I have been contemplating the nature of 'leadership' recently. This is mainly due to it being time to start planning our yearly gay leadership conference here at the University of Wisconsin - Madison. Last year's conference was an amazing event and I'm looking for an encore.

However, I've managed to deconstruct 'leadership' in my mind to the point that it would be hard to teach right now. So, I'm pouring through manuals and texts looking for a good way to teach a subject I'm having to relearn. Along the way, I've stumbled across some interesting things that I had never thought before.

Relearning something can bring new light in ways that simple forward motion can't illuminate.

One section of my book is talking about empowerment of group participants. A 'follower' or 'co-creator' of social change will generally stick around if they feel that they are being heard and appreciated by the leader. At the core of leadership is the fundamental belief that we, as social beings, can do better in collaboration than we can independently.

Still, there are people who chose to not be part of the civil system. Most people agree that multiple people are capable of much more than the individual, yet there exist segments of society that reject this premise altogether, often to the detriment of others.

There can be two solutions as to why this happens:

1. I am wrong in my assumption that people are capable of more in association than alone.

-or-

2. These people reject this idea because they feel that they can do better fending for themselves. Most likely, this is caused by the civic system not working for them, or actively making their lives worse. This would result in crime, disregard for others, and the breakdown of society at times.

So, my next question is, does everybody have the right to fend for themselves if society isn't working for them? Do we actually cause crime by tolerating injustice and pain?

I don't know the answer to these questions, but I can't help but wonder if society can ever progress so long as we leave people behind. I imagine a utopian society where we all look out for the welfare of each citizen as a fellow. This makes each of us responsible for the leadership process... and makes us the true foundations of civilization.

At the risk of sounding a bit less-libertarian than I'm comfortable with, how do we reach this happy medium between social progress and social progressivism?