The Distinctiveness of Democratic Political Leadership

Abstract

One recognises that political leadership still makes a difference. However, scholarship seems incapable of offering the proper tools to provide further and relevant understanding on the theme, particularly when we consider liberal democracy's current trends, namely its egalitarian ethos and the personalisation of politics. One of its key features, even in strongly controlled democracies, with tight systems of checks and balances, is the ascendancy of assertive leaders, to whom voters look when deciding on which party to vote for. Therefore, a dispassionate assessment of political leadership is needed in order to adjust our analysis: from the qualities of particular individuals, their intentions, perspectives and preferences, to the way leaders perform their role. This article intends to identify what is the specific nature and distinctiveness of contemporary political leadership, arguing that the nature of the task sets new problems in the political science literature and asks for new approaches.

Don’t call me a leader, but I am one: The Dutch mayor and the tradition of bridging-and-bonding leadership in consensus democracies

“…The current study is not claiming that Barber’s analysis of these executives fails to provide valuable insights into local leadership, but rather that it provides insufficient insight into alternative types of leadership that carry considerable relevance for the wider debate on what is political leadership in a democratic context ( Kane and Patapan, 2014 ; Teles, 2015 ). Dutch mayors play a fundamentally different role in local governance than Barber’s mayors, the analysis of which requires a different understanding of what leadership is and also requires a different vocabulary.…”

The democratizing impact of governance networks: From pluralization, via democratic anchorage, to interactive political leadership

“…However, the conditions for political leadership are far from favourable. Elected politicians struggle with the structural contradiction between the call for a powerful political leadership and the egalitarian ethos of Western democracies (Kane and Patapan ; Teles ). In addition, they face numerous obstacles to political leadership such as an increasing socio‐political polarization; a dwindling membership base of political parties; a widespread decline in the trust in government; and the dispersion of political power among different organizations, sectors and levels of governance (Teles ).…”

Animal Farm: The New Political Leaders in Mass Democracies

“…Is there an alternative? One can consider democracy without leaders as the other relevant contemporary trend (Teles, ). Smart cities, tech‐driven policies, direct democracy, communitarian auto‐regulation, citizen activism, neighborhood‐sized demos, are all possible drives of a new way of organizing the polity.…”