Connecting With Those We Like – and Our Politics

under the tribal theory, where leadership was (and still is where there are tribal societies) defined as being accountable to all persons under the leader’s realm, the ideal leader would be one who could best accept all parts of himself. Whereas, in Machiavellian theory, which for today we could call Orwellian or elitist, a leader is one who can successfully manipulate masses into believing that their regime is ‘democratic’ when in fact it is anything but. For Machiavelli said “The [ideal leader] must retain a semblance of the old forms, so that it may seem to the people that there has been no change in the institutions, even though in fact they are entirely different.” Hobbesian theory is quite similar, Hobbes having lived during the 16th Century religious wars and advocated a powerful secular state that could stand up to the Church – and those at war with the Church. And likewise is Spenglerian theory; Spengler’s model was of the State, as political governance, subjugating tribal societies and evolving through various stages in politics (and other things) in justifying that subjugation.

How do we prepare ourselves for political systems?

It depends upon which theory of political science one believes in. It is easy to prepare ourselves for a Machiavellian or a Hobbesian or an elitist system. For all of these systems are based on the concept of victim-victimizer. The ‘masses’, or common man, are victims of present or recent or distant past despotism; and are at best dupes, and at worst cannon fodder. But these systems are not sustainable. As Orwell points out, the Middles are always plotting to overthrow the Highs, recruiting through manipulation some faction of the Lows; and sooner or later they will be successful. (as if that’s going

Pages: 1 2 3