McKibben talks in his piece “Movements without Leaders” and he explains how todays revolutions do not have cut and dry leaders, BUT it seems to be that everyone is pitching in and they are all like leaders in a sense, working hard together. This reminds me of Charles Duhiggs piece called “From Civil rights to Megachurches” When he talks about strong and weak ties within the chruch. Duhigg talks about how there were a bunch of churchgoers who took on the task of hosting bible studies at their houses, and it allowed the church to grow super quickly, and it was because there were many smaller leaders who were able to use strong ties to make a bunch of weak ties between the small groups which all attended the church. The question is do movements work better with leaders OR without promient but many leaders, and I think the answer is to have many leaders. If everyone feels like they are needed to make change they are going to fight harder and harder for what they believe in instead of following the visions of one person they are all able to collabarate and create change together. I think it is important to have some well known figures AND have everyone be a “leader” at the same time.
