Leadership in Unprecedented Times

Welcome to Wabi Sabi, the art of imperfection. This podcast is all about, you know, the ups and downs of life, but actually understanding that life is never perfect. I'm looking for the imperfections and how we can see it. know, given that we live in a very interesting times in terms of how life has transpired. I we started this podcast, you know, a couple of years back, I would say, you know, Jim and I really began our journey together. I guess we know each other for quite some time, but I think we really deepened our connection really when during Um, the COVID years, because what happened was, that I really started making movements and thinking about moving, uh, out of Australia to Portugal. And, Jim was thinking at the same time, and I don't know how it came up or even know how it kind of came about, but we both now had a scent, uh, very common ground and, and this is how it kind of started. I, and I, I guess I'm starting here is because it, first of all, I feel like that time really kind of shaped. obviously who we are and for our lives in the future. And we don't even know what that looks gonna look like yet because I know surprising has almost been three years now. And, but as we getting closer and closer, we start to see like the ripple effects and how it can affect, you know, for me especially is not just myself, but really for me, it's about my family and my kids and how they're gonna grow up. And I'm probably see that ripple effect happening about five years from now or 10 years from now. And, and, and really see those differences. But you know, the reason why I'm mentioning that is because things have changed so much in the last three years. And not just an us, but in just terms of the COVID years to now, I find like the world has shifted. And I'm gonna start with COVID because our main talk today is really about leadership as a whole. And I really felt that COVID itself really kind of changed, had an underlying pressure on leaders being leaders and how to lead, and also highlighted how certain leaders just didn't have what it took to lead. And they resorted to, I guess, lack of a better word, like authoritative leadership. And then there's leadership that, you know, understood the whole aspect of things. I think these are my opinions, and Jim, you might have different opinions. But I think this is a good starting point to see like how the world is shifting. And then also the ramification of that, in how world leaders or certain leaders are you know, force a certain particular thought process. And now people are seeing the true nature of, you know, what they, you who they are, what they are. And then the society also shifting in its thinking as well. And I find that really interesting that we're on the midst of like the shift that is actually happening underlying all of this. So anyway, so that's the beginning thought process of leadership.

Yeah, I think that's a really good context. I'm back, you know, context to give you an understanding of how and why we would consider this as a discussion point, because the theme today was really about leadership and in part, it's inspired by the recent US inauguration with Donald Trump. And as we started to discuss that and plan for our recording today, It was important, you said, incumbent to look back and go, well, what has leadership look like? What is traditional leadership? And hang on, we can't just look at just this as an event. What, what's, as you said, has transpired over last three years has really changed people's perspective of what leadership is, what good leadership is and how leaders rise to the occasion. And I agree with you totally like level one leadership is positional leadership where I'm in this position. So you have to do what I do, but that defaults to, you said, authoritarianism and it's not really empowering people and leading them, it's telling them what you have to do. And while there are certainly times where that's important and crucial, I think what's happening is that there's been a general distrust of leadership across the board. And that's probably a good discussion points to look at why, why has that happened over time? And particularly, as you said, that led through the COVID.

Yeah, it is very interesting to start to see like, if we look at the world stage and we can start there and then kind of apply it to our individual, I guess lives. mean, the world stage, was, even on Australia, as you remember, like there was a, leadership pretty much was one party or one sided party pretty much that ruled the entire state government, which was very, it was a different party at the time than the federal government. And I just. Really COVID kind of highlighted to me that the federal government had no power, had absolutely no power at all. That was shocking to me worldwide, even the States and Canada was like, wow, like you're the federal government. I thought you had all the power, but it really did have no power whatsoever. That was revelation number one. But two was, it was interesting to me is that since those years have passed, I mean, you know, whether we agree or disagree with what they did, but definitely the power have shifted from one side to the other. you know, in every country, Australia, I feel like it's shifted, you know, in America, UK, Canada, they've all shifted from the one party to another. I don't, I haven't really thought about any particular, at least the countries that I follow have really kept the same power that, you know, that rode through the COVID years.

Yeah, in Canada, Tridu has just stepped down. So they haven't actually changed across. So that's the only one that hasn't changed, is silly, from one form to the other. Pretty much, yeah. These are Canadians. Yeah, right.

Yes. Yeah, it's because he's holding onto power. he refuses, he refuses as a Canadian, can probably say that, he refuses to hold an election, right? He refuses to hold an election. You know when the reason why, and then this is like, this is, you know, this is my rant from our last podcast. The reason why most people don't realize he's holding onto election until I think March or whatever, or it's gonna be not now, even though he stepped down, he's not holding it now. Why? It's because at a certain point, which the day after, the day before the election, some of those senators or we'll call them, it's not really call senators because you call something else, those party members will get their pension. Right? So it's like, what are we doing here? Like, are we, you know, so he's not, they're not holding it so that they can actually get their pension. So really benefits like individuals rather than the whole. So now all of Canada has to wait until, you know, this election, which is still, you know, months away. before anything gets done so that few people are gonna get their pension. Now don't know, that's true, because I haven't really followed that many politics, but that is the main talking point that's been happening, why they've been holding back, holding back, and holding on to this power, which I think is ridiculous when it comes to leadership. It's like you have no interest. What you're voting to power is that you should be in the interest of the people you work for in a sense, like if you're a company, but you're holding your self-interest more so on top of the interest of the whole business or the people that work for you.

