As some of you know, this week I begin a 6-month sabbatical from my work with InterVarsity Christian Fellowship! This is a gracious gift offered to paid employees after 7 sequential years of service (it’s been 8.5 for me), and I’ve been looking forward to it for quite some time. Already, I have deactivated all of my social media profiles, set up work email’s autoresponder, and deleted any work-related apps off of my phone. Beyond that, during this sabbatical I am looking forward more time to read, write, pray, sleep, be outside, do small house projects, and spend time with my family.
This Sunday I was reflecting on the concept of fasting, i.e., abstaining from something (usually food) for a designated period of time, usually with the goal of gaining greater spiritual focus, clarity, insight, or depth. And in some ways, I think that a sabbatical (a period of “fasting” from work) is very similar to a period of fasting from food.
Like food, work was designed by God as a good thing for humans to have and to enjoy–both existed in the Garden of Eden before sin entered the world. However, we see in our present world that humans have a broken relationship with both of these things in many ways. Thus fasting and sabbaticals (or even just a weekly Sabbath) are crucial spiritual disciplines to remind ourselves as humans that ultimately these things are not where our identity can be found, but rather in being children of God. Both fasting and sabbaticals are deeply biblical, and we can see periods of both fasting and rest (sometimes both at the same time!) being commanded of God’s people throughout Scripture.
For myself, I have always been a high achiever and a hard worker, ever since entering school 25 years ago and the workforce 10 years ago. I am a little scared but mostly eager for these next 6 months to rest and to reflect deeply on who I am when I am not achieving something. It’s for that reason that I have kept my goals and plans fairly minimal for this time–I could of course take a seminary course or start a side hustle, but then I would still feel tempted by the idol of productivity. I am instead going to try my best to embrace the gift of rest and all that God has for me.
If you are the praying sort, please pray for God to meet me during the next six months. Thank you!
Category: Personal
Regarding the proposal for a Carlisle Truth and Reconciliation Commission
“WHERE COMMON MEMORY IS LACKING, WHERE PEOPLE DO NOT SHARE IN THE SAME PAST, THERE CAN BE NO REAL COMMUNITY. WHERE COMMUNITY IS TO BE FORMED, COMMON MEMORY MUST BE CREATED.”
-George Erasmus, Native American Elder
Compared to most nations around the world, in the United States we have an incredibly short memory regarding our history. And that is particularly true when that history is unpleasant or uncomfortable. It’s much easier to buy into simple, nice, triumphal narratives that make us feel better about the past. But as George Erasmus’ quote points out, if you bury that ugly, nasty past, you can never truly forge real community. That is why truth-telling, particularly the form of truth-telling that comes through “Truth and Reconciliation Commission“-type projects, is such a crucial tool for correcting past injustices. The most famous TRCs have been in Rwanda and South Africa, but truth-telling tactics were used in Germany, Canada, Australia, and in a host of other countries.
In recent weeks, my tiny town of Carlisle, PA has made local headlines after a proposal for Truth and Reconciliation Commission was introduced by the Borough Council, as a key way to address systemic racism in this community (here’s the seventh, hopefully final version of the proposal). I am supportive of this Truth and Reconciliation Commission for a number of reasons, which I will explain below.
First, I think this proposal starts in the right place by first focusing on examining, illustrating, and documenting the problem of racial injustice.
According to the wording of the proposal, this TRC’s main work will involve: “(1) examining and documenting policies, practices, and actions by the Borough of Carlisle and the Carlisle Borough Council that have contributed to racial inequity and systemic racism; (2) providing opportunities for individuals impacted and traumatized by systemic racism to share their stories and experiences, relating to polices, practices, and actions by the Borough of Carlisle and the Carlisle Borough Council; (3) facilitating conversations among and between community members from various backgrounds; (4) collaborating with existing businesses, institutions, nonprofits, agencies, boards, and commissions; and (5) identifying, analyzing, and recommending to the Carlisle Borough Council institutional and policy reforms meant to mend the wounds caused by and combat systemic racism.”
These activities are all part of establishing a “common memory,” rather than one that selectively remembers the past. While merely documenting the past and proposing reforms is not the only thing that needs to be done, it is an important first step. I also appreciate that the TRC has an end date of December 2022, meaning that it is not some ambiguous, eternal project, but one with a clear timeframe and goals.
