1. The relationship between leadership and knowledge of political and policy processes is a clear and direct one: one cannot be an effective leader without that knowledge, whether intuitive or learned. In this age of non-heritable leadership, "leaders are made, not born" ("PPSI," p. 7). Such a leader might be self-taught in the school of hard knocks, in the mode of a Harry Truman, or the product of a well-studied, often academic approach to leadership, as with Bill Clinton. There are no guarantees, of course. Learning alone might not foster leadership and, indeed, prove inimical to it, according to Gardner's theory of "anti-leadership vaccine" (p. 10). Nevertheless, the skills needed to exercise effective leadership are such that no individual with a talent for leadership can progress far in this field without them - and they can be learned (p. 11). Those skills include a developed "ability to sense problems, to mobilize human resources, to plan, to communicate effectively, and to have sound knowledge of the operation" (pp. 10-11).
Leadership is a fluid characteristic: as few individuals wield unrestricted power, most leaders are followers in part, persuaders and, as often as not, administrators as well. In the political sphere, leaders must have a good sense of the systems within which they are operating (p. 11); a knowledge of process is indispensable to effective leadership.
2. Within the context of Greenstein's (1968) definition of political socialization, this writer has experienced an intimate and self-aware involvement in that process. Defined in terms of informal and formal political learning, political socialization is a necessary component of the concerned citizen's education; for a teacher, one often entrusted with the responsibility for inculcating others with that knowledge ("Political Socialization," pp. 75-83), the political socialization process is also an instructional tool. This writer has been both ...