Yes. It is quite true that the communication systems endemic to our species have had a catastrophic tendency to percolate precisely the wrong kinds of self-interested personalities into positions of power.
While it is not always the case that the worst succeed in that particular (and peculiarly) theatrical game of politics, the worth of a leader is as much as anything else measured by their orientation towards generative vocabularies and binding, unifying concepts as opposed to those who seek to simply and destructively amplify and exploit background psychological signals of difference and insecurity.
Something worth considering in this context is that the political systems of our world are very much a function of communications systems that are also profoundly inflected by the complex (as adaptive) dynamics of language.
The primary communication and cognitive mechanism of human language as sociotechnical transmission medium for, and adaptive self-representation of, our planetary civilisation (such as it is) is problematised by the fact that as a proxy information and energy-processing (computational) system, it maximally self-propagates as a function of its failures to communicate.
This is a critically unacknowledged enigma.