When I was in college, I majored in economics and philosophy, and it was apparent even then that a significant shortage was headed our way: a CEO shortage of strong, viable leadership.  And that the attack on our culture that was creating that shortage was purposeful and malicious.  And now we see it everywhere, from failed companies ranging from everything, whether we are talking about the collapse of the Frisch’s restaurant chain, Tupperware, or the Hollywood movie industry.  In every form of business, we see a class of CEOs who were taught weak politics, put in place over those reasons alone, and have choked off and killed huge portions of business sector economies.  I used to warn everyone back then, and people would laugh and giggle and call me a conspiracy theorist for what I was saying.  But as it turned out, everything was true.  We are not making Jack Welch-type CEOs anymore; clearly, people are yearning for it, which is one of the reasons why President Trump was elected back into the White House.  People don’t like the lack of leadership in the world, or what has happened to their businesses.  But if you talk to company heads from top to bottom worldwide, especially in the United States, you find these trained monkeys who don’t know what they are doing and couldn’t lead an ant colony to a breadbasket at a picnic.  Reflecting on my college days, they were only teaching Marxism as an economic viability which I thought was ridiculous and it didn’t take much to figure out that an entire generation learning that kind of garbage was of course going to be crippled in their adult lives, which is precisely the case we are seeing now.  The biggest challenge in the modern age is not returning our economy to our hands, which is occurring rapidly under Trump’s policies.  The shortage of leadership is coming out of the CEO class now, who aren’t prepared to lead companies into healthy sustainability.

Another thing that I am very critical of, just as I was of the college teaching methods, is the new trend of LinkedIn, the professional networking site.  There is a lot wrong with it, which was designed to pull leadership-oriented professionals toward a social score of acceptance that is very China-like.  It’s more about uniformity than exceptionalism, and the deficiency is certainly showing up in our culture today.  We can bring back our jobs from the impact of globalism, but can we put CEOs in place to run those companies in time to run them?  I have a lot of faith in the adaptability of human beings, especially when they are under pressure.  And I would say that we can.  However, the current recruitment method and implementation of a leadership culture, as seen on LinkedIn, is not where the future is.  Consensus building with other losers hiding behind professional titles will be smoked out quickly under the scrutiny of marketplace competition.  And companies that have gone down that road are finding themselves lacking, which is evident in the failures of so many companies these days, who followed the rules of the Obama administration and found themselves closed and bankrupt, which was always part of the plan.  Who needs an army to attack an enemy country when you can train a generation of leadership to lead their economy down the drain?  It could be argued that many of the failures we are seeing from older companies are because they are at the end of their business cycle, and new opportunities are squeezing out the old-fashioned companies with tired brand recognition.  But I would say it’s more than that.

I used to get a lot of flak for my interest in philosophy, even when majoring in it, from the same type of losers today who think LinkedIn is their key to networking salvation.  But I will say now what I said then: what you think matters, and why you think it.  Not following the orders of what some professor committed to Keynesian economics and Marxist social diatribes tells you will be important when it wasn’t going to be.  Probably the best thing I have ever done was spend those college years reading so much philosophy independently, without being told to do so by anybody.   And if more people had prepared themselves independently of the established institutionalism, they’d be better prepared for this significant change in leadership necessity, now.  And I am enjoying a certain satisfaction now because of all the criticism I endured.  The world will find a way for sure.  But it won’t come from those most trained to do it.  The market rejects bad CEOs in favor of innovation, hard work, and merit. It is not the LinkedIn values of a fancy profile picture and a padded resume that looks and sounds impressive, but it is essentially representative of a trained failure made that way by institutionalism to hit the market as a failure and bring down our entire society.  When what you learn philosophically leads to ruin, don’t be surprised when bad leaders ruin companies.  As I say that, I’m thinking of Bob Iger at Disney, who has pretty much ruined that company with bad social philosophy and a reckless assumption that the power of the company would always remain, and would never feel the effects of competition.

The world’s future leaders will not come from institutionalism; they will come from the pressure cooker of life.  Those who have survived the pitfalls of globalism with their take will be the most viable to adapt to these rapidly changing economic standards.  The marketplace will find leaders to run all these new companies.  But it won’t be by the old networking ways, but in the philosophy of success that is at the foundation of all endeavors.  Process fulfillment can’t allow group consensus to hide Marxism in the shadows, which is what has been happening.  It can’t allow the losers of LinkedIn to pad a resume and say some fancy things here and there without actually leading people to victory.  No, in a competitive environment, good leadership will be driven by a proper philosophy of success that wins the day.  Not the CEO who wanted to check all the DEI boxes and led their companies to ruin following it, as Bob Iger did at Disney, and many other huge companies suddenly struggling to maintain their markets.  The brownnoser, the boot licker, the social appeaser will not find a world conducive to their back-footed strategy.  Only the strong and wise will adapt to this rapidly changing market.  There will be a lot of failures, but those who do succeed are those who weren’t taught by institutionalism to fail, purposely.  But those who didn’t listen.  And as I look around, I am happy that I never did.  It’s easy to criticize now with hindsight being what it is.  I feel a little sorry for those who thought they had a handle on all this, because the suffering is hard on them.  But that’s how the ball bounces in a wild and woolly world.  Competition will root out the bad.  Marxism can’t hide them from the world as they have been doing.  But we will be far better off for it. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707