A brief comment to:
Why global leadership? Who's the leader? Why a leader, and not cooperation? Why would a global democracy need a leader, or leadership?
Why not a cooperative participative global governance (co)structure, without a leader, or leaders?
At a national(ist) scale, extreme examples of discourses of "leaders of the people" we had the Nazism, Maoism and Stalinism...
Why open the venue to a "leader-centric globalist discourse" that top-downs the hierarchy down to the lower mindless bots, alienated desiring machines that obey the global leader?
Living systems are self-organizing, autopoietic, they do not need a global leadership, the system knows very well what it needs, and knows how to make emerge the best adaptive responses.
Top-down schemes lose perspective and are strange to the systemic bottom-up self-organization that is natural of every living system.
A top-down leadership scheme invites a zero-sum strategic reasoning in the game between the leader and the populace.
The "invisible hand" of life always rejected illuminated leader-based globalisms. What legitimacy does a leader-based global dictatorship have to think and decide for the rest of the world?
The world does not need a leader, leaders, or leaderships, the world needs adaptive, responsive, structures that regard the needs of everyone, that is, every living entity, not just humans. The world is not just the humans, the humans are just another example of an animal species, and not a very successful one at intelligent responses.
If one still thinks in the leader-based paradigm, one has clearly lost the evolutionary train. But who said that we need to remain here as long as the dinosaurs did?
