Polarization, Incivility and Election Interests: The Constraints of Political Leadership in American Democracy

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/297698
Title:
Polarization, Incivility and Election Interests: The Constraints of Political Leadership in American Democracy
Author:
McCain, Jesse Louis
Issue Date:
2013
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Abstract:
Leadership has and always will be a dynamic part of human society. As social cohesion needs to be reconciled and group decision making manageable, leaders will continue to play a pivotal roll in shaping the world we live in. But understanding effective leadership and how leaders operate requires an examination of context. Leadership scholar Warren Bennis constructs in detail a vision of what he calls the transformational leader, one at the apex of power who embodies a follower-centered approach to leading. Transformational leaders ignite a personal relationship and vested interest among followers in their cause, one that pleases a majority while inspiring action. In the context of social movements we find that this type of leadership can be attainable. Political leaders however face significant constraints in fulfilling the criteria of the transformational leader. Polarization, incivility and election interests function within democracy to limit political leaders from realizing substantive goals. Applying the standards of transformational leadership to politics proves to be unfair. Political leaders will never fully attain the ideals of transformational leadership, as political leadership operates in a completely different context. We should therefore have a different standard of assessment for successful political leadership.
Type:
text; Electronic Thesis
Degree Name:
B.A.
Degree Level:
bachelors
Degree Program:
Honors College; Political Science
Degree Grantor:
University of Arizona
Advisor:
McCain, Jesse Louis

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titlePolarization, Incivility and Election Interests: The Constraints of Political Leadership in American Democracyen_US
dc.creatorMcCain, Jesse Louisen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcCain, Jesse Louisen_US
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.abstractLeadership has and always will be a dynamic part of human society. As social cohesion needs to be reconciled and group decision making manageable, leaders will continue to play a pivotal roll in shaping the world we live in. But understanding effective leadership and how leaders operate requires an examination of context. Leadership scholar Warren Bennis constructs in detail a vision of what he calls the transformational leader, one at the apex of power who embodies a follower-centered approach to leading. Transformational leaders ignite a personal relationship and vested interest among followers in their cause, one that pleases a majority while inspiring action. In the context of social movements we find that this type of leadership can be attainable. Political leaders however face significant constraints in fulfilling the criteria of the transformational leader. Polarization, incivility and election interests function within democracy to limit political leaders from realizing substantive goals. Applying the standards of transformational leadership to politics proves to be unfair. Political leaders will never fully attain the ideals of transformational leadership, as political leadership operates in a completely different context. We should therefore have a different standard of assessment for successful political leadership.en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeElectronic Thesisen_US
thesis.degree.nameB.A.en_US
thesis.degree.levelbachelorsen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineHonors Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.disciplinePolitical Scienceen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.contributor.advisorMcCain, Jesse Louis-
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.