The Politics of Egoism

Egoism, in holding that individuals ought only to consider what they want for themselves, may at first glance appear to have little mileage in politics.  With people being told they should just care about their own desires, society is most likely caught in a perpetual state of conflict.  The rule of law could hardly prevail when self-centred behaviour everywhere is deemed acceptable.

However, what recent decades have revealed is that a hierarchical form of egoism can become a serious political force.  It operates on three levels.

First, it glorifies the ego of the leader.  Instead of subjecting those seeking or holding power to moral scrutiny – demanding that they care for others and put the interests of society above their own – it encourages the virtual worship of those who arrogantly present themselves as unquestionable.  Such egoistic leaders can make false accusations against innocent people, but whenever they commit a crime themselves, they claim they are being set up.  They indulge in corrupt practices routinely, and lie shamelessly to deny their countless wrongdoing.

Secondly, the hyper-egoistic leaders attract as followers those with strong egoist inclinations. They offer validation and support to people who have few qualms about pursuing their own preferences at the expense of others.  They seek to bring into the fold anyone who considers being concerned with the feelings and wellbeing of other people as a sign of weakness. The leaders tell their followers that they are right to always put themselves first, they should hold on to their prejudices against others, and they should seek their own betterment irrespective of the damages that might cause everyone else.

Thirdly, the relationship between leaders and followers is reinforced through [a] the followers vicariously identifying with their ‘faultless’ leaders so that they can feel powerful when the arrogant leaders act with impunity; and [b] the leaders enabling the followers to neglect, mock, despise, intimidate, exploit, or injure others who are unable to defend themselves. The followers are thus made to feel gratified and righteous when they get their own way at the expense of those derided as ‘weak’ as well as the genuinely vulnerable.

The pattern outlined above would be familiar enough given the behaviour of recent demagogues who won power in the US, UK, Brazil, etc. Their strategies are reminiscent of abusive cults where the followers go along with whatever their leaders say or do – no matter how groundless or outrageous it might be.

Like cults, it can be difficult to get those who have been drawn into it to see sense and disengage from it.  There are cases where a cult implodes – where the corrupt and abusive practices of the leaders become so excessive that even their fervent followers have had enough and abandon them.  In other cases, where the leaders lose their grip and one by one their followers are reached by friends and families who reconnect them with reason and common humanity – leading to the cult dissipating.  But there are also cases where the cult gains strength and threaten the lives of others on an ever-larger scale, and society has to respond with robust law enforcement.  In those cases, the cult leaders scream that they have been victimised, that their followers will readily use violence to defend themselves against ‘injustice’.  Provided those on the side of fairness and democracy stand firm, the reign of such cults can be brought to an end.

This is the challenge we now face in relation to the threat of hierarchical egoism.