Meditation on the Paradox of Despair and Hope

I would disagree with the assertion that hope vs. despair constitutes a paradox of leadership (at least in the area of leading change [which is the call to action in the Pope's encyclical]). One of the first steps in leading change is to convince people that change is in fact needed. This can be done by showing how the current state of affairs is somehow lacking or inadequate. The worse you can make the current situation seem, the greater the obvious need for change. While despair is not a requirement per se, a profound discontent with the status quo generates more pressure for change. Hope in the form of a proposed course of action to address the identified problem then becomes a tool used by the leader to move towards what is (hopefully) a better end state. The greater the despair, the greater the need for hope and the better chance a leader has to galvanize those being led to action.

While this dynamic can be seen at work throughout history, it is rife with problems. It is easy to find fault and throw stones. And as seen in the politics of the last decade, it is easy to arouse and stoke discontent. Having a viable, workable solution towards which to guide the now discontent population is far more difficult. And all of this relies on having a leader who is morally sound and who uses the power granted them for the actual greater good rather than for self-enrichment or ego gratification. Such leaders (and the ability to devise solutions to wicked problems) are hard to come by. This rarity (I think) is a far greater challenge to effective change than the apparent paradox between despair and hope which I see as a necessary precondition for change....