Hard Times and Great Men

 

The way governments like the Tories in the UK, or Trudeau in Canada, are imploding looks like divine intervention. But so does the concomitant rise of political figures with unique, uncanny talents: Farage, Poilievre, and Trump. All are masterful rhetoricians; all are brilliant off the cuff; all work without notes; all convey sincerity.

How is it that these hard times seem to produce the needed man?

We saw the same thing circa 1980. After a time of ennui, of decline and relative social chaos, we saw at once Thatcher in Britain, Reagan in the US, and Pope John Paul II; one might also cite Trudeau in Canada, although he was not new in power. He rose in response to an earlier crisis, that of Quebec separatism; but was still in power 80-84.

And we saw it in the great leaders who rose in response to WWII: Churchill, De Gaulle, Tito. 

I theorize that such talents are always about. However, so long as things are going well, nobody wants to listen to them. Churchill spent years in the wilderness. Partly due to envy, partly due to a sense that they might change things too much: safer to elect a cipher, so long as things are going well enough. There is also, in the back of our minds, the fear that any one individual who is too skilful and strong might be able to turn his office into a dictatorship.

I think, however, this last fear is misplaced. Those who are especially skilful are least tempted to seize power; they can achieve it legitimately. Not only did Churchill leave office peacefully, for example; he declined a peerage. A guaranteed office was an insult to his talents as a “man of the commons.” De Gaulle walked away from power twice. Washington limited himself to two terms. Dictators are usually unimpressive sorts who rise above their competence, and so need to strongarm to stay there. They are the relatively obscure backroom players, like Putin, or Stalin, or Mao, or Ghaddafi, or Saddam, or Franco, or Kim Il-Sung, or Pol Pot, or, I might say, Pope Francis, who seem to emerge from the shadows. They appear on the dias, and people ask themselves, “Who is this guy?”

Granted that some dictators are the exception. Hitler and Mussolini are exceptions; as is Canada’s Trudeau. They were prominent figures before being elected, and had political skills. But I think it can fairly be said that they were all three clearly unqualified for their role of governing, of management. So they resorted to force and subterfuge.

Trump, Poilievre, and Farage all, in their way, have extensive management experience. 

Nor did Hitler, or Mussolini, radiate spontaneity and a sense of sincerity, as Poilievre, Farage, and Trump do.

They are not the stuff of which dictators are made.