I too sense some common ground and will accept that we likely agree on more than we disagree. It’s interesting though, as you seem to be a bit to the left and I am a bit to the right, yet we agree on much – there is indeed hope:)

I don’t think capitalism is “the” problem, but run amok or perverted can certainly contribute to the problem. I feel the same way about politics. My belief remains that we are in a crisis of leadership. If we can find our way forward to a place where leaders once again see themselves as servants we have a chance. We must refuse to tolerate, and in fact, displace those in leadership positions who are there for little more than self-serving purposes. It will indeed take a national movement, but all national movements begin with individuals at the local level. From humble beginnings come great things, but great things endure because humble beginnings are not forgotten. 

Mike, we are very much in agreement about most things. I don’t want to argue about whether there is a “liberal” media boogeyman or the other things we do disagree on.  

Politics is about making collective decisions. Leadership is, by definition I think, a political thing where a leader helps enact a decision involving and affecting people. In order for a leadership movement to be effective, it must have high visibility with potential followers and to its opposition, whatever that may be. I’m sure there are many efforts ongoing today that provide leadership at a local level or within a sector; I just don’t see them having a national or international impact. This is a big country with big problems.I was responding in part to your first paragraph which seems to address a populist mandate as due in the US. And I agree with that. Poor leadership gives us wars with no plans to fund them for the first time in our history. Poor leadership damages the future by harming the educational system, not funding the pursuit of pure R&D which ultimately generates jobs, and structuring corporate taxes to encourage job movement overseas, etc.Leaders must provide a benefit to their followers if they are to have followers. The most visible third party effort ever, the Tea Party, is a blatant tool of the Koch brothers and their corporate ilk. No valuable leadership will come from that quarter.  Is capitalism and politics too tightly bound in the US for the type of selfless leadership you discussed? That’s my fear.

I’m not even sure where to start with this, but here goes…I think your heart is in the right spot, but our heads are clearly in different places. Conservatives control the media??? Nothing could be further from the truth. There are both conservative and liberal media outlets that display a bias, but on whole, the mainstream media has a overwhelming liberal bias. This has been the case for the better part of recent American history and simply cannot be credibly disputed. I think most of us long for the days of journalistic integrity from both conservatives and liberals.

Your comment smacked of being much more of a political statement than a comment about a movement of leadership. While I do agree that the American middle class is engaged in a life or death struggle, it’s intellectually dishonest to villainize conservatives behind the veil of a liberal partisan agenda. I’m not particularly pleased with democrats or republicans of late, which is exactly why we need fewer politicians and more leaders. 

I completely disagree that those occupying Wall Street are the only current example of a leadership movement. I agree that many of those occupying Wall Street right now have no idea why they’re doing it – interviews of those protesting about why they are there have proven that. Some are curious, some are there out of legitimate frustrations, some are there to further misguided causes, some are there just because they want to be a part of something. I really don’t have any issue with the protest, but I do take exception to those who would use this as a ruse for blame shifting, or to create more unwanted chaos. Might something good come out of these protests? Perhaps, but only time will tell. 

While I could list many examples of what I would consider earnestly motivated leadership movements, I would cite The Mentoring Project – http://www.thementoringproject.org as one worth noting. Although this movement is being led by the Church, it is non-denominational, there is no political agenda, and they are helping young men to break the cycle of adversity and become better leaders. This is a great example of how to change the world for better.  

By this point in my reply you may have guessed that I’m not a big Al Gore fan. I’ve heard him speak, I’ve met him briefly, and in my opinion, he is a bigger part of the problem than he is a part of the solution. He has personally, politically, and most of all, financially benefited at the expense of the truth. With regard to your comment about the internet being a tool for democratization, we are in agreement on this. 

I too hope that this election brings about the needed change we are all seeking. However, that won’t happen if we don’t elect a leader, not a wannabe leader, not a power monger, not just another slick politician – but a real leader. Thanks for sharing.

There is a good reason Kotter has been a disruptive force for change for more than 3 decades – he gets it. Thanks for sharing the quote. 

Not knowing the specifics of your situation, I cannot answer your question. However I can make the following observations: You are either overvaluing your contributions, or your boss is undervaluing them. It could also be that your contributions are deemed valuable, but are just being expressed inappropriately. In either case, communication needs to be improved so you both receive the benefit of one another’s contributions. My suggestion would be to surface the issue with humility by stating your desire to be a more valuable contributor, and by asking how your boss would like to see your thoughts and ideas communicated. The answer you receive should let you know where you stand.