>>2932487<based leader needs to have charisma and competency<needs to be a professional pleb-wrangler<needs to give hope to plebs<needs to instill revolutionary optimism and discipline in themBe careful with this line of thinking. The goal, after all, is to build class power and raise the people to the level of revolutionaries, not subordinate them to a fascistic-adjacent personality cult wherein class is subsumed by personality. Don't get me wrong, I don't think having good leaders is bad by any means
but in our modern world, they should not become irreplacable. If we are to talk on this matter, it should be a matter of "leadership must" instead of "the leader must", whatever form that leadership structure takes be it a radicalized union, a revolutionary communist party or anarchist association.
Instead of
finding or grooming a particular exceptional individual, the means to raise a stable supply of
adequate leaders
before shit hits the fan is nessecary. Class conflict is a dynamic and rapidly evolving war without clear front lines, central command staff in such a situation must allow officers to have a great degree of autonomy and trust in their ability.
We find ourselves with a few radicals itching to become generals when we have a massive shortage of NCOs, how are we to win a war like this? Sun Tzu wrote on this.
>By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army. No leader can witness every sector at once, it relies on officers to communicate effectively and interpret the situation from their sector. How often I encounter marshals at rallies or people acting in a first aid capacity who fail to communicate clearly with their team! No single leader can correct this as the nature of relaying the lived experience of the front is ever a bottom-up matter.
>By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This causes restlessness in the soldier's minds. The plebs, if lead by a leader with a narrow understanding of what leadership is, who treats the people as an extension of their will instead of people to cultivate, will see right through it and become distustful.
>By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This shakes the confidence of the soldiers.We see this in many organizations, the delegation of tasks simply according to whoever is available or whoever puts their hands up without taking well into consideration if that task is well suited to that individual… or nessecary at all.