Totally. You're representing your constituents, your community, the people who put you into that position to create a change. And fundamentally, leadership, particularly in a democratic society, is about we have faith in you. We are choosing you to look after our best interests. And it's any wonder that it erodes trust in community when it looks like from the outset, whether, you said, it's 100 % true, whether it feels self-serving. It feels like this is what's going on. You only just have to look at recently in Syria and the destabilization of the government where they fled to Russia and they realized how self-serving that government was for a long time. so that Syria was controlled by with an iron fist and there was fear and there was campaign and there was terror. And that's not that's using power as a means of of influencing people as opposed to the being elected into that position. position and that's the whole thing that discussion point about, you know, who really are the leaders and are they there because of their own importance? And I'm sure they get some, there has to be a reason why there's both a, they're an altruistic drive, but there's also a compelling reason for other people where they get into positions of power. Um, but at what point does it tip over to become more self-serving?

Yeah, what's it? mean, I'm not sure this is the same discussion here, but it does impact here, which I feel like there's this whole the media impact on societal thinking. I never realized how impactful and how manipulative they can be and has been over the last, 10, 15 years. And maybe they have always been that way. I just never noticed it. But they feel like they, you know, you can really see it. And I hate using this left and right because I don't know, like I think most of us are more in the middle and the center. I think we just talked about offline before, like we're more centrist than actually left or right and depending on who the candidates are and who the leaders are and what policy is really kind of, we kind of not flop back and forth, but we kind of like lean one way depending on the topic, right? And what's interesting though, it's like most of the media now outlets out there, especially in American media, it's either, you you either left or you're out or right. And which, which really interesting is that the left will find anything to make the right look bad and the right will find anything that make the left look bad. And it's like this creates, it creates this really massive echo chamber. And what I find is that it becomes very manipulative. Then all of a sudden, like you get two greater, greater extremes. And this is sort of where the problem has, I feel like it's, leading towards is that we're getting worse and worse, right? And so like people can't even talk or have a civil conversation. What we used to have. And it's really pulling. you know, the world apart. And this is not just happening in America, it's happening in a lot of different places, which is really discerning. But at the same time, you would think that the power that beat obviously, there's a lot of things that can manipulate, but they're also like a lot of social media power now where people can investigate a journalist and by individuals are probably highlighting some of these things that these media outlets are so manipulative that they can actually, you know, really create rebuttals, I guess, to those narratives. So there's the power of social media, is negative, but also positive in a way, because now you have individual people who can have a thinking for themselves, and which drags more people into that narrative versus the whole multi-billion dollar corporation media. Meaning people are listening more and more to long-form podcasts, individual journalism versus the traditional. media outlets that you typically see. And so I wonder how that will change how the leaders react. And I mean, Trump is probably one of the perfect examples. Like he went on a very different campaign than, than Harris did, right? You look at, you know, Trump, went on all the, you know, the Joe Rogan podcast. They went to all these other podcasts that traditionally you wouldn't have utilized instead of going to the mainstream media as like the CNN or the, the ABC and the NBCs, right? This is where most of the the narratives would have been spun. But because most people are leaning towards the social media aspect, it's starting to shift and leaders will look at that and start to shift their narratives because now they have to be, I don't know, you hope that they will have to be a little bit more truthful because they're, they have, those mediums are gonna call them a little bit more accountable than what traditional media has done, at least in recent years, in my opinion. I probably should say that.

Yeah, it's very interesting because I think the starting point for me was why is how we're looking at leaders different or changing? used to be, when I remember growing up, there was a respect and a cultural authority around politicians and... police officers and there used to be this like this respect to them. I've realized over time that that's decreased. There's not, they don't have that position of acknowledgement and respect that they deserve, you know, in there. it took, it took me a long time to get comfortable with the idea that, you know, particularly when I first started following politics in the U S where you would go out there and like you wouldn't criticize them. Like in Australia, particularly, you wouldn't criticize politicians to the level that they did in America at all. And what it took me a while to get used to was the fear campaigns that are run, that are designed to influence people. And they're not run by the parties themselves, but they're run, as you said, by marketing companies. so it shows you the power of influence from other areas. Now it was said that John F. Kennedy used the platform of TV as an edge to be able to be influential. And that was influential in his ability to be elected. Now, Uh, president Obama started using social media at the time and he was influential and he was able to mobilize. You only look at the Aberdeen Arab rising and the power of social media as a new medium to use that. And Donald Trump used, um, podcasts form long form to his advantage. Kamala Harris had invitations to get on there, but she chose not to. And strategically, a lot of the Democrats look back now and go, that was a tactical error. That was a problem because people could not see what you are like as a leader.

