Is it just me, or does it feel like every major organization is currently undergoing a "forever leader" phase? It’s getting harder to find anyone in a position of massive influence who actually respects the natural lifecycle of their role.
I was watching a documentary the other day about how different institutions collapse when a single person refuses to step aside. It really got me thinking about the ethics of "term limits" versus "finding ways to stay." It seems like whenever someone reaches their expiration date, they suddenly find some legal technicality or a way to rewrite the rules just so they can keep their seat at the table.
It’s frustrating because it usually feels less about what’s best for the community or the fans, and more about ego and maintaining a grip on power. Once you've built a system that serves you, why would you ever want to let go?
Do you think term limits are actually enforceable in these massive global entities, or is it always just a suggestion if you're powerful enough?
I was watching a documentary the other day about how different institutions collapse when a single person refuses to step aside. It really got me thinking about the ethics of "term limits" versus "finding ways to stay." It seems like whenever someone reaches their expiration date, they suddenly find some legal technicality or a way to rewrite the rules just so they can keep their seat at the table.
It’s frustrating because it usually feels less about what’s best for the community or the fans, and more about ego and maintaining a grip on power. Once you've built a system that serves you, why would you ever want to let go?
Do you think term limits are actually enforceable in these massive global entities, or is it always just a suggestion if you're powerful enough?