A second thing I like about the proposed Carlisle Truth and Reconciliation Commission is the collaborative way it has come about. According to conversations with Council members, the proposal came about after the recent town hall panel on racial equity in January, that featured a variety of local leaders and activists. An initial draft was put together, then sent to those same panelists, who offered feedback and revisions. A subsequent Zoom session generated some more revisions, and then more have come up after the proposal was introduced at the February Borough Council meeting. Next, the proposal will be voted on in March. What I really appreciate about this is how truly collaborative this process has been. Too often, government bodies create proposals that sound nice rather than being actually meaningful to the community (or on the flip side, activists create proposals that have no chance of governmental implementation). To have a truly collaborative approach between the Borough Council and community members is a very encouraging start.
Thirdly, I appreciate that in this proposal the Borough is taking ownership for the legacies of racism have been passed down from the previous generations. While of course there is still active racism happening in Carlisle, a large part of the economic and social disparities between different ethnic groups is due to governmental policies that existed in the past and have left a long legacy. For example, I have a friend who owns a house on Parker Street, and the original deed from ~1920 states that the house is not allowed to be sold to “Negroes” and members of other non-white races. While housing discrimination based on race is now technically illegal, for how many decades were whites allowed to build up wealth and real estate in Carlisle while Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) kept out of this wealth generator? Real estate is just one topic; there’s tons of local issues like this.
Now, it would be easy for the Borough of Carlisle to say, “Well, all that injustice all happened in the past, and we condemn it – but it wasn’t our fault!” That is the common deflection of so many people in our society, refusing to take responsibility for anything and instead finding someone else to blame. But instead, by choosing to take responsibility for the past, present, and future of this town, the Borough Council is showing real leadership – a leadership that is all too lacking in our country. (In a different world, Carlisle wouldn’t need to be doing its own TRC because there would have been a national or state-wide TRC decades ago…but that’s another topic.)
Potential Objections to the TRC
Let me address a few concerns that others have brought up about the proposal for the TRC, and a share few concerns of my own.
Firstly, there have been a few (white) Carlisle residents who have voiced their opposition to the proposed TRC by saying that such a commission is a waste of time, because there is no systemic racism in Carlisle. To me, that’s an easy claim to put to the test. If there truly is no widespread, systemic racism in Carlisle, then the TRC will be truly unable to collect any stories, experiences, or evidence of it! But, if the TRC does indeed up with significant evidence about racism, wouldn’t that be something worth getting out in the open? As a Christian, I firmly believe that all evil gets worse when it is covered up. So instead of covering it up, we should be exposing it to the bright, disinfecting light of truth, where it can be properly dealt with.
Moreover, after just 7 years of living here I can tell numerous stories of racism in Carlisle that I have either personally witnessed or heard firsthand, not to mention very public displays like the KKK flyers in 2019, or the drivers who cursed out and mimed shooting Black Lives Matter protesters downtown this fall. One quick story: on my street this past June during the George Floyd protests, an elderly white landlord told me unprompted that he used to rent to Dickinson College students but stopped in recent years because “it’s been going downhill ever since they started letting all the minorities in,” saying something about it being a jungle down there. I called him out saying something to the effect of “Hey you can’t say that” but wish I had a better response in the moment. Looking back, I’ve only seen him rent his house to white folks in the 5 years I’ve lived on this street. Coincidence? Or … ? And if he doesn’t rent to non-white folks…is it any reason that those folks struggle to find affordable housing in Carlisle? How many landlords, businesses, etc. are racist like this man? And if he felt safe being blatantly racist to me, someone he had never met….who else is he influencing with his views? Anyway… I could tell dozens of anecdotes like this…and the fact that some people deny racism exists shows just how necessary the TRC really is!
Secondly, there are some who would argue that we need to simply move on and forget the past. Can’t we all just have unity? But trying to impose unity and historical amnesia without justice is a false peace, built on a foundation of violence and lies. It is only in a study of our past mistakes that we can begin to make amends and avoid repeating similar mistakes. As one anecdote: after their defeat in World War II, German soldiers civilians were forced by the Allied armies to watch graphic videos about the concentration camps. For most of these people, it was their first time seeing the full extent of the evil perpetrated in their name, and they were horrified. To this day, 75 years later, Germany still pays financial reparations to the descendants of Holocaust victims as well as to the nation of Israel. Moreover, anti-Semitic speech such as denying the Holocaust is illegal in Germany and carries criminal penalties. This does not fix the past, but it is a sign of contrition. In contrast, when there is no study of past mistakes and no redress of wrongs, it opens the door for the same or even worse mistakes to be made. Imagine if the Union troops had required Confederate civilians to actually come face to face with the horrors of slavery after the Civil War–would white Southerners have been so quick to turn to the KKK, to lynch mobs, and to Jim Crow laws?
