Imagine at a board meeting the issue of pollution is raised, and the directors’ responses all focus on how to deflect public attention from the serious damages their company is doing to the environment. Some suggest running an advertising campaign about their commitment to recycling their office supplies, others want to do something with schools involving children cleaning up their local ponds, and so on until an intern sitting at the back asks, “but what’s going to be done about the pollution itself?”
Whenever top executives are hit with their ‘Emperor’s New Clothes’ moment, they have a choice. They can dispense with the messenger. Or they can take a closer look at what kind of organisation they have become and embark on a genuine change programme.
All too often the focus of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has been on how to get people to form a positive view of a company, as opposed to how to ensure they become disposed to interact with it in a positive manner.
‘Seeing’ is a static state and it is transient. A view formed one moment can be easily displaced by another if other experiences throw up contradictions. By contrast, the underlying disposition to interact in a particular way – the gestalt – affects how a person relates to the experiences from a defined source on an on-going basis.
The question is how should an organisation go about building relationships with the diverse stakeholders that make up its ‘public’ so that over time, they are more disposed to interact with it positively. Some may be tempted to use gloss and misdirection to draw people into a false sense of endearment towards the organisation. But not only is the very purpose of CSR incompatible with such irresponsible manipulation, such an approach is unstable as lies tend not to cohere in any broad narrative, carries huge risks in their exposure, and is ultimately unsustainable as we live in the age of pervasive surveillance and scrutiny.
The alternative is to commit the organisation to the development of the cooperative gestalt in all its interactions with stakeholders. The cooperative gestalt denotes a dispositional tendency that prevails when the people concerned are inclined to:
• Engage in cooperative enquiry: they believe in pronouncements about what is or is not the case in so far as these are open to evidential checking, objective observation, cross-examination by anyone who can make a contribution.
• Embrace mutual responsibility: they regard those they are dealing with as deserving of equal respect, and want to treat them with the same consideration as they would expect to be accorded to themselves.
• Expect participatory decision-making: they support decisions made on the basis that the decision-makers have sought and taken into account the ideas and concerns of those affected by the decisions in question.
Organisations that consistently behave towards their stakeholders in line with the cooperative gestalt will in effect be cultivating a similar set of dispositions amongst their stakeholders in how they will interact with those organisations.
A company that is ready to acknowledge its mistakes in causing pollution, financial mismanagement, safety failures, or its deficiencies in paying the poorest staff a sub-living wage, strong-arming small suppliers, destabilising communities through mass redundancies; and is prepared to rectify them, not by high profile declarations, but through sincere collaboration with those affected, will produce in everyone they deal with the deepest sense of trust and respect.
The history of institutions – be they national governments, transnational corporations, or local businesses – bears testimony to the inextricable connections between organisational actions in line with the cooperative gestalt and the mirror image of that gestalt in how people are disposed to interact with those organisations.
CSR can never work as a one-way broadcast about the virtues of a company. To carry any credibility, it has to be built on a reciprocal basis. Respect stakeholders, be open with them in making any claims so they can look into the foundation for such claims, and involve them in critical decision making – in return, they will respect you, seek your input rather than jump to conclusions, and give you credit where it is deserved, and the benefit of the doubt where you have slipped up.
Thursday, February 19, 2015
Friday, February 13, 2015
The Case for an Open Cooperativist Development Agency
Economic systems and practices that exploit workers, users, communities and the environment to the detriment of our common good have long ceased to command respect. The only reason they nonetheless persist is that most people do not see other, more viable, options as to how they can satisfactorily live and work. But in reality, there are plenty of alternatives.
Alongside the spread of economic democracy, and the renewal of cooperative enterprise as an economic and social model, there is gathering momentum in the building of new forms of Social and Solidarity Economy; the displacement of a myopic conception of ‘growth’ by a vision and strategy for sustainability; the emergence of more inclusive, commons-orientated politics in Greece, Italy and Spain; and grassroots transformation movements encompassing community land trusts, Transition Towns, and ‘Shareable Cities’.
Furthermore, all these alternative approaches share core values and beliefs that place mutuality, power equality, and common stewardship at the heart of productive human relationships. Together they are constructing the route to a different and better future for all.