That's right. Yeah.

in an environment where you have to be in conversational mode. We didn't get the sense of what you're really talking about rather than little sound bites on a curated section at best on a platform that wants to influence people in a particular way.

Yeah, and that's very interesting, right? Because this is the going back to us now as being leaders is that oftentimes we as leaders will choose the platform or choose what's working for us at that moment in time. But when the shift in platform changes, like you going from short form, two minute, five minute interviews on, know, say CNN versus three hour interview on Joe Rogan, that's such a contrast. And all of a sudden now like the requirements of being a leader now is questioned, right? Because if you don't like, I mean, I don't think Harris, like personally, I don't think Harris would have had the stamina or the, the, stamina is probably the best word to last for three hours in a Joe Rogan podcast to be authentically herself about what she needs to talk about and the policy and had enough background and experience to be able to stay consistent in that knowledge. And I think that's the fear, right? It wasn't, I think that's the fear wasn't a scheduling conflict. It was a fear that Joe Rogan was going to outer even though Joe Rogan, I really I mean, listen to enough Joe Rogan's, I don't think he's there to out anybody. He's just he's just a curious person. And he's really, you know, he pushes back on certain people, but really, he's not trying to push back hard. It's just like trying to get more understanding. And I feel like, all of sudden now you as a leader has to really show I think in this today's age, you actually have to show consistency. not just be good on quick sound bite. You have to be good at, you know, really being very clear and objective and be able to hold and withhold and withstand thoughts for longer than, you know, the three to five minute, you know, frame. And that's really difficult to hold that mask if you are wearing a mask. And that's what I think that Trump did well.

Yeah. Well, Joe, I'm Yeah. Well, Joe Rogan, like he said, was fascinated about it. He's publicly declared that politically he was a Democrat and he had a perspective, a social leaning perspective that fit him in that camp. And what I was fascinated with, and we just mentioned just in conversation before we started recording, is how many people change their view and perspective of their politics totally on that? I mean, if you are basically You know, if you have grown up with a particular leaning or affiliation, I think, you know, you've got a lot of, of conditioning around that. you grew up in a family environment and you go, okay, people around me, people associate, they're very similar. And so constantly there's, there's overlap there. But if you're quite resolute in your belief for you to change that, I'm really interested to go, go, what causes someone to change that? Is it they've changed their own ideology or do they not have faith in the leader? Right? Do they no longer feel that the people who they thought they identified with have their best interests at heart? So to me, that's of interest. when you go back and have a look at a lot of the people that shifted camps towards Donald Trump, they were previously Democrats and basically liberals in their thinking. What changed?

Yeah. Oh, it's fine. I find it fascinating because I listened to the All In podcast. I'm not sure if you listened to them and, if you, yeah, they're great. And I've been listening to them, you know, since COVID times. And even though I didn't agree with everything they said, but it was, you know, I still listen to a respect that, you know, their thoughts, but what was interesting from a political agenda, all three, three out of the four were Democrats by far, like really left leaning.

Yep. Yeah, I do. I do. They're great.

more, not really, like they were left leaning more so. then David Sachs is really probably the only Republican kind of candidate on it. Yeah. Right. Yeah. And then what's interesting over the years, I'm talking years, it wasn't months, like over the years, there was a shift, right? There was a shift and these are billionaires like Chamoff starting putting and actually inviting Trump and poor money to have a fundraiser for him. And it was like, wow, this is interesting. And that's goes exactly what you're saying. Isn't it interesting? Like, what does it take for someone to

He's the most one on record who'd been right leaning.

move and shift teams and in a sense, shift ideals to make that shift. And I think which I feel like should be the better society that we should be thinking about, right? Because I think the previous thing is like, you have to be on this team. Like if you're a Democrat, you have to stay Democrat because you're always right. Exactly. Or if you're a Republican, you have to be Republican. You can't switch sides.

You're either with us or against us, yeah.

Like, let's face it, and you know, this is like this whole inverse bell curve that we all see. Pretty much, like there's always about 10 to 20 % on either ends that are, we don't call them extremists, but like on the extreme ends, there are ones who are the zealous who will always be, they will always be a Republican, or they'll always be a Democrat, and they will never, no matter what happens, will change. But most people are really more in the middle. And you know, traditionally, what I would say is that, the votes are always influenced by the people in the middle, like depending on, you know, it's like people like you and I, which is like, you know, one year we're gonna be more left, one year we're gonna be more right, depending on who the candidate is and depending on their policies and depending who the person is. But I think this whole divide of this left and right, where it's like, it has to be one side or the other, it's only the, and they're the voices that are the loudest, the extremists at the bottom, and, but most people are just. keeping quiet because they won't they don't want to be canceled. And especially especially where we're in this cancel kind of culture. Like all of these combinations, I feel like really suppressed a lot of people what they were feeling, because almost people felt a certain way, but they really didn't feel like they are comfortable enough to talk about their own views and how they felt. And I think that really kind of shift the narrative. And I think that's why the surprising results for a lot of people was like, the Democrats always thought they were going to win this, but not realizing that they missed the mark, that most people don't feel that they were doing a great job. Most people didn't feel that they were heading in the right direction until it was too late.