A third objection to the Carlisle TRC might be that there are more urgent things to focus on in Carlisle, such as COVID-19, mental health, crime, affordable housing, food deserts, infrastructure, sustainability, etc. A few quick responses: a. It’s possible to do multiple things at once. b. The TRC will operate semi-independently from the Borough Council and not necessarily distract from day-to-day activities. c. Nearly every problem in Carlisle also has a racial component to it. Minority residents have less of an access to affordable housing, affordable healthcare, healthy food within walking distance, smooth roads, healthy trees to provide shade, etc…I could go on and on. Some of these problems might be too big to fully solve in our tiny town, but isn’t it better to at least try to solve them for the people who need the most help? For example, hypothetically, if the Carlisle TRC discovers that in the past the Carlisle Parks and Recreation department avoided planting trees in minority neighborhoods, one possible avenue of redress could be to set aside a lump of money to deliberately plant extra trees in those neighborhoods. Why would that be a bad thing?
Those are a few of the major objections to the Carlisle TRC that I’m aware of. I have a few concerns of my own, which I will briefly share:
First, I’m afraid that the TRC will do lots of meaningful research but that nothing will be done with that info. Thus it is incumbent for us as residents to hold each other and our leaders accountable to act on the things that are revealed by the TRC.
Secondly, there is a concern I have that the TRC will not fully address the genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Native Americans that used to live in this area (not to mention those who were forcibly acculturated into White American culture at the Carlisle Indian School, the first example of such “Indian Boarding Schools”). Partially that’s due to the fact that there’s virtually no Carlisle Natives left here to share their stories and to offer redress to…but that doesn’t mean it’s not important. Carlisle first started off as a frontier/pioneer town on the western border of the original US colonies, with frequent confrontations with Natives, and we must not skip that piece of history.
A third fear I have is that many white residents are not actually interested in learning the truth about racism in Carlisle nor doing anything about it. A one-sided TRC that exposes unsettling truths about racism but doesn’t involve white residents could cause these residents to double down on the status quo, or worse lead to a reactionary “whitelash“. There are probably a number of ways to try to address this concern, but one way is for white allies to bring as many of our fellow white neighbors and family members into this process of learning history. The truth may be painful, but it must be known.
Overall, despite my concerns I think that this proposal for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in Carlisle to address racial injustice is a good idea, and long overdue. I look forward to seeing what this TRC brings to light.
I Was Wrong…
Our political culture has many problems, but a big one is an unwillingness to admit when one has been wrong…and we’re seeing that happen big time among many right now as they double down on defending things they know are wrong (e.g. the myth of widespread election fraud, Qanon, or arguing it was Antifa who invaded the Capitol, etc).
Thus, in an attempt to try to normalize the practice of publicly admitting past mistakes, here is a (partial) list of political views that I once held that I now believe I was wrong about. If you’re willing, I encourage you to publicly share your own list (only if it’s humble and sincere; snarky confessions don’t count!).
PS-this isn’t a space to disagree and to try to argue that my former views actually were correct; my point is to promote the idea that people can, and should, be willing to publicly change their minds when faced with the evidence, and that to do so is not shameful or “weak”.
1. I was wrong to have supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which I mistakenly thought would swiftly bring peace and democracy to that nation. I am grateful for Mr. Losee who patiently engaged in letters back and forth explaining why he, a Vietnam veteran, thought an invasion of Iraq would be a mistake. He was right, and I was wrong.
2. I was wrong in 8th grade to argue that affirmative action policies were fundamentally unfair; I now believe that they are one of many tools to try to correct an unfair past and build a better, more just future.
3. I was wrong to think in 2008 that Obama’s election would lead to an increase of abortion overall and a legalization of “partial-birth” abortion. Neither of those things happened, and in fact, the abortion rate dropped to record lows during Obama’s time in office.
4. I was wrong to think that the Occupy Wall Street movement would lead to any major or systemic change. As massive as that movement seemed in 2011, looking back 10 years later I don’t think it produced any tangible results.
5. On a similar note, I admit I was overly enthusiastic regarding the 2011 Arab Spring. I thought that popular movements would swiftly topple dictatorships across the Middle East, but what we’ve seen in Syria, Libya, and other nations is overall pretty messy.