However, anyone involved in advancing these approaches must recognise that the issue of scale has to be addressed. Advocacy for many of these ideas and their adoption in diverse localities have been going on for decades. The championing of commons and cooperative models has indeed been taking place since at least the 19th century. Although they flourish in a variety of locations, they remain a small minority when people look for opportunities to find work, make a fair return on what they have to offer, obtain financial support, or acquire the goods and services they seek. Conventional businesses that manage transactions between the many to generate profits for the few remain the dominant model of operation almost everywhere we go.
Advocates for alternative socio-economic models that embrace open and inclusive cooperation are increasingly engaged in collaborative efforts to promote what they have to offer. But to reach the tipping point where their favoured practices become the majority across society, it is necessary that in parallel with such advocacy and knowledge-sharing, a robust organisation structure is put in place to raise the resources needed to support the development of these practices on a much more extensive scale.
It is time, therefore, for advocates, organisations, funders, foundations who share the vision of building open, sustainable, cooperative commons in every sphere of human interaction, to join forces in establishing an Open Cooperativist Development Agency with a Board tasked with delivering the following eight functions:
1. Promote knowledge-sharing, highlight common ideals, and provide learning on why and how open cooperatives should be set up and developed.
2. Provide coop business angels to give advice on start-up, consolidation, and/or collaboration with others with shared interests or geographical focus (on a voluntary basis; funded by a central body supported by members’ contributions; or a fee on terms agreed with the advice-receiver).
3. Raise money from supportive funders and provide low cost loans/investment to pro-open cooperative organisations.
4. Arrange cooperatisation of non open coop businesses (arranging for discussions/voting sessions, lending money to workers to take over the business).
5. Work with unions, community groups, democratic campaigners, and political parties to develop pro-open cooperativist policies and secure wide support for their introduction.
6. Negotiate with local and national govt to set up community owned trusts, and other appropriate policy actions.
7. Adjudicate/mediate between multi-stakeholders.
8. Safeguard open coops from sell-outs or unprincipled takeovers.
Ideas are important in changing how people think about how organizations can be made to serve our needs more effectively. Yet we cannot live by ideas alone. Practical outreach, sustained technology transfer, political alliance building, intervention to repel corporate encroachment, and access to substantial funding are indispensable. Relying solely on diverse groups making ad hoc small-scale contributions to run a variety of projects will only take societal transformation so far. With a well-funded development agency guided by multi-stakeholder accountability, we would be much closer to a step-change in substituting plutocratic exploitation by authentic cooperation.
--
For the report, ‘Toward an Open Cooperativism’, by David Bollier & Pat Conaty, go to:
http://commonstransition.org/toward-an-open-co-operativism/
& ‘Why We Need a New Kind of Open Cooperativism’, by Michel Bauwens, go to:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Why_We_Need_a_New_Kind_of_Open_Cooperativism_for_the_P2P_Age
Alongside the spread of economic democracy, and the renewal of cooperative enterprise as an economic and social model, there is gathering momentum in the building of new forms of Social and Solidarity Economy; the displacement of a myopic conception of ‘growth’ by a vision and strategy for sustainability; the emergence of more inclusive, commons-orientated politics in Greece, Italy and Spain; and grassroots transformation movements encompassing community land trusts, Transition Towns, and ‘Shareable Cities’.
Furthermore, all these alternative approaches share core values and beliefs that place mutuality, power equality, and common stewardship at the heart of productive human relationships. Together they are constructing the route to a different and better future for all.
However, anyone involved in advancing these approaches must recognise that the issue of scale has to be addressed. Advocacy for many of these ideas and their adoption in diverse localities have been going on for decades. The championing of commons and cooperative models has indeed been taking place since at least the 19th century. Although they flourish in a variety of locations, they remain a small minority when people look for opportunities to find work, make a fair return on what they have to offer, obtain financial support, or acquire the goods and services they seek. Conventional businesses that manage transactions between the many to generate profits for the few remain the dominant model of operation almost everywhere we go.
Advocates for alternative socio-economic models that embrace open and inclusive cooperation are increasingly engaged in collaborative efforts to promote what they have to offer. But to reach the tipping point where their favoured practices become the majority across society, it is necessary that in parallel with such advocacy and knowledge-sharing, a robust organisation structure is put in place to raise the resources needed to support the development of these practices on a much more extensive scale.
