Showing posts with label Power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Power. Show all posts

Thursday, May 19, 2011

The Seduction of Power

Power of any sort is the ultimate seduction. The cliche is that power corrupts. I believe, it does not corrupt so much as it seduces. The form, level and amount of power does not matter. Most people think of financial corruption when they think of the corrupting influence of power. However, what usually proves irresistible is the urge to use this power to massage the ego.

Consider bureaucracy. No organization can exist without some form and level of bureaucracy - a point often lost in all the bashing that this institution endures in the popular and business press. Thus every entity regardless of whether it is a private institution or a public institution has some sort of bureaucracy. This is true irrespective of whether the institution is in a developed country or in a developing country. However, there are twin evils of a necessary institution - petty bureaucracy and red tapism. We all suffer from these two facets and all of us without exception decry them. But at its heart, what is petty bureaucracy and red tapism. The ability of the bureaucrat to exercise this power in a fashion that stokes his or her ego. This person can be morally upright, intelligent and diligent and still exercise his given power in a fashion that demonstrates to others exactly how powerless they are. This is a seduction of power.

Most high officials in organizations are offered varying degrees of protocol. Thus for example, the CEO of a private company can have the use of a company jet. A judge may be offered say a police escort. All traffic may be blocked for the passage of a president or a prime minister. At first, there may be feelings of gratitude and a sense of humbleness. Many times people in such positions come from more humble backgrounds. Very quickly however, these things are taken for granted. Indeed there is a feeling of outrage if there is any talk of revoking such perks. Why? These things massage the ego. They whisper to the concerned person "You are better than the rest. These are your natural rights because you are so superior and so important. Yes traffic should stop for you. You do important work while everyone else basically loafs around." When this mindset develops, these perks mentally morph into inalienable and essential rights. This is part of the reason why US automobile executives flew into Washington in the aftermath of the 2007/2008 financial collapse despite the fact that their companies were basically bankrupt. This factor is also partly why they were so bewildered by the harsh criticism that they subsequently endured.

Why can you not afford to argue with a police officer who stops you for a traffic violation? The officer's ego is all too often tied up with the exercise of the power that he has to stop and check a vehicle. Any roadblock to the exercise of that power hurts his ego and makes him all the more determined to impose his will over the hapless driver. Whether the driver was actually guilty of a traffic infraction is besides the point. This is how power seduces. The police officer has been allowed a limited form of power but that in his mind makes him a cut above the rest. At higher levels where the power allotted is greater, this factor is all the more important. This could be why people in the higher levels of a hierarchy (regardless of whether the hierarchy is in the private sector or in the public sector as I have mentioned above) behave in an arrogant fashion without concern for other people. In their mind the power that they have (which typically is only because of their position) makes them better than the rest. The longer they are in their position, the more rightful are the perks and privileges that they have. This is the seduction of power.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, April 14, 2011

The Lure of Power

Exactly what is the lure of power? Why do despots fiercely cling to power no matter what the consequences may be for their country? Is it because they believe themselves to be indispensable? Do they view themselves as father figures guiding their child like population to safety?

One possible reason can be money. Almost every single dictator has been massively corrupt looting millions if not billions from their countries over the course of their rule. Frequently this looting is accompanied by a deliberate breakdown of law and order and an undermining of any countervailing institutions. Building these is a pre-requisite of good governance but they would also act as a check on the looting that dictators love to indulge in.

However, while this is a major component, it cannot be the sole one. If that were the case, dictators would tend to flee when the population rises in revolt. Instead they cling on desperately and willingly push their countries into civil war like Gaddafi has done in Libya. In some cases, the despots may not be personally corrupt but they will still refuse to share power. Bahrain is currently following this route. So why try to hang on to power once the population is out on the streets and has made it clear that you are not wanted?

Incidentally power also seems to have major health benefits. The more absolute the power, the greater the apparent health benefits. Take a look at the despots sprinkled far too liberally around the world. Each one of them is a picture of robust health as long as they are power. However, most of them fall ill and die shortly after losing that power. Dictator after dictator has been the picture of robust health as long as they have control only to fall into illness and dying fairly quickly after being kicked out.
Enhanced by Zemanta