority. 

After the death of Bhagwan Sai Baba, many people began thinking that they have got another Avtar in the guise of Anna Hazare to lead this Satyugi minority population.

Whether a person is a Satyugi or Kalyugi is decided by presence of some or all the four characteristics as mentioned in Srimad Bhagwad: Truthfulness (Satya), Selfless hard work (Tap), positive thoughts (purity) and Daya & Daan (Charity).

1.      If all the four characteristics are present, the person is Satyugi.

2.       If truthfulness is absent, the person is Tretyugi

3.       if both truthfulness and hard work are absent, one is Dwaparyugi

4.       When only Daan & Daya are present, the person is Kalyugi.

 To become a Satyugi in today, one should follow the principles of communicating the non-violent way.

 If Anna Hazare group continues to communicate violently, they will lose their credibility in the public.

 Saam Daam Dand Bhed is taught and practiced as a fundamental principle in politics. It is understandable that politicians in power will try to instigate Anna Hazare so that he responds using violence in his speech and in this way lose his credibility in the public.

 And this is what has been happening over the last few days. Everyday we are witnessing members of his team attacking the government with violence in their speech. Anna Hazare should realize that public sympathy is with Anna Hazare; he is respected as a Gandhian and not his team mates. If they continue using violent communications, this movement will lose its importance and impact.

 Is somebody listening?

About the author: Padmashri & Dr. B.C. Roy National Awardee, Dr. K K Aggarwal is a Senior Consultant, Physician, Cardiologist at Delhi based Moolchand Medcity; President Heart Care Foundation of India; Chairman Ethical Committee Delhi Medical Council and has served as the Research and Academic Wing Heads of National Indian Medical Association.