It is time, therefore, for advocates, organisations, funders, foundations who share the vision of building open, sustainable, cooperative commons in every sphere of human interaction, to join forces in establishing an Open Cooperativist Development Agency with a Board tasked with delivering the following eight functions:
1. Promote knowledge-sharing, highlight common ideals, and provide learning on why and how open cooperatives should be set up and developed.
2. Provide coop business angels to give advice on start-up, consolidation, and/or collaboration with others with shared interests or geographical focus (on a voluntary basis; funded by a central body supported by members’ contributions; or a fee on terms agreed with the advice-receiver).
3. Raise money from supportive funders and provide low cost loans/investment to pro-open cooperative organisations.
4. Arrange cooperatisation of non open coop businesses (arranging for discussions/voting sessions, lending money to workers to take over the business).
5. Work with unions, community groups, democratic campaigners, and political parties to develop pro-open cooperativist policies and secure wide support for their introduction.
6. Negotiate with local and national govt to set up community owned trusts, and other appropriate policy actions.
7. Adjudicate/mediate between multi-stakeholders.
8. Safeguard open coops from sell-outs or unprincipled takeovers.
Ideas are important in changing how people think about how organizations can be made to serve our needs more effectively. Yet we cannot live by ideas alone. Practical outreach, sustained technology transfer, political alliance building, intervention to repel corporate encroachment, and access to substantial funding are indispensable. Relying solely on diverse groups making ad hoc small-scale contributions to run a variety of projects will only take societal transformation so far. With a well-funded development agency guided by multi-stakeholder accountability, we would be much closer to a step-change in substituting plutocratic exploitation by authentic cooperation.
--
For the report, ‘Toward an Open Cooperativism’, by David Bollier & Pat Conaty, go to:
http://commonstransition.org/toward-an-open-co-operativism/
& ‘Why We Need a New Kind of Open Cooperativism’, by Michel Bauwens, go to:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Why_We_Need_a_New_Kind_of_Open_Cooperativism_for_the_P2P_Age
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Find out more about: Responsibility & Moral Development
Central to progressive politics and the development of inclusive communities is an understanding of the conditions under which people should be held responsible for their behaviour, and how that affects others in society.
This issue is critically examined in two books by Henry Tam:
Responsibility & Personal Interactions: A Philosophical Study of the Criteria for Responsibility Ascriptions, Tam, H. (Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990).
Available from Amazon or directly from the Edwin Mellen Press
This book explores the interpersonal basis of the practice of responsibility ascriptions; formulates a clear and precise set of criteria for responsibility ascriptions; and demonstrates how the proposed criteria help to solve the key problems connected with responsibility in moral and legal philosophy.
Sir P.F. Strawson, the Waynflete Professor of Metaphysical Philosophy (University of Oxford), wrote that he read it “with great interest and pleasure. I find myself fully in agreement with the main thrust of it … I particularly applaud (and share) [Tam’s] conception of the proper task of the philosopher.”
Chapters in the book:
• Personal Attitudes, Personal Interactions, and the Practice of Responsibility Ascriptions
• Is It Irrational to Hold People Responsible for Their Behavior?
• Forced to Behave in Spite of Oneself
• Culpable and Non-Culpable Ignorance
• Mental Abnormality and Responsibility
• Responsibility for Foreseeable Side-Effects & Intentional Omissions
• Determinism & Responsibility
Punishment, Excuses & Moral Development, Tam, H., ed., (Aldershot: Avebury Press, 1996)
This book brings together philosophers, psychiatrists and criminologists to explore how best to deal with irresponsible behaviour in society.
Contents:
Part 1 Punishment:
Punishment, citizenship and responsibility
Restitution without punishment - is it enough to make criminals pay?
Mental disorder, multiple diagnosis and secure provision
Part 2 Excuses:
Responsibility, mental illness and psychiatric experts
"Not guilty, by reason of genetic determinism"
The limits of criminality - Kant on the plank
Part 3 Moral Development:
Criminals and moral development - towards a cognitive theory of moral change
"Community", communities and the education of citizens
Individual versus social change
Educating responsible citizens.
This issue is critically examined in two books by Henry Tam:
Responsibility & Personal Interactions: A Philosophical Study of the Criteria for Responsibility Ascriptions, Tam, H. (Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press, 1990).