6. I was wrong to believe that Donald Trump would get the United States into a new foreign war. While I do think we had some close calls, and I would be worried if he had been re-elected, the fact is that he has (almost) completed his four years in office without starting an additional war.
7. I was wrong to expect that demographic changes would make Democratic electoral dominance inevitable. Instead, as was proven this November by conservative vote shifts in Florida, Texas, and many other places, one cannot assume that urban residents and ethnic minority voters are an automatic lock for Democrats.
8. I was wrong to think that Facebook, Twitter, and other large social media corporations could adequately govern their own spaces without government regulation. The profit motive is far too enticing to promote a healthy ecosystem, and I now think the government should take steps to break them up, regulate them better, and/or somehow ensure that these platforms are not fundamentally harming our society via fake news, extremist groups, and polarization.
Again, this isn’t an exhaustive list of political topics I have been wrong about, but these are some of the big ones that come to mind. May all of us, and especially our political leaders, be willing to admit when we were wrong–and commit to doing better.
“Who’s Ever Ready?” – Poe’s Leadership Development in the Sequel Trilogy
This is one of my favorite bits of writing I did in 2020, and it was first published here for the website Eleven-ThirtyEight (which I would argue is one of the most thoughtful and insightful Star Wars blogs out there). I’ve been a guest writer on Eleven-ThirtyEight a number of times– you can view my other articles by clicking here.
As someone who works with college students through a campus ministry, my favorite part of the job is leadership development. Every year I try to guide students to take steps forward along a leadership “pipeline”: taking risks, sticking with commitments, inviting others into a vision, being honest about past mistakes, and dealing with failure—all while doing so with a measure of humility. That’s why I’ve loved the recurring theme of leadership development in the Star Wars sequel trilogy, particularly as it relates to passing the baton to the next generation. There are many ways that we see characters grow in this trilogy, but perhaps the clearest development arc of a leader is that of Poe Dameron.
Whether it’s his risk-taking in The Force Awakens, his lessons learned the hard way in The Last Jedi, or his final maturation in The Rise of Skywalker, we see a continued path of development for Poe into a leader far beyond just another stereotypical flyboy or lone ranger. Poe’s steady growth as a Resistance leader, under the guidance of Leia and other mentors, is a stirring model for anyone looking for a clear picture of a leadership pipeline in action.
Basic Leadership Skills: Boldness, technical skill, and beginning to cast vision
In the opening of The Force Awakens, Poe Dameron is a commander and a skilled pilot, sent by Leia to retrieve a valuable piece of intel. Within the opening twenty minutes of the film, Poe exudes basic leadership skills such as boldness, the ability to take risks, and technical prowess. Thinking quickly, Poe entrusts the map to BB-8 when he realizes his capture is imminent. After his X-wing is disabled, he grabs a rifle and starts providing covering fire for the Jakku villagers. A few scenes later, as Finn helps him break out of First Order captivity, Poe quickly teaches him how to operate TIE fighter weaponry, and coaches him through the process of destroying some of the turbolasers. Throughout their escape, Poe does not denigrate Finn or doubt him, but instead affirms him. Thus the viewer is introduced to Poe as someone with the clear stirrings of leadership qualities: he takes initiative, exhibits proficiency in technical skills, and can quickly teach other individuals basic tasks.
Although Poe disappears for the middle act of TFA, he jumps right back into the action for the final one. Back at the Resistance base, Poe advocates for Finn to Leia—“Finn’s familiar with [Starkiller Base]”. It’s a small moment, but meaningful: so often leadership simply involves networking the right people to each other, and then stepping back and letting the process take over. Poe could have tried to share the information on Finn’s behalf, claiming credit, but he happily lets Finn take the lead with Leia. Later, leading the attack on Starkiller Base, he keeps his dialogue centered and encouraging, reminding Black Squadron of the big picture: “Yeah, we gotta keep hitting it! (…) Remember, when that sun is gone, that weapon will be ready to fire, but as long as there’s light, we got a chance.” Perhaps a bit cheesy, as far as dialogue goes, but it gets the job done. At the climax of the film, Poe bravely flies inside the very structure he’s trying to blow up, destroying it from the inside.
