part of my new - ELITE MANAGEMENT THEORY series
Personal interests are paramount – most important.
The smaller the cooperating group is the better it reflects
member’s interests.
(Obviously, the minimal group of one person reflects that person’s
interests perfectly.)
The larger the cooperating group is the more powerful the
group is and the less it reflects personal interests.
Groups of comparable sizes can have different levels of
power depending on the participants.
Therefore logically elites form – smaller groups of more
powerful people who tend to dominate larger groups.
There is a quirk though. An aristocrat - a member (or
potential member) of the elite may appeal to the masses – a larger and
therefore more powerful group of people and topple the ruling elite to
establish his or her own rule – eventually creating its own elite group of
people who are more powerful just because they are closer to the leader one way
or another and for different reasons.
Two theories have emerged to address that –
Plato/Aristotle’s aristocratic communism - the guardians (Turkish Sultans,
Lenin) and but who will guard the guardians – obviously nobody and the whole
idea of philosopher kings* (regardless of some remarkable examples of ethical
leadership) generally failed, and that brought to the emergence of liberalism.
Liberalism at first everything seemed (and still seems fine)
– liberal democracy shall account for the interests of all members of society
or citizens and the free market economy should provide for the satisfaction of
never ending increase of needs and expectations. The brilliance and
attractiveness of the liberal ideas culminating in the US Declaration of
Independence a document unsurpassed not only for its historical significance
but also for its synthesis of current political thought.
Attempts to analyse humanity based on generalisations may
dangerously mislead those who pursue them because the essence and power of
humanity is diversity.
On the other hand, cooperation provides a decisive advantage
and we can safely assume that the current people are those with ancestors who
have cooperated more successfully than those who cooperated less effectively
and subsequently perished.