Available from Amazon or directly from the Edwin Mellen Press
This book explores the interpersonal basis of the practice of responsibility ascriptions; formulates a clear and precise set of criteria for responsibility ascriptions; and demonstrates how the proposed criteria help to solve the key problems connected with responsibility in moral and legal philosophy.
Sir P.F. Strawson, the Waynflete Professor of Metaphysical Philosophy (University of Oxford), wrote that he read it “with great interest and pleasure. I find myself fully in agreement with the main thrust of it … I particularly applaud (and share) [Tam’s] conception of the proper task of the philosopher.”
Chapters in the book:
• Personal Attitudes, Personal Interactions, and the Practice of Responsibility Ascriptions
• Is It Irrational to Hold People Responsible for Their Behavior?
• Forced to Behave in Spite of Oneself
• Culpable and Non-Culpable Ignorance
• Mental Abnormality and Responsibility
• Responsibility for Foreseeable Side-Effects & Intentional Omissions
• Determinism & Responsibility
Punishment, Excuses & Moral Development, Tam, H., ed., (Aldershot: Avebury Press, 1996)
This book brings together philosophers, psychiatrists and criminologists to explore how best to deal with irresponsible behaviour in society.
Contents:
Part 1 Punishment:
Punishment, citizenship and responsibility
Restitution without punishment - is it enough to make criminals pay?
Mental disorder, multiple diagnosis and secure provision
Part 2 Excuses:
Responsibility, mental illness and psychiatric experts
"Not guilty, by reason of genetic determinism"
The limits of criminality - Kant on the plank
Part 3 Moral Development:
Criminals and moral development - towards a cognitive theory of moral change
"Community", communities and the education of citizens
Individual versus social change
Educating responsible citizens.
Friday, January 2, 2015
The Everest of Senior Public Service Management
Here’s a perennial dilemma for those who have taken on a managerial role in public service – on the one hand, you can see how effective management can enhance the good public services are meant to deliver to people; on the other hand, you wonder if you want to take on greater management responsibility when the path up the organisational hierarchy is not always the most inviting.
In truth, the ascent is often far from easy, especially if you do not possess the characteristics and dispositions prevalent amongst those who tend to set the agenda from above. What are you going to do? You can either confine yourself to where you are and do what you can within the parameters laid down by others, or you can strengthen your own management capability so there is a better chance that you will be the one leading public service improvement in the years to come.
In partnership with the Civil Service College, I have developed a number of courses for public sector managers who want a more influential role in shaping public policies and services. Have a look at them and see if as part of your organisation’s training and development programme, you can take advantage of any of these courses:
Thriving on Diversity
It is often observed that a glass ceiling hangs over anyone who, because of certain physical characteristics or cultural traits, does not match the profile of the great majority of those at the top of public institutions. Yet the way put forward for getting round that ceiling frequently turns out to be a mere injunction to adopt a similar office persona as the ‘norm’ and behave like the majority. But narrow conformity cannot be a sound basis for inclusion. Instead, we need a genuine alternative that recognises strength in differences – an approach that enables all concerned to thrive on diversity.
Course dates: (22 Jan, 30 April 2015)
Managing Ministerial Expectations
Many courses are concerned with the ideal policy-making process. In reality, the route that goes from a Minister’s request to putting a new policy in place is full of challenges that seldom conform to any theoretical model. To navigate an effective way forward, we need to understand how best to get to know and interact with senior politicians, their advisors and those who work most closely with them.
Course dates: (3 Feb, 5 May 2015)
Succeeding through Collaborative Leadership
Effective leadership is vital in achieving organisational goals. Across the civil service and the public sector generally, it is increasingly essential for leaders to secure objectives through close collaboration with a wide range of internal and external partners, who may make very different and challenging demands. To succeed, we should aim to acquire the skills and approaches for leading top teams and building synergy-maximising partnerships.
Course dates: (3 March, 18 June 2015)
For details, goggle search for: Civil Service College + [name of the course you're interested in]
In truth, the ascent is often far from easy, especially if you do not possess the characteristics and dispositions prevalent amongst those who tend to set the agenda from above. What are you going to do? You can either confine yourself to where you are and do what you can within the parameters laid down by others, or you can strengthen your own management capability so there is a better chance that you will be the one leading public service improvement in the years to come.
