By world leader, I mean political leader of a country, whether it be chancellor, president, prime minister, sultan, caliph, emperor, emir, monarch, etc.
If your country has more than one of those (i.e. France, England, Australia), pick the leader of government as opposed to the head of state.
If your country has more than one of those (i.e. France, England, Australia), pick the leader of government as opposed to the head of state.
I think it varies, context is everything. I'm only basing this on one specific event, but I think manipulation is essential. Honesty seems to get you nowhere, you need to be pragmatic and have support. Regardless of how you get it, support is necessary.
I think of people like Julius Caesar or Alexander who were very good at capturing a kingdom but knew nothing of how to govern one. And others who were very brave yet guileless and so met their end.
It still bothers me that 'silly clevers' can triumph through what little they know and the very intelligent be destroyed by what little they're Ignorant of.
It's a funny world we live in.
There will never be a single world leader, and under our current political systems, absolute global power is a very dangerous idea.
Political globalisation is inevitable, however.
Our current political systems need to be reorganized, such that the highest level of government (global), would be a council that is limited in power, to issues that pertain to global issues only. (This concept is somewhat like the structure of the Government of Switzerland.)