So here's a perspective and view that I'd love to have your insight in. So a lot of people who choose public life do that from a perspective of service. I want to help humanity. Now, over time, money and power rise to the top. So to get a campaign, it's astounding the amounts of money that are involved in any campaign or to run for presidency, which is phenomenal. So I'm of the view, and I'll declare that from the outset, that I like politicians to be financially independent. I like the idea that they have a perspective that, you know, I know some people go, hey, I don't want a leader who can't relate to people who are struggling. But personally, I'm of the view that I would much rather have someone who's a billionaire in power who is qualified who has no need for the role, who's choosing it, and quite often has to put their money and their businesses in a blind trust because they're not that they like, they don't have to be bought or influenced by somebody else. They're like, listen, man, I'm good. I'm good. I'm actually here. So you'd be interested in your thoughts about that as opposed to the career politicians who, um, who do it and get paid, you know, they get paid well by conventional standards, not enough by standards of other companies in my opinion as well too, but yeah, is there any capacity where they can be influenced? Do you think?

Well, yeah, absolutely. mean, if you look at the US Senate, and again, I'm not like dive deeper into the to American politics, I don't really know that well. But I mean, if you look at some of the pictures of the people who are US Senate, so who had been there for I don't know, you know, forever, you know, we have 70 year olds, I think, or, you know, mid 70 year olds that are in the Senate that can barely walk. And, you know, it's just like, these career politicians, like there should be limited terms, right, you should be able to kind of make sure that you can't it's not a career, like it's a career, like I think you're absolutely right from that perspective. I make same agreement, which is, you know, if you're financially independent, you don't need to do this. You're doing it because you really have a genuine, wanting either power or you're gonna do it because you really wanna serve, right? And there are people like that. And there are also people who know that there's a lot of money and after money, I'll leave it after they leave politics that could really change. you know, their entire trajectory. I like that, you know, certain politicians can't be bought because, you know, there is, they don't need it. And now I know that might be a naive thinking that, you know, politicians are not bought in other ways and, know, other things that are under hand. I'm sure there's always going to be things that are going on. But the reality is, that I think that there's a lot of things that are going on that if you only allow people who understand,

Look, of course.

I mean, I guess I think of people are they're always good people in the world and the good people rise to the top to be able to be in those positions of power. I would hope that they do the best things. Are they gonna be perfect at it? No, everybody's flawed in some way. Are they gonna lean towards their own beliefs? Absolutely. But I feel like if your intentions are there and you can minimize the corruption that are being able to be in those leadership roles. I think that's gonna be a better way than actually having a leader who's incentivized by their own personal gains. Again, I'm not saying that none of us have personal gains when we become leaders. We obviously have personal gains, that's why we do it. But I feel like if it's so much better that when you're financially independent, then you actually lead the people rather than knowing that if I get this role, I'm gonna be more financially well off. Um, hence like my comment around the Canadian government that they're holding off the election so that some people can get their pension for life that I feel like that is unethical and it's, shouldn't happen. Um, and, that's the, those are the things that, uh, I would say that that, you know, we need to kind of somehow stop because it's, it's, it's putting the wrong incentive. I mean, you're absolutely right around, if you're not financially independent, like who's going to want to leave their businesses, you know, running their businesses, uh, who are successful to go be in these positions that. are that you can get scrutinized by the media and you don't get love and you're now in the public life and every move is being questioned. Like, why would you want to go do that? Right? Where you can just happily to earn what kind of salary? You're not doing it because of the money, right? So that's why a lot of people don't, it's like in schools, right? Who are the teachers typically? Well, usually you're not the teachers that have successful businesses, right? Unless they are there just to give back. It's usually career. you know, lecturers, career educators who really haven't, have only done from a theory perspective, but never actually gone and built a business. And we've seen that in, you know, in our profession as a chiropractor is like, there's going to be chiropractors who are lifelong teachers and there's nothing wrong with that, but they're not necessarily the best teachers to teach, you know, chiropractors to help them build a business because they probably weren't that successful in the practice. And very rarely do I see, and it does happen, where sometimes you do see one or two that are successful go back to the schools to be clinicians or whatever, because they want to give back to the schools and the students. But that's usually not the case.

