Quiet talks about naturally introverted societies dominated by a single ruler. Is this a problem with introversion? Is "quiet persuasion" enough to hold off immediate dominating political forces

I was fascinated by the section on cultural introversion.
The societies mentioned were ones that had been/are dominated by a single ruler. Is this a problem with introversion? I'm not convinced that "quiet persuasion" is enough to hold off immediate dominating political forces.

I'm thinking of Ghandi, though he wasn't actually a ruler. Through quiet resistance I believe he achieved quite a lot. Same with Mother Theresa and the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama may be considered not a ruler per se, but a leader. He has spoken around the world, which may pull him from his comfort zone, but I'm certain he's introverted at heart.

I am of the thinking that Quiet Persuasion is not going to help much with the current situation in this country. Fortunatly we do have people who may or may not be extroverts that are willing to join groups and lead political type movements that are trying to force our redundant and useless congress to fix some of the problems.

Though a great admirer, I can't see a Gandhi winning over Kim Jong-Un of North Korea. He would just be jailed, tortured and killed. I very much believe in the power of non-violence, but I wish Susan Cain had addressed this. Her section on Asian students was enlightening, but I am left with the question of how well they are able to stand up to dictators.