Thus in TFA, we see someone with the basic building blocks of a leader. Poe is bold and daring, willing to take risks for the sake of others and the broader mission. Moreover, he has clear technical skills, and is able to quickly teach those to others, whether it’s describing how to fire a TIE’s lasers or explaining how large Starkiller Base is. Lastly, Poe is able to quickly encourage and refocus the allies he’s fighting alongside, even in the midst of battle. If TFA were the only film to show Poe’s arc as a leader, it would be inspirational, but perhaps a bit basic. TLJ and TROS take his growth as a leader to the next level.
Intermediate Leadership Skills: Leading squads, learning from failure, and preserving those you lead
At the beginning of The Last Jedi, Poe leads another stunt to save the day: attacking a Dreadnought head-on. Since the point of this is simply to delay the First Order, Leia orders Poe to retreat once she learns the evacuation is complete. Her priority is the continued existence of the Resistance, not a token military victory that she knows will do nothing to dent the First Order’s overall forces. Unfortunately, Poe only sees the opportunity to take down a Dreadnought, and refuses to retreat—leading to heavy losses.
“There were heroes on that mission!” Poe blusters to Leia after she demotes him. “Dead heroes. No leaders,” Leia corrects him. “I need you to learn that.” Unlike the First Order, which has limitless resources, it is crucially important for Resistance leaders to steward those under their care and raise them up to be the next generation of leaders. As Admiral Holdo says, “We are the spark that will ignite the fire that will restore the Republic. That spark, this Resistance, must survive.” I believe it’s this same dynamic that lies at the heart of Admiral Holdo’s dismissive attitude towards Poe. Holdo is surely aware of Poe’s incredible skills in an X-wing, but she knows that derring-do is not the right way to preserve the Resistance given their current tactical situation. For the second time in The Last Jedi, Poe has a choice: whether to sit back and accept his senior commander’s view of the bigger picture, or to attempt a flashy, riskier plan that will put him back in the center of the action.
Once again, Poe chooses action, supporting Finn and Rose’s plan to sneak aboard the Supremacy and disable the hyperspace tracker. Through the course of this doomed scheme, however, we see Poe take leadership in some new ways. He carefully listens to younger leaders explain their plan, and sends them on their way with the resources they need (coordinating with Lieutenant Connix to aid their escape). Later, he gathers additional co-conspirators who join him in mutiny after a failed attempt to win Admiral Holdo’s support for his plan. Say what you will about Poe’s mistakes here, but he is clearly willing to develop a plan, bring others into it, and risk his own reputation and life for it. It would be admirable, if it weren’t so risky to the overall Resistance. I can almost feel Leia’s frustration before she stuns him: Come on, you should know better by now!
Despite the mutiny, Leia and Holdo don’t seem to hold a grudge against Poe (perhaps they see a bit of themselves in him?). As Poe lies stunned on a gurney, Holdo gently touches his face and slyly nods to Leia, “That one’s a troublemaker—I like him.” “Me too,” Leia agrees. I might be reading too much into it, but I resonate a lot with this small exchange: two senior leaders smiling about a talented up-and-comer who has obvious potential but needs just a bit more maturing. Poe’s leadership skills are immensely valuable, if only he can grasp the bigger picture: preserving the Resistance is more important than immediate action. “[Holdo was] more interested in protecting the light than she was seeming like a hero,” Leia gently chides Poe once he regains consciousness.
Finally, at the end of TLJ, Poe begins to understand this lesson. In an echo of Leia’s order to him at the start of the film, Poe orders Finn to retreat from his futile attack on the battering cannon. And later, when Finn wants to leap into battle to help Luke Skywalker, Poe stops him. “He’s stalling so we can escape. (…) We are the spark that’ll light the fire that will burn the First Order down. Skywalker’s doing this so we can survive.” Poe gets it! Finally, Leia can relax, knowing the future of the Resistance is in good hands. “What are you looking at me for?” she says. “Follow him!”
Perhaps Rose’s quote summarizes this leadership lesson best: “That’s how we’re gonna win. Not fighting what we hate, saving what we love.” In our own world, too many underdeveloped leaders are consumed by the causes they lead, becoming bitter as they face resistance, or devouring the very people they lead for the sake of the mission. This type of toxic leadership culture ends up treating individuals as pawns, not worth protecting if there is some short-term profit to be earned or goal to be achieved. In contrast, leaders who are actually maturing are those who begin, like Poe, to understand that the future of the movement lies more in saving and growing one’s fellow travelers over the long haul, rather than simply using them up for a short-term utilitarian gain. Poe has advanced a lot as a leader by the end of TLJ; in TROS, Poe will complete his growth.