In partnership with the Civil Service College, I have developed a number of courses for public sector managers who want a more influential role in shaping public policies and services. Have a look at them and see if as part of your organisation’s training and development programme, you can take advantage of any of these courses:
Thriving on Diversity
It is often observed that a glass ceiling hangs over anyone who, because of certain physical characteristics or cultural traits, does not match the profile of the great majority of those at the top of public institutions. Yet the way put forward for getting round that ceiling frequently turns out to be a mere injunction to adopt a similar office persona as the ‘norm’ and behave like the majority. But narrow conformity cannot be a sound basis for inclusion. Instead, we need a genuine alternative that recognises strength in differences – an approach that enables all concerned to thrive on diversity.
Course dates: (22 Jan, 30 April 2015)
Managing Ministerial Expectations
Many courses are concerned with the ideal policy-making process. In reality, the route that goes from a Minister’s request to putting a new policy in place is full of challenges that seldom conform to any theoretical model. To navigate an effective way forward, we need to understand how best to get to know and interact with senior politicians, their advisors and those who work most closely with them.
Course dates: (3 Feb, 5 May 2015)
Succeeding through Collaborative Leadership
Effective leadership is vital in achieving organisational goals. Across the civil service and the public sector generally, it is increasingly essential for leaders to secure objectives through close collaboration with a wide range of internal and external partners, who may make very different and challenging demands. To succeed, we should aim to acquire the skills and approaches for leading top teams and building synergy-maximising partnerships.
Course dates: (3 March, 18 June 2015)
For details, goggle search for: Civil Service College + [name of the course you're interested in]
Thursday, January 1, 2015
Find out more about: ‘Question the Powerful’
Twice a month, Question the Powerful prompts the reader to think about current political challenges, social misconceptions, or a perennial problem connected with widening power inequalities. You can ensure you get the latest posting by following the blog or requesting free notifications by email at the top left hand corner of the QTP page.
In the meantime, you may be interested in some of the popular posts listed below:
The Voter Vanishes
The National Safety Fund explained
A History of the World in 500 words
The Cooperative Gestalt
Who’s Afraid of Political Education?
The Reciprocity Test: Pros & Cons
Oppose the War on Welfare
The Power Hypothesis
Like to Teach the World to Vote?
A Bomb for an Eye
Cooperative Problem-Solving: the key to a reciprocal society
What Next for the WEA?
The Politics of Cultural Inclinations
Left Disorientated?
Memento Tory
In Praise of Mo Tze (墨子)
Some Like it Thick
Axis of Stupidity
Let them eat bullets
The Alpha Male Syndrome
The Crisis of Civic Disengagement
Belief is not enough
For a complete listing of the essays posted on the Question the Powerful blog, see ‘QTP Essays’.
In the meantime, you may be interested in some of the popular posts listed below:
The Voter Vanishes
The National Safety Fund explained
A History of the World in 500 words
The Cooperative Gestalt
Who’s Afraid of Political Education?
The Reciprocity Test: Pros & Cons
Oppose the War on Welfare
The Power Hypothesis
Like to Teach the World to Vote?
A Bomb for an Eye
Cooperative Problem-Solving: the key to a reciprocal society
What Next for the WEA?
The Politics of Cultural Inclinations
Left Disorientated?
Memento Tory
In Praise of Mo Tze (墨子)
Some Like it Thick
Axis of Stupidity
Let them eat bullets
The Alpha Male Syndrome
The Crisis of Civic Disengagement
Belief is not enough
For a complete listing of the essays posted on the Question the Powerful blog, see ‘QTP Essays’.
Friday, November 21, 2014
Politics & Machiavelli: the real lessons
When Machiavelli completed The Prince in 1514, he was not to know that it would become one of the most infamous books for the next five centuries. Indeed the worst things anyone could do in gaining or retaining power came to be known by that deplorable adjective, ‘Machiavellian’.
Anyone who has actually studied the works of Machiavelli, especially his Discourses, an essential companion to The Prince, would know that Machiavelli was far from being a friend of deceptive and arbitrary rule. After all he was the one who insisted that “when it is necessary for [a ruler] to proceed against the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause.”
