THE LEADERS WE DESERVE

Have We Stopped Expecting Those In Power to Be Virtuous?

Getty Images

Summary  

This article explores the ancient expectation that leaders embody virtue, in contrast with today’s widespread moral decline in leadership. Public trust is eroding as lies become routine, conflicts grow, and compromise fades. The author warns of looming global instability and urges citizens to demand truthful, ethical leaders who prioritize cooperation over conflict, before it is too late.

PHUKET—Belief that leaders should be virtuous is as old as civilization. Chinese philosopher Confucius, in the 6th century BCE, proposed that rulers must cultivate moral excellence to govern effectively. His Analects emphasized benevolence and moral integrity as the cornerstones of leadership. This ethos spread through East Asia, influencing systems of governance for millennia.

In the West, Plato's Republic painted a vision of philosopher-kings, wise men with disciplined minds and souls. Aristotle later argued that leaders must possess practical wisdom, courage and and a sense of justice. Such Greek ideals shaped Roman statesmen such as Cicero, who advocated leaders be "servants of the people."

According to legend, the Chinese Emperor Yao (traditionally c. 2356 – 2255 BCE), instituted a system of abdication under which leadership passed not to his son, but instead to the worthiest person. He put out a drum and encouraged citizens to use it to voice their concerns and make suggestions on how to improve governance.

Another example was Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (121-180 CE), whose personal writings revealed a devotion to humility, self-improvement and doing what was right (versus what was easy or popular.) He endeavored to treat people of all classes fairly and to protect the rights of the poor and of slaves (who, for instance, could own property, marry and bear witness.) Ashoka the Great, King of the Mauryan Empire (322-185) which stretched across modern-day Iran and the Indian sub-continent, renounced war and developed the concept of dhamma, or pious social conduct, following Buddhism.

In the 17th and 18th centuries, philosophers such as John Locke and Immanuel Kant posited that leaders are duty bound to promote public good. Transparency, empathy, and accountability had come to define good leadership, and while the practice of power often fell far short of the mark, the ideal at least that good leadership required great virtue, endured.

The Erosion of Virtue

This century, one of unprecedented connectivity, has seen a sharp decline of virtue among global leaders. Dishonesty's grip has so tightened that I struggle to name a current leader whom I have not caught in a lie (well, I have yet to catch Prime Minister Mark Carney of Canada in one, but perhaps he just needs more time.)

Transparency International announced in February 2025 that 47 countries out of 180 surveyed had their worst showing in opinion of public sector corruption since they began the surveys in 2012. From the United States and Russia, to France and Venezuela, citizens think their leaders have become even more corrupt.

Once hailed as pillars of society, many in positions of power now exhibit alarming moral bankruptcy. This erosion is manifested in systemic dishonesty, openly self-serving agendas, obvious self-enrichment, and a cavalier attitude towards public trust. Lying has even become acceptable — expected and routine. Most governments today constantly make up narratives and spin them through their mainstream media, stories far from the truth that are often designed to distract from it.

Corporate leadership is arguably worse. Today's top executives are routinely caught orchestrating financial fraud on a colossal scale, even collapsing their companies out of pure greed and devastating thousands of lives. A single tweet today can make the billionaire tweeter even more billions overnight.

Academic research proves the trend is worsening. Transparency International announced in February 2025 that 47 countries out of 180 surveyed had their worst showing in opinion of public sector corruption since they began the surveys in 2012. From the United States and Russia, to France and Venezuela, citizens think their leaders have become even more corrupt.

Who is Responsible for Decadent Leadership and What Will Be Its Consequences?

Probably the most common type of lie told by politicians today is a false accusation. When the speaker says something about his opponent or perceived foe that he or she knows to be untrue, is that not lying?

The Speaker of the US House of Commons recently claimed that China is "the greatest threat to world peace," this just days after his country's military had illegally bombed Iran. The USA has overthrown or attempted to overthrow other regimes in 57 different countries, and has been involved in 137 different military conflicts. In contrast, the country Speaker Johnson calls the greatest threat to world peace last fired a shot outside its borders in 1979, in a four-week conflict in Vietnam, and has never attempted to overthrow another country's government.

