Community loyalty is largely dependent upon leadership. There is a
reciprocal relation between loyalty and leadership; leaders inspire
loyalty and loyalty incites leadership. Thus the amount of leadership in
a community and the willingness of its people to assume leadership are
good indices of community loyalty, and the willingness to work under
leaders is its crucial test. The leader is essential to group activity.
Without a leader group activity is difficult or impossible. If men are
to act together effectively some one must be spokesman and director.
Lack of leadership has ever been one of the chief handicaps of rural
life as compared with that of the town and city, and with the growth of
organization the need of rural leadership is increasingly apparent.
Until very recently the vocation of agriculture has had but little call
for leadership. Successful farming required strict attention to the work
of the farm and leadership brought no pecuniary advantage to the farmer
as it did to the business or professional man. Furthermore there seems
to be an innate desire for equality among farmers and a disinclination
to recognize one of their number as in any degree superior, which
discourages the development of leadership among them. The town and city
place a premium on leadership and a position of leadership gives a
status which is coveted; but for the farmer any position of leadership
is a burden or a public duty rather than an opportunity. For this reason
the control of government, education, religion, and all the larger
associations of life has been largely in the hands of urban leaders.
This has been inevitable and the lack of representation of the farmers'
interests has been incidental to the nature of his vocation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account