Yeah. And I'm glad you mentioned that. or as I do declare the part of the reason why we went to Barcelona in the first place and we're now in Edinburgh, for exactly the same reason, you know, as, um, as, uh, people within the extended chiropractic community who had a level of experience, we kept on getting tired of hearing of graduates leaving from the profession of chiropractic specifically. because either they lost their way, they couldn't connect to why they were doing what, particularly women, the attrition of women leaving the car-braking profession is astounding. And so we, particularly Bettina, who decided, look, I don't want to do this. I'm prepared to step up. It's a conscious decision. And she could only have done that if she had a level of financial freedom to be able to pursue this, because you don't follow academia.

Mmm.

for the money, you do it because it's a calling, right? Yeah, you know, and, and, and, and it's like to, and quite often people aren't really clear on that. You know, like there's in the consulting role that we have, it's, it's daylight between, between that, but there's a part of, of leadership and calling and purpose and serving that you do because that's your own metric, your own, uh,

Yeah, can imagine like, yeah, exactly.

basically value structure that governs that. And I would like to believe that those are the idealistic part of me is the part that wants to believe that that's what politicians do. That's what they just go, I want to make a change. I want to create something better for my community than we already have. And I feel I have the skillsets to do it. That to me is a person I can get behind. Part of the reason why for me, you know, like, um, Kennedy, Kennedy was really, that's the part that I got really behind.

Yes.

Um, I want to see, you know, when he's talking about make America healthy again, I could get really behind that as a concept. And I would hope that that as, a, as a perspective is what other nations look at and go, what can we do as well? And what inspired me about that was he's a guy who is technically democratic royalty. Who, who basically committed heresy by going, you know what? No, I'm actually going to go and work with another party. I've been denounced by my own party, my own tribe. I actually want to help society. I'm going to fill out with someone who has a totally diametric, like to me, I have huge respect for that. No matter how much pushback he got personally, because I think that you're focusing on the issues and the people rather than your own position.

Well, that's one of the things I find really fascinating to me is that, and this is why I don't enjoy politics. It's like the pushback that you actually get against all of these things. For example, him, I really admire RFK Jr. for his role and I hope he gets it in terms of being the role of trying to make America healthier again. I I don't know how old is he at the keys. Late 60s or early 70s or whatever. Yeah, late 60s. like, exactly. Like he's a guy who's like, you know, take his, you see him with his shirt off, he's going out there and he's working out. Like, isn't that the guy that you actually want to really be the head of, you know, chaining the system from within? And yet, he's getting criticized, right, for like all of these things. You're like, but don't you want that?

late 60s, yeah. Looks jacked and healthy, you know. Yep. Yep.

What's your other, what's your counter argument that he's not the right person, but yet, then what are you supporting? Like you actually want people to get sicker and dying? Like, and if you compared to the person who ran the health before him, holy crap, like have you seen what she looks like? You're like, are you kidding me? Right, like are you kidding me? Like how is this even possible that, you know, and nothing against her, I don't know anything about her, but just.

Previous, I don't know. Have you seen that photo? Yeah, same, same. I saw that and went, okay, yeah, policy. Yeah, yeah.

I know we're judging based on a picture, there's a picture does say a thousand words. And this is what I tell a lot of health practitioners, I'm not saying you have to be the healthiest person, but man, you gotta have to look the part, right? You gotta look the part, right? Meaning you gotta do the work, because you can't fool, right? You typically can't fool what you look like because it's not genetics, it's like this is what you do. how we look is the basis of what you put in your body. how you, what, and when I say put in your body, not just food, but like the nutrition, the exercise that you put in your body, that's what's gonna make the difference, right? You can't lie to that, right? You can, you know, talk about it, but it's like those are the people that should be leading health, okay? And that's why I find that really hard to understand that they, because they're so against the party or they're so against the person, they almost lose sight of the bigger picture. Are we so focused on the person? Are we trying to help America get healthier? What are we doing here and what are we arguing against? And I think this is where, oftentimes, leader has to really stay strong in their beliefs and despite all these attacks, have to keep in mind what are you doing, waiting for. Because most people would just go, that's just too hard. My family's being targeted, I'm being targeted, I don't need this. Most people wouldn't want to be in that position. I don't want to be in that position.

Well, two things I was going to say is number one went back in, I think it was about 1997 or eight. got, we were living in country, New South Wales at the time. And I've got approached to be, uh, to run for, um, the city, representative in the city. And at the time I went, no, look, I'm not interested in running in there. Cause I knew what that would involve. And I agree with you that I just didn't have it within me to commit to something I thought was very important. So totally agree with that front. But when you're talking about. Uh, representing great luscious. You've got RFK. Here we are talking about a guy who's a great, who is a great ambassador for health. And then you've got someone like Trump who's like, whose own admission he's never, you know, I can't remember when he's at a vegetable last, he talks about his love for, um, for junk food and, and soda and all that doesn't exercise hardly sleeps. And it's like, how the hell do you have so much energy and vitality?

