Anarchy thrives when leaderless groups of conscientious people rebel against the status quo or otherwise voice dissent outside of their system of government. Anarchy is rampant when people blame their government for perceived injustices, refusing to be a part of the system they so desperately want to change. The concerns are being voiced outside of the system and not addressed in any manner that is constructive. People want to replace their government, but they have no plan for what the replacement government would look like. In terms of changing the unjust conditions that exist, nothing could defeat the purpose more than anarchy. Anarchy is the easier, more cowardly way of handling our problems. It is an ineffective model for any real change.
The people need to find ways to fix their own government themselves through leadership. If the people walk out on their government and slam the door in disgust, the government has every right to lock the door and throw away the key. The lack of civil discourse is where the SPCL sees a problem. Therefore, in order to effectively address injustices in the world and bring about change, people must try to get back into the room, work with their government, and be the change they want to see in the world.
Conspiracy theories tend to make people outwardly focused and more likely to cast blame on others. To affect change in the world, people must stop blaming government and start taking the personal responsibility for looking inward. As Mark Potok puts it, “We are trying to defend an open society that values honesty, frank opinions, sincerely held or passionately held, but also the truth. That is fine. What is not fine are rancid ideologues” (M. Potok, personal communication, September 27, 2011). He is not suggesting that there is anything wrong with differences of opinion. His concern is the lack of healthy discourse.
Donald Clifton and Marcus Buckingham’s use of the term revolution in their book, Now, Discover Your Strengths, indicates the concept that dramatic changes can come about in an organization that takes advantage of the available tools of leadership development. The first revolutionary tool is in learning to distinguish strengths from weaknesses, by understanding the difference between innate talent and learned attributes. Other revolutionary tools involve the use of a system of identifying talents and the development of a vocabulary for identifying talents. (Buckingham &Clifton, 32)
Developing a marketable model of transformational servant leadership with an emphasis on personal responsibility, strengths, and values could change the paradigm enough to bring about real solutions to the cycle of widespread anarchy and bad government. Servant leadership involves inward reflection, personal growth and constant change. Instead of chasing conspiracies, if an organization such as WAC were to foster a model of transformational servant leadership with transformational leaders and followers who are servant leaders, they could be a beacon of hope to millions of disaffected people who reject the status quo. Part of Mark Potok’s message is that change comes from challenging the status quo. If the natural tendency of the counter-culture is to challenge and even reject the status quo, then this concept of transformational servant leadership is the perfect model for the revolutionary-minded counter culture to embrace.