Dysfunctional leadership creates a self-sustaining cycle where employees vying for promotion mimic the toxic behaviors of their boss. They do this to endear themselves to the decision-maker, believing that demonstrating a better leadership style would disqualify them from the role.

History’s most shocking atrocities are defined less by their authoritarian leaders and more by the 'giant blob of enablers' who facilitate them. The current political climate demonstrates this, where professionals and politicians abdicate their expertise and principles to avoid conflict, becoming complicit in the process and allowing destructive ideologies to gain power.

Much of government functions on decorum and unwritten rules. When political actors attack these norms—like challenging procedural traditions—it creates a cycle of retribution that destabilizes the entire system more profoundly than any single illegal act could.

When public figures violate long-held social contracts, like showing respect for the recently deceased, it's more dangerous than the act itself. It signals a fracturing of the shared cultural grace and unspoken rules that provide societal stability.

When one political party prioritizes governing and maintaining standards, it's disadvantaged against a party that prioritizes drama and disregards those standards. The governing party is forced onto the defensive, constantly reacting to manufactured outrage instead of advancing its own agenda.

Stakeholders demand courageous leadership but foster a culture of intolerance. By failing to distinguish between major offenses and minor infractions and "canceling" leaders for mistakes, the public itself disincentivizes the very courage and authenticity it seeks, creating a paralyzing circular problem.

Major political realignments are not always triggered by specific crimes but by a pervasive 'vibe' of elite entitlement and impunity. Revelations that expose a culture of being above the law can act as a societal 'let them eat cake moment,' sparking a revolutionary shift in public sentiment and policy priorities.

A leadership style centered on "kindness" doesn't mean avoiding disagreement. It means setting a firm boundary: policy and decisions are fair game for debate, but personal attacks on opponents are off-limits. This strategy combats public "conflict fatigue."

Populist figures don't create societal problems; they rise to power because existing economic and social issues create an environment where their message resonates. To solve the problem, you must address the underlying conditions, not just the leader who represents them.