Thank

You smash every belief that we have about what good health and nutrition looks like that photo of Kennedy and Trump and, Elon on the plane. Well, they're opening up, you know, um, the Mac is burgers and the look of incredulousness in our case faces priceless. He's like, I haven't eaten anything like this. Well, so there's always outliers, right? There's always people who are going to bucket.

Yeah. Yes.

But I honestly don't know how he has the energy and stamina to do what he does based on how he, what he feeds his body. I just don't understand that. And it challenges everything about what I believe about health, you know?

Yeah, well outliers are outliers and there's going to be certain people around there, but it's also like, but the higher the probability is that, know, when we talk about health as, you know, as a health leader, as we discussed, you need to kind of do the things that's most, you know, what's going to get you there. Are you going to get it right? No. Do I get it right? Absolutely not. Do I only eat healthy food? Absolutely not. You know, but majority of the food should be, right? And I think that that's going to, you know, from a credibility point of view, from a brand perspective, I think that's going be super important as leader because

Yeah.

you know, most even to our kids, as being a leader to our kids, if we tell the kids, you know, not to smoke or not to drink, and we do the same thing, well, they're gonna go like, why do you get through it? And why, you know, like, is this making sense? It's just it's it's congruency that has to be there. And the integrity has to be there too, for us to kind of move forward, I think.

Yeah, which then leads into that age old argument of a leader's born or they developed, right? And it's that whole scenario, you know, like you may certainly exhibit leadership qualities very on, but a lot of the times I've over the view that the situation reveals itself and the person and the leader develops and grows through the experiences if they allow themselves for that. What's your take and thought on that?

Well, I think this is very similar to like as an athlete being born or is it skill, you know, like, is it born or, or they developed, think, um, and this, this is leadership is the same thing. And I, I, my personal belief is that it's both. think there are, there's going to be circumstances. I'm sure we can pull up examples where a person born had no natural leadership skills and, they learned it and they were able to develop. And then the other way around is that there are certain people who were born with all this natural leadership skills and they enhanced it as well. I think it really depends on, I think being born with it will give you a leg up in a sense in the natural DNA, but are we ever gonna prove that? Probably not. But I think it's just down to, I think maybe three factors. One is DNA, like are you born? Do you have natural key characteristics? We can't deny that there's certain people have certain characteristics based on their DNA, right? And then the second thing is also how were they nurtured in through their family? Like how did their family shape, their family and also their experiences as a youth, how were they shaped? Because I think the belief of the family and how they were raised is gonna influence how that gets developed and nurtured out of them. And thirdly, it's gonna be the desire to actually go and seek. and learn and put themselves in those experiences to get better at, you know, the leadership skills. So I think it's enhanced at those levels. So I think it's a bit of both. I think if someone is born with it and they have some natural charisma, as an example, you have a leg up, but doesn't mean you're going to do anything with it. Because if you don't actually develop the skills to be a leader, then I don't think you're going to get there. But I think that just because you didn't, I'm born with charismatic kind of energy, I think you can develop. You know, I don't think I had any charismatic energy when I was young. I don't think I was, you know, personally, I feel like for me, I feel like I may have had some tendencies of maybe a leader, but most of this leadership has to have been forced and fine tuned and nurtured and developed myself. Not because I'm saying like, I mean, I'm so good to develop, but I just feel like, you know, I knew myself as a kid, I was very shy. didn't, you know, never took anything on, didn't have the courage to kind of step into those roles. but it was not until like later on in my life where I started, you know, building that confidence. And this confidence actually didn't come until probably near the end of my chiropractic college years and then actually afterwards. I'm talking like 26, 27 before I really recognized, you know, I could have the potential of making a difference, but that had a lot to do with falling a lot of leaders and really being interested in like those speakers specifically, and then trying to mimic. their thoughts and patterns and listening to them and ingraining their message in my brain, which then I think ultimately shift how I thought. What about you? Do you think it's born in nature?

Yeah, I like that. Yeah. think it's a bit of both. It's a bit about its nature and nurture that kind of thing that age or argument talent versus hard work, all those kinds of things is there's some people who are just naturally gifted and it goes back to the principle of epigenetics where you've got your, your genetic potential, but how much of that you express comes down to lifestyle factors, et cetera. It's the same thing with talent. Like, you getting the most out of yourself? And you know, some people have a huge amount of talent, more talent in their little finger than the next person does, but they never actually express it. They never develop it. So I think that there's, that's why I agree with you both. I agree with what your thought is about both in that there's inherent attributes or traits that may make it easier or harder, but it's what you use with those and what compelling forces and drives along the way that inspire you and what situation shows up that forces you to expand and grow. to meet that challenge. So I think their determinants of leadership that are really factors. So this is why I'm really interested and curious coming back to the US is what kind of Donald Trump will be this time around, because it's all well and good to go. Here's what it was like there. But between when he became leader and now that's eight years. You know, he's gone and lost a presidency, he's come back four years later. He survives within a head turn of being assassinated. not once, but twice. I don't know. And when you look at, I read George Washington's biography and they talked about the greatest general, one of the greatest generals they've had as leaders, but as a growing up, he was less than that. He definitely wasn't the leadership quality that now put them on their currency and he's such a revered leader. He grew into that. But if you'd taken a snapshot of him in his 30s and 40s, he was nothing like that. And so I'm really, really curious to find out, will that be different? And are people who previously were against Trump, have they seen something that's different in the narrative and the way he's presenting himself that suddenly goes, I can get behind this guy now where I previously couldn't? I don't know. I don't know. But I'm really curious to find out.