Lack of virtue is widespread and hardly unique to the USA. Moreover, in today's conflicts, both sides are usually to blame — though rarely equally. For instance, I blame the war in Ukraine mostly on unreasonable expansion of NATO up to Russia's borders, a US-assisted coup in Ukraine in 2014 (against a leader wise enough to seek neutrality), and refusal to reply to Russia's concerns. However, would the invasion of Ukraine — killing or severely wounding over a million people — have been a virtuous Russian leader's choice? And how could Ukraine's President Zelensky have decided to pointlessly continue the war, for what has now been three more years, rather than sign a peace deal reached in April 2022, only a couple of months after the war began?

Similarly, while my main sympathies lie with the the long-suffering Palestinian people, victims of a terrible oppression by a people who should know better, does that justify Hamas' brutality against Israeli civilians and even children? As Mahatma Gandhi showed in colonial India, the oppressed can combat their oppressor by being morally superior, and more intelligent, rather than by sinking to their level and copying their crimes. In a further example, I think Iran is understandably shocked at the treatment of their fellow-Muslim Palestinians, and severely alienated since the UK and USA overthrew their nascent constitutional government in 1946 to keep their oil. But does a virtuous religious leader threaten to annihilate Israel, even if only posturing? Could that ever lead to peace?

Worse by far is Israel's killing of 5% of the population of Gaza (quite possibly 10%), and starving the survivors, an ongoing genocide being committed by the government of a people who were themselves victims of the worse genocide in human history. In no way can that horror be justified by the horror of Hamas' attack.

China continues to at least try to be a reasonable party, mostly speaking truth in my hearing of it, promoting peaceful global cooperation and avoiding international provocations as much as it can. For instance, in response to the Trump Trade War, Beijing recently granted zero tariffs on all types of imports from all 53 African countries, something the Western media largely failed to report.

But China too is losing restraint. It has done a poor job in the South China Sea. It does need some small islands and atolls to defend itself from US encirclement, and ensure the USA itself does not take control of them via proxies. The USA makes every effort to foment friction and block resolution of disputes about them. However, all this notwithstanding, China has failed to strike amicable deals with its neighbours. Its idea of sharing resource rights around those rocks is a good one, but it remains unaccomplished, leaving itself open to accusations of bullying.

Peace-making and peace-keeping require great willingness to compromise. Compromise requires mutual trust, while building that trust requires repeated demonstrations of honesty — of trustworthiness. Trust is the very foundation of our societies, a magic formula that has for millennia allowed us to do business with strangers. Instead of treasuring that trust, we are systematically trashing it, passively allowing cynical leaders to lie it into oblivion. As NATO members plan to spend $25 trillion more dollars on 'defense and security' in the next decade, most likely cutting social expenditure to pay for it, there is hardly an olive branch to be found, much less a dove that could offer one.

History shows that at least a few 20th century leaders like Nelson Mandela were broadly inspiring for their principled honesty. Not everyone agrees with each other's picks for such veneration, but most agree that we do look up to a few 20th century leaders because of their outstanding virtue. What political leader is inspiring our children today? To my mind, the 21st century has yet to provide a single candidate. Unless societies demand moral accountability, the rot will continue, hollowing out the foundations of what little stability remains.

We are all responsible and we must demand and find honest leaders, men and women who tell the truth even when it is unpleasant for them. We must have Heads of State and Government who are dedicated to compromise and cooperation, not aggravating conflict, not even with their perceived opponents or foes — especially not with them.

Must we tolerate that some become billionaires at all? Is that not immoral in a world where the basic needs of so many hundreds of millions go unmet? At the very least, the exorbitant privilege of great personal wealth should require highly ethical behaviour and the payment of quite high taxes.

If we cannot put better people in positions of great power, no matter what political or economic system a particular country has, then in the long run we the people will be at fault for what will follow. There will be no one else to blame.

———————————