But before we look further at why the common misunderstanding should be corrected, we should consider a current trend that projects an even more perverse interpretation of Machiavelli. Take the BBC programme, ‘Who’s Afraid of Machiavelli?’, aired just last year. Instead of challenging the view that Machiavelli was seeking to guide people with power to use it immorally, the makers of the programme and all who were invited to speak on it not only reinforced that view, but also claimed that it was to be celebrated. Their take on Machiavelli essentially came down to this: if you’re running a government or a large business, you have to be ruthless; you have to make others fear you; and you have to go with your judgement alone on what should be done, and get it done by whatever means necessary.
For these political insiders and business gurus, Machiavelli should not be denounced for advocating nasty power play, but praised for validating it as essential in getting the business of a ruler or top executive done.
But while some people may revel in imagining that even the most ruthless behaviour (of their own or the leaders they advised) would be endorsed by a world famous thinker, there are three crucial points they should have noted. First, when Machiavelli advised that the ends would justify the means, he was very specific about what those ends were, namely the establishment and development of a free republic – i.e., an association of citizens who collectively have a say through public deliberations over how they are to be governed. The people are, he insisted, “more prudent, more stable, and of better judgment than a prince.” So unless the leader in question is genuinely striving to create and secure a form of governance which spreads power more evenly to all people, nothing is justified; least of all, any action to simply make oneself more powerful and feared.
Secondly, the authoritarian model is only recommended where the option of a free republic is not immediately attainable. Machiavelli’s advice was not that a leader should be authoritarian, but that if one were living in a state where power was concentrated exclusively at the top and rival forces would resort to vicious means to seize the throne (not to mention stopping anyone from democratising power to the citizenry), then one would have to be ruthless in countering those threats and firm in securing one’s own power. But if one were in a free republic, or had managed to transform an absolute monarchy into one, then there would be no excuse for using repressive measures.
Thirdly, for Machiavelli, even when a ruler is steering a course from the prevailing authoritarian conditions to a free republic, it does not mean that anything is permissible. One has to ask if one’s actions are helping or hindering the all important process of bringing about a form of governance whereby people can speak feely about contested issues and jointly secure their safety and prosperity without being dependent on the whims of one individual (or an elite).
Indeed Machiavelli was consistently critical of rulers who put their own desires above the good of the people. In relation to the ruthless tyrant, Commodus, he wrote, “Commodus, to whom it should have been very easy to hold the empire, for, being the son of Marcus, he had inherited it, and he had only to follow in the footsteps of his father to please his people and soldiers; but, being by nature cruel and brutal, he gave himself up to amusing the soldiers and corrupting them, so that he might indulge his rapacity upon the people; on the other hand, not maintaining his dignity, often descending to the theatre to compete with gladiators, and doing other vile things, little worthy of the imperial majesty, he fell into contempt with the soldiers, and being hated by one party and despised by the other, he was conspired against and was killed.” The Marcus referred to here, incidentally, is Emperor Marcus Aurelius, the stoic, philosophical, compassionate ruler of Rome.
If political and business leaders want to learn the real lessons from Machiavelli, they should stop focusing on expanding their personal power as an end in itself, and start devoting themselves to empowering others to share in decision-making so that it is never the elite few but always the people who together determine the common good.
--
For an extended discussion of Machiavelli’s political ideas with reference to historical leaders, see this interview with Henry Tam, made by the Documentary Film-Makers Cooperative: http://youtu.be/bJqnqdFC2VU
Anyone who has actually studied the works of Machiavelli, especially his Discourses, an essential companion to The Prince, would know that Machiavelli was far from being a friend of deceptive and arbitrary rule. After all he was the one who insisted that “when it is necessary for [a ruler] to proceed against the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause.”
But before we look further at why the common misunderstanding should be corrected, we should consider a current trend that projects an even more perverse interpretation of Machiavelli. Take the BBC programme, ‘Who’s Afraid of Machiavelli?’, aired just last year. Instead of challenging the view that Machiavelli was seeking to guide people with power to use it immorally, the makers of the programme and all who were invited to speak on it not only reinforced that view, but also claimed that it was to be celebrated. Their take on Machiavelli essentially came down to this: if you’re running a government or a large business, you have to be ruthless; you have to make others fear you; and you have to go with your judgement alone on what should be done, and get it done by whatever means necessary.