Mature Leadership: Being honest about one’s past, acknowledging weakness, and raising up other leaders
In TROS, we see Poe become the general Leia always saw in him: he owns up to his past, acknowledges his shortcomings, and leads other leaders. For the first chunk of the film, though, Poe is the same risk-taking, pep-talking, squad-leading commander we witnessed in the previous films. That’s great—the need for those basic leadership skills don’t go away. But his turn to even deeper maturity comes in the second act when he realizes he needs to go back to Kijimi, a system where he had betrayed and deserted his old spice-running friends. We see Poe weigh the cost of facing those he had wronged (and coming clean about his past to Finn and Rey) against the bigger picture—“If this mission fails, it’s all been for nothing. All we’ve done, all this time.” In both the Star Wars universe and our own, too many leaders try to bury shameful past secrets, or attempt to hide present biases, vices, and weaknesses. Of course, those areas of brokenness only fester in secrecy. Poe takes the big step of not only facing his secret shame, but doing so in the presence of those he loves. In the end, it’s not as painful or embarrassing as he fears it will be, and the risk opens up the possibility of reconciling with Zorii and his other former compatriots.
Poe’s growth continues on Kijimi. After a tense reunion with Zorii, she offers him a chance for redemption, romance, and an escape from the destruction to come: by fleeing with her to the Colonies. Poe has the chance to save himself, but he turns it down. “I can’t walk out on this war. Not ‘til it’s over.” He then turns even more somber. “Maybe it is [over]. We sent out a call for help at the Battle of Crait. Nobody came. Everyone’s so afraid. They’ve given up.” This is Poe’s dark night of the soul, a level of vulnerability and lament that we haven’t seen from him before. Poe has been holding in these dark fears, but takes the time to share them with Zorii. Zorii, for her part, doesn’t try to take advantage of Poe’s dour mood, but encourages him: “I don’t believe you believe that.” Poe nods; encouraged or not, he’s committed to the Resistance, to the bitter end.
But Poe’s commitment to the Resistance isn’t necessarily enough. After a verbal spat with Finn on Kef Bir, Poe blurts out: “I’m not Leia!” Finn’s response doesn’t comfort him: “That’s for damn sure.” Up to that point, Poe could take comfort that the buck doesn’t stop with him and that Leia will always know what to do. Yet what happens when Leia is gone, and he has no choice but to take her place? All those fears—of failure, inadequacy, doubt—rise up within Poe as he sits in front of Leia’s shroud-covered body back at the Resistance base. Can he really lead the entire Resistance without Leia watching over him? Contrary to his prideful instincts in the previous films, Poe finally admits that he can’t be the leader the Resistance he needs: “I’m not ready.” He can’t simply defeat an empire all alone. But therein lies the secret, Lando tells him. “We had each other—that’s how we won.”
And this is the turning point, the final, most important lesson about leadership that Poe needs to learn: ultimately, his job as a leader is to empower other leaders. That’s what Leia, Holdo, and others have been doing for him this whole time, and their example pays off. Poe immediately asks Finn to come into command with him: “I can’t do this alone.” In an antithesis of the First Order’s philosophy, Poe knows that others have to be trusted, and empowered, to do the right thing to actually defeat the enemy. “The First Order wins by making us think we’re alone. We’re not alone. Good people will fight if we lead them. (…) What our mothers and fathers fought for, we will not let die.” And they don’t. Poe, along with Finn, Rey, Lando, Chewbacca, and dozens of other leaders, destroys the Sith fleet in poetic fashion: by targeting their central power systems (both personnel and equipment). Once Emperor Palpatine and General Pryde are gone, the First Order is leaderless and collapses under its own weight. The Resistance, on the other hand, is decentralized, chaotic, and chock-full of leaders—and it can’t be taken down quite so easily. This type of organizational structure makes no sense to the First Order: “It’s not a navy, sir, it’s just…people.” Yet like other mass movements we see in our world, the Resistance’s spark has turned into a raging bonfire, and no amount of opposing forces can ever snuff it out.
Poe’s journey as a leader is complex and not entirely his own; he owes much to Leia, Admiral Holdo, Finn, Lando, and others. But throughout the sequel trilogy, he consistently takes steps towards humility and maturity, and the Resistance is better for it. Leaders in our own world would do well to apply the lessons of Poe’s leadership arc to both their own growth and to how they develop those under their care.