Hmm. Yeah, yeah, like, mean, for, yeah, for me, like I look at the, you know, I remember following, you know, the, Trump versus Hillary, you know, back then, and I really didn't like Trump. I really didn't feel like he was going to be a great president. And when he won, was very surprised and, know, but like looking at this, this one, you know, versus Biden or Harris or, you know, I, know, maybe it's just the way I'm seeing things, but I do feel like he's a different person than he was the first time around. Right?

That's where I'm coming from. That's what I'm from. Yeah

Like that's exactly what you're saying. And I do see that. mean, again, I'm only one person set of eyes, but I feel like you're probably seeing the same thing too, which is not now, of course, it really goes to show whether not the next four years is he going to follow through? Like it's all good and well and say, let's face it, he's a politician now. He's a media personality. He can say whatever one to buy the vote to get him in, but it's actually what his action is. What's going to dictate, you know, what will happen. But I do feel like one, I think a couple of factors probably affected his leadership. One, he's getting older. And I think that probably has this insight of like, okay, like there's only so much time left. I think we all kind of feel that way at some point to recognize like, okay, that's going to change how we view life. Secondly, assassination attempts, like that's going to be like a brush of death, like in one moment, like if he just didn't turn, like if he didn't turn, like he would have been dead, right? So it's like that split second of like, that's the, that's the little, like those are the sliding door moments. We could have such a different conversation around this if it was someone else. And I think third is like learning from the experience of failure.

Yeah, yeah.

I think not for failure just because he lost, but the failure of actually during this first tenure of the four years and the people he surrounded himself with. And you look at the cabinet picks that he did for this time around is completely different than the first time. Because the first time he almost didn't know, he didn't know what to do. So he actually had people there that, know, other people saying that you should choose these people. And now he's taking a very different approach. He's bringing like a lot of young people, very sick.

Yep. Yep. The Supreme Court, yeah, the Supreme Court appointments. There's a lot of young people. Yeah, I agree with you.

Yeah, and coming from a lot of from business, a lot of entrepreneurs, a lot of tech people that kind of come in that are just to bring a very different look who are if he if he thinks strategically, he's bringing people that are outside of the political sphere sphere, like the Ilan, the Vama Swaley, like, sorry, I can't remember his name, whatever Swami like these guys are not politicians, and they're not from Washington. They're entrepreneurs, which is really interesting. will see how this goes. But he's trying to almost

from a swan.

do the exact opposite of what he did the first term, which hopefully that means that he's learning from his lessons and going, okay, I'm to do things differently. Who knows? We don't know how that's going to turn. Will he be able to push past the Washington and the US political underlying and the parties that are there and the power that be? But what I do feel like at least he's doing something different. I think that's what we can learn from as a leadership perspective. He's like trying something different, not doing the same thing over and over again. and trying to do exactly what he did last time.

Yeah. And, you know, irrespective of what you look at in your policies, there's got to be something to the guy. It's got to be more than just ego and power because the challenges that this guy has, has worked through, you know, the indictments, the, the, the negativity, you know, like, you know, you would have been, you know, jailed for 700 years and all these charges and whatever. look, there's no question there's blemishes on the guy's record. don't get it. But there's something about, I don't know, there's That photo when he got shot, when he turned around and his first instinct was to go fight, I think that mobilized a lot of people. I really do. I think I'll look back on that. It's kind of like one of those. I remember watching that and I think, I personally feel like history was made on that day because had he been assassinated, I think what it would have potentially done for what it's worth is created turmoil and potentially civil war in America.

Yeah.

And I can't imagine, I don't want to think about what would have potentially happened, but I just look at that and go, okay, what would happen if those kinds of scenarios, but to have, you know, the instinct to actually rise above your own fear and actually have a message. Sure. You know, you could look at it and go, the guy's a multiple, uh, an incredible marketer, but no one, no one can prepare for that and have the insight. So there's something that gave me an insight to a part of his character. And maybe that's the leader that they need right now. A lot of people will disagree with that, you know, because there's people who will look at this and going, this is the dawn of a new age. Other people are going, I can't get out of America quick enough. Who's right? I don't know. But there's something about a leader that has the fortitude to just lean in and step up when challenged. And I think that that's what a lot of people bought into in this leader.

