Leading in the pandemic: A systemic-pragmatic reflection

Hans Schlipat, Tutzing, April 2021

In the wake of the pandemic, little will be the same as it was before. This includes the relationship between the individual and the community, especially in Western "liberal" societies.

"Freedom" is always relative, evaluated and perceived. For whom, for what, from which perspective? For the individual or the community? When does harm occur for whom? Is it justifiable or unreasonable, even legally actionable?

A clear majority of the German population (~75%) has been voting for months - and still is - for maintaining the adopted Corona measures or even strengthening them. A minority makes itself heard loudly and refers to individual "experts" who also represent minority opinions of their respective professions. Media hirelings are to be found everywhere. These minorities take politics and the social majority hostage by demanding their "freedom rights" in the media or even by denying Corona - among them doctors! -, by failing to distance themselves from perpetrators of violence in demonstrations they organise and are thus responsible for, and by incessantly trying to get the courts involved. And they cover dissidents with shitstorms in order to silence them.

Politics - as in many other cases - is reflexively oriented towards limiting the confrontations with minorities. And thus increasingly loses the support of the majority. Especially because the measures taken lead to a swing between the interest blocks and give the impression of a lasting lack of concept. This action creates losers on all sides. Unanimously agreed measures are already cashed in the minute after the meeting and interpreted according to the target group's own political calculations. Incidences? We still have enough bed capacity. Completely ignoring the fact that when the beds are "full", it is "10 past 12". Completely negating the now reliable majority findings of virologists, scenario modellers and doctors, who formulate clear, urgent advice on how to deal with the pandemic.

In the meantime, the majority of society must ask itself why it is paying taxes for a state that is not able to protect its health and lives through forward-looking decisions and also from the minority. Both, the minority and state institutions are acting in a grossly negligent and mostly premeditated manner. They are thus responsible for the deaths of thousands of people as well as significant restrictions on the lives of those with long-term illnesses. The self-proclaimed "freedom fighters" Lindner and Kubicki present themselves eloquently with cluelessness (as is well known, a lawyer is an expert on anything), cynicism and audacity, invoking the Basic Law. But these are the very people who have been in hiding for months and who have previously evaded any responsibility. These AFD stalwarts and other lateral and crooked thinkers should also be legally prosecuted for failing to help and deliberately aiding and abetting thousands of people to suffer. Their contributions are toxic for society, they are the gravediggers of public spirit. They must be resolutely confronted from the centre of the community.

A global pandemic does not allow "business as usual". And not every legal loophole must necessarily be exploited against the interest of the common good. It will not be possible to reconcile the hundreds of thousands or millions of individual interests under one legal hat. In special crisis situations, the community lives from the willingness of the individual to bear burdens for the preservation of the whole. Unfortunately, it will not be possible to distribute the burdens "fairly" in every case and from every perspective.

Angela Merkel has once again failed as a "leader" in a major crisis. And with her, the entire established political system.

The systemic perspective, the consideration of the consequence of the consequence, the clear, permanent communication with and to all those affected, the own, unmistakable attitude, will to decide and assertiveness: all not discernible. Instead, helpless, conceptless muddling through and despondent messages with unworldly evening discussions at the lowest level. With the aim of keeping as many affected people as possible quiet.

Findings and "Learnings":

Communication, communication, communication

People accept difficult, drastic decisions and go along with them if they can see the sense, goal and purpose. The argument that "people do not support measures" is completely incomprehensible against the backdrop of survey and behavioural majorities. People are prepared to set aside their own sensitivities and interests in favour of the common good. It is the task of the leadership to give the led lasting orientation. This has not happened and is still sorely lacking.

Clear position and stance

If, as the advocate of the majority, I cannot assert my own positions vis-à-vis the clear minority, I must act consistently: Either I succeed in organising my own majorities or I have to ask for a vote of confidence and - as ultima ratio - resign. And leave the leadership to those who pursue their individual interests. So that even the silent majority realises that it must activate itself.

In times of crisis at the latest, the common good dominates individual interest

The approach "I'm local ok, what do I care about my environment" has also failed in the fight against pandemics. The discussion of the privileges of individuals or regions can be replaced by the awareness that "we are all in the same boat": a manageable lockdown for all, regardless of incidence, with clear rules of consequence. Here, too, communication is crucial for acceptance and success.

The systemic perspective

The understanding of interdependencies and cause-effect relationships with concrete implementation is missing. The lack of courage to use and represent facts as the basis for binding decisions supported and implemented by the majority and to face the consequence of a lurching both/and course leads to uncertainty, loss of trust and dwindling support. The ability to accept the perspective of those affected and to develop a predictable and flexible-stable course is essential for responsible politics that also understands and uses the "crisis" as an opportunity to shape the future.

By the way: This is a global pandemic. The need for solidarity is all the more important in combating it in the long term. If we do not succeed in giving the poorest countries access to vaccinations and medicines within a reasonable period of time, we will have to learn bitterly that our own successes will not bring about a lasting improvement in the situation, since multiple mutations will counteract the temporary phyrus victories.

The beating of the butterfly's wings takes on a concrete meaning that we cannot escape. We have only one planet, which we share with other living beings, as well as resources, which may be finite or regenerative. Everything is interrelated and interdependent. The effects of the economic and social policies we support in supposedly "distant" countries in Asia, Latin America or Africa are now - in whatever form - right on our own doorstep. Dealing with them is still characterised by helplessness and exclusion.

We need courageous, far-sighted leaders committed to the common good, who understand the importance of the systemic view and the consequence of the consequence. Who get their fair share of the common successes, but understand that in the long run they will only do well if the others "out there" do well too.

It is the time of "Servant Leadership".