It’s clear that the world as it is – considering the climate crisis, the rise of nationalism, geopolitical tumult, the possibility of AI killing us all by the end of the decade – could do with some more ethically astute and capable leadership. If you could time warp them into the present day, which leader from history could the world do with now – and why? Bernard, Machynlleth

Send new questions to [email protected].

Readers reply

No one from history. The climate crisis, technology challenges and the power concentrated within a group of several billionaires are unprecedented in human history. The leader we need is probably a woman, already an activist, someone who does not care to be a politician, but does care about making the planet livable and safe, for current and next generations. And she or he can get things done. We don’t need someone who is “just” wise and has the right worldview, we need someone who acts, despite all the bureaucracies and dependencies we have created in the world. The right people are already there. Only we have not noticed yet, glued to the old template and old perspectives. Lundskane

Mikhail Gorbachev. He recognised that the game was up, and managed to end the cold war (at that time) without it becoming hot. It is a great shame that the west’s leaders were more interested in triumphalism than mutual development. ArthurOPodd

Deganawida, otherwise known as The Great Peacemaker, a little known (in the west) leader of the Iroquois nations. He brought five tribes together, under the law of peace, getting all the warriors to bury their weapons under a white pine. It takes a far braver (wo)man to pursue peace among warring nations than one who sends thousands to their deaths in the name of their own egos. slojdare

Perhaps Nelson Mandela. He has so much respect that the world would listen and act accordingly. Rattandy

Michael Collins, a strong but realistic leader who wasn’t afraid to make tough decisions. He was a tough, resourceful, clever military leader and a realistic politician who wasn’t afraid to compromise. SunShineEile

Jacinda Ardern – and she’s available! chrisstarling

We just need the United Nations to have full control, setting targets for countries’ governments, judging disputes, redistributing wealth, protecting all things vulnerable, and taking the lead in things single nations can not. It is already there, it just needs a full mandate and no more vetoes. Essay1970

I think a leader who can lead the world through all the present insanity is already here: Mark Carney. He clearly possesses a moral courage that is spreading across the globe, and an international vision that is being followed and implemented by an increasing number of countries. JacintoBoca

Sir David Attenborough? His respect for living things and joy in the lives of all manner of creatures would enfold us all and permeate our collective unconscious. Myfavouritememoryis

Jesus Christ. Alison Swan

I suggest Theodore Roosevelt. Well educated, fiercely intelligent and productive, an unhealthy youngster who developed into a physically robust man, a wealthy man who could see the problems of the lower classes and empathise with them, courageous against the powerful class, of which he was one. He fought corruption, personally led the fight at San Juan Hill during the Spanish-American War, started the US national parks programme, and fought against corruption. He was our equivalent of your Churchill. Alas, are there any men (or women?) of this stature and ambition in the US? Lawrence Baker

Queen Elizabeth I.
janet cox

Ernest Shackleton. He put people before achievements. Trapped in the ice off Antarctica, he set off at great personal risk to save his men. Although he could have been a great national hero, when he got home the world had changed and was at war. Who knows, if he had the opportunity to develop his philosophy as a national figure sanity may have prevailed. Even if it didn’t, a people-centred postwar settlement might have prevented the rise of the Nazis. A model which we need today. John Sommer

Jimmy Carter. He was a far better president than he was assessed by Americans. He just arrived at the wrong time, with the Arab oil embargo and the revolution in Iran. When gasoline was in shortage and there were fights at gas stations, he was blamed. When the attempt at rescuing the Iran hostages went disastrously wrong, he was blamed, when the true fault was with an incompetent military. He was unfairly made to look weak because, behind his back, Reagan was making deals with Iran to keep the hostages until he was elected. The best part was that during his entire presidency the US was at peace, and he was a leader who withdrew support for the South American dictators the US had worked to install. He was elected to decontaminate the US administration, and he could do it again. Boguille

Margaret Thatcher. Despite all the hate directed at her memory, she is the only PM since the second world war to get the public finance straightened out. She played a crucial role in the first climate treaty restricting refrigerants. No doubt she could bang heads together over carbon emissions. Had she not disappeared from the scene, our relations with Russia would undoubtedly be in a better place. There is a long list of achievements which people conveniently forget. Yes, she oversaw the “destruction” of many old industries. But they were already twitching corpses when she came to power. Who now would want to work in the mines or shipbuilding, or any of the other old extremely dangerous occupations? Even though the City of London may not be quite the force it was, our service industries which she encouraged are still a source of high revenue returns for the state. The creation of the single market had much to do with her drive to get something useful from our EU membership. Her mistakes are well known. Taking her eye off the ball over the Falkland Islands. Not using council house sale money to build more social housing. Right now we need someone as strong as Thatcher to keep Nato focused and stand up to the tech bosses etc. Colin Neal

No past leader would cope. No present leader is coping. Is it time to do away with leaders altogether? Drivantestigo