Royal DNA: The Only CV You Need
Leadership is an acquired skill, national level leadership exponentially so. Even if you're just a figurehead, you still have to know a massive amount about etiquette, political maneuverings, foreign policy, and public relations. Some qualifications or relevant experience are generally a good idea. Maybe you've been in a variety of increasingly challenging government positions, or led a company, or been in a public-relations-heavy job (actors in the USA seem to do quite well in politics); or maybe you've been born into a hereditary monarchy and were brainwashed trained from birth on how to perform your duties.
Unless, of course, you live in Fantasyland. There, the qualification seems to be 'royal descent', no matter what the person's previous life experience or training for the role. I dislike this scenario because it is predicated on the following assumptions-- which, when you look at them, are pretty dang suspect:
Your DNA makes you special and qualified, not your accomplishments. LIFE SKILLS ARE NOT HERITABLE. It doesn't matter if Bob the Farmer's biological dad was the Best King Ever. If Bob has not been trained in how to balance a national budget or wrangle Parliament, or run the national church, or negotiate with foreign dignitaries, or whatever it is he needs to do as king, he will be screwed. On a more philosophical level, implying that what someone accomplishes in life (or doesn't accomplish) is made valid (or invalid) by an accident of birth leads precisely nowhere good.Leadership is an innate ability. No one wakes up one day and figures out how to get other people to cooperate with them. That's why our teachers spent so much time making us do group projects, and why people who participate in team sports tend to be more successful in their later careers. We need to learn how to play nicely with others, and will inevitably make mistakes along the way. Some people may have personality traits which help facilitate this learning process, but it's still a process, not some innate ability like being double-jointed or having perfect pitch. Divine right of monarchs. If you want to write a story where this is a feature of the universe, go ahead. However, it opens up an enormous can of worms, many of which are extremely squirmy. See Wednesday's post for more details.
Unless, of course, you live in Fantasyland. There, the qualification seems to be 'royal descent', no matter what the person's previous life experience or training for the role. I dislike this scenario because it is predicated on the following assumptions-- which, when you look at them, are pretty dang suspect:
Your DNA makes you special and qualified, not your accomplishments. LIFE SKILLS ARE NOT HERITABLE. It doesn't matter if Bob the Farmer's biological dad was the Best King Ever. If Bob has not been trained in how to balance a national budget or wrangle Parliament, or run the national church, or negotiate with foreign dignitaries, or whatever it is he needs to do as king, he will be screwed. On a more philosophical level, implying that what someone accomplishes in life (or doesn't accomplish) is made valid (or invalid) by an accident of birth leads precisely nowhere good.Leadership is an innate ability. No one wakes up one day and figures out how to get other people to cooperate with them. That's why our teachers spent so much time making us do group projects, and why people who participate in team sports tend to be more successful in their later careers. We need to learn how to play nicely with others, and will inevitably make mistakes along the way. Some people may have personality traits which help facilitate this learning process, but it's still a process, not some innate ability like being double-jointed or having perfect pitch. Divine right of monarchs. If you want to write a story where this is a feature of the universe, go ahead. However, it opens up an enormous can of worms, many of which are extremely squirmy. See Wednesday's post for more details.
No comments have been added yet.