Well, only time will tell and the actions will speak louder than words here. And then I think that that's what's gonna, it's gonna be. And I think that it's, I think a lot of people are starting to shift their narrative of, well, let's just see, you know, like a, you know, a lot of Democrats that I've spoken to just going, okay, well, it is what it is, right? It's almost accepting that something you can't control, you've already kind of voted and it's almost like, all right, well, we'll see. Cause you might as well like why kicking and screaming when you can't do anything about it.

Yeah.

is now it's just like you just hope for the best. And I do hope, I do really hope that it starts to move the political landscape across the world to really start moving in a direction that's actually more incumbents of less war and also just like prosperity for people. Of course, that's not gonna be, but there's gonna be some pain in that, right? I mean, so if just from a financial debt perspective, like they gotta bring that debt down. And that's going to be some pain. It's going to be some cuts on certain things and expectations. And, you know, it's going to be unfair for some, for certain people. And it is, but unfortunately that's what's going to, it's going to be affected. But oftentimes like we have not necessarily full control over that. But it's also just watching and seeing how this shapes out. But I think there's a lot of lessons to be learned and it'll be interesting to kind of see, will he be a different president than he was the first time? I hope so. I hope so, just for the sake of America and also for the rest of the world. I really hope so. Cause I felt the first four years was just such a circus. Um, like just the narratives and stuff. I know that starting to try to bring that up, but I don't think it's sticking this time. I feel like the narrative, like the mainstream media is, sticking. And, I think they're just, I think they're starting to lose. And this is what they call it. You know, the death of the mainstream media. think it's because of that, because people are tuning off now and people are not really buying into what they've been selling.

Yep. Yep.

over the last eight to 10 years. And I think that there could be a shift here because we get to see for what actually is and let us judge for ourselves for the reality that it is. And again, it's hard to do that, but at least more information will help us make better decisions, I think.

Yeah. And I think the overarching takeaway for everybody in their own life and world is that there is going to be sometimes situations outside of your control that make things either easier or harder for you. It'll either create hope or despair. It's about looking at the situation and go, how can I make the best use of this situation? What can I still do? If you just pack it, you know, basically fold and throw your cards in and go, that's it. I'm done. can't do that. That's not going to serve you. It's about going, okay, things have shifted. Things have changed. Things are uncertain. Things are imperfect. What do I do now? How do I adapt? How do I keep moving forward irrespective of what's going on? To me, that's a really important decision. If you don't like the decision that's been made in a democratic process, what are you to do about it? What are you going to do? Are you going to adapt to it? Or if you're that leader who's going to challenge the establishment, this is an opportunity for you to rise up. You know, and it doesn't have to be, you don't have to go to the highest office of the land, but it may be in your organization. It may be in your office. It may be in your family where you need to step up and create change and be the leader in that family or that environment or that community that actually creates a change you want to see in the world.

Yeah, and I think, you know, when we think about the lessons we can learn from leadership, it's also recognizing that, you know, become the leader that is really for the constituents that you are trying to lead, like the people you lead, whether it your, the company employees that work for your company or being a leader for maybe it's like being be intentional about serving the community that you actually are the leader of, you know, whether it be in a health space or, you know, an economic space or financial space. you know, being a leader in your family, you know, being a great dad, a great mom and leading that, you know, those are the people that you're trying to take care of and, and, and try to like, I mean, again, I'm saying try because I think we're not, we're all flawed in some way, but the realities is like leaning towards focusing on the betterment of humanity and betterment of people. That's, I find is the better definition of leadership, right? Leadership is to be able to make hard calls, make decisions, but it's for the betterment of people rather than the self-serving. self-serving for yourself. And I think that's what, you know, the main highlight that I really want to kind of stress when it comes to being a leader.

Well, Lawrence, you started with the we live in interesting times and I think that's probably a really good way to close that out too, as a summary of we live in interesting times and it's a wait and see what happens on a world scale. But this was probably more of a politically influenced discussion that we've probably had. I enjoyed it. I don't know. hope to other people did. It's not so much us pontificating about our views. It's more a case of looking at what's going on in a global sense. and current affairs and going, okay, how is this relevant to our podcast? How is it relevant to the message that we're talking about? you know, that to me is the biggest story going around in the world, you know, the last little while. And I thought it was helpful to bring that in and take the lessons out of it that we can summarize for our listeners.

Yeah, and I hope that we can continue having discussions across the world just because we disagree on topics, but it's more about having agreement that we can have discussions without actually hating each other. think that's the most, I hope that the world moves towards that medium. So, all right, this Jim and I on the art of imperfection, with the Wabi Sabi Show. We'll look forward to catching you up with the next episode. Take care.