For these political insiders and business gurus, Machiavelli should not be denounced for advocating nasty power play, but praised for validating it as essential in getting the business of a ruler or top executive done.
But while some people may revel in imagining that even the most ruthless behaviour (of their own or the leaders they advised) would be endorsed by a world famous thinker, there are three crucial points they should have noted. First, when Machiavelli advised that the ends would justify the means, he was very specific about what those ends were, namely the establishment and development of a free republic – i.e., an association of citizens who collectively have a say through public deliberations over how they are to be governed. The people are, he insisted, “more prudent, more stable, and of better judgment than a prince.” So unless the leader in question is genuinely striving to create and secure a form of governance which spreads power more evenly to all people, nothing is justified; least of all, any action to simply make oneself more powerful and feared.
Secondly, the authoritarian model is only recommended where the option of a free republic is not immediately attainable. Machiavelli’s advice was not that a leader should be authoritarian, but that if one were living in a state where power was concentrated exclusively at the top and rival forces would resort to vicious means to seize the throne (not to mention stopping anyone from democratising power to the citizenry), then one would have to be ruthless in countering those threats and firm in securing one’s own power. But if one were in a free republic, or had managed to transform an absolute monarchy into one, then there would be no excuse for using repressive measures.
Thirdly, for Machiavelli, even when a ruler is steering a course from the prevailing authoritarian conditions to a free republic, it does not mean that anything is permissible. One has to ask if one’s actions are helping or hindering the all important process of bringing about a form of governance whereby people can speak feely about contested issues and jointly secure their safety and prosperity without being dependent on the whims of one individual (or an elite).
Indeed Machiavelli was consistently critical of rulers who put their own desires above the good of the people. In relation to the ruthless tyrant, Commodus, he wrote, “Commodus, to whom it should have been very easy to hold the empire, for, being the son of Marcus, he had inherited it, and he had only to follow in the footsteps of his father to please his people and soldiers; but, being by nature cruel and brutal, he gave himself up to amusing the soldiers and corrupting them, so that he might indulge his rapacity upon the people; on the other hand, not maintaining his dignity, often descending to the theatre to compete with gladiators, and doing other vile things, little worthy of the imperial majesty, he fell into contempt with the soldiers, and being hated by one party and despised by the other, he was conspired against and was killed.” The Marcus referred to here, incidentally, is Emperor Marcus Aurelius, the stoic, philosophical, compassionate ruler of Rome.
If political and business leaders want to learn the real lessons from Machiavelli, they should stop focusing on expanding their personal power as an end in itself, and start devoting themselves to empowering others to share in decision-making so that it is never the elite few but always the people who together determine the common good.
--
For an extended discussion of Machiavelli’s political ideas with reference to historical leaders, see this interview with Henry Tam, made by the Documentary Film-Makers Cooperative: http://youtu.be/bJqnqdFC2VU
News Release: A Novel Exposé of Government
What lies behind government rhetoric? How much are big corporations actually pulling all the strings? Will it be long before democracy collapses altogether?
In his new novel, Whitehall through the Looking Glass, Henry Tam, a political analyst and former senior civil servant, presents us with a disturbing vision of what’s in store for us.
The story is set in the near future, when the Consortium, working in cahoots with multi-billionaire monarch, George VIII, dictates terms to those in charge of governing both Britain and the US. It tells how the Consortium expands its power until there is no one left who can stand in its way. Or so it appears, until a defiant civil servant and a secret resistance movement threaten to bring its reign to an end.
The novel combines a fast-moving plotline, satire and futuristic invention to bring home the nightmare awaiting any society that allows its government to be taken over by the corporate elite. As one reviewer observed, it is “funny and scary in equal measure.”
Leading figures in politics and government have been forthright with their praise:
“Henry Tam knows how government works, and how fragile democracy is. With his insider knowledge and surreal imagination, he has given us an extraordinary dystopian tale about corporate greed and political collusion.” (Baroness Kay Andrews, former Government Minister)
“Forget ‘Yes, Minister’ and ‘The Thick of It’; if you want a sharp satirical look at life inside the corridors of power, read Whitehall through the Looking Glass … Tam’s novel also has a serious message about the dire consequences when corporations take over the running of a government.” (Sonny Leong, Chief Executive, Civil Service College)
“This is a timely reminder of the dangers of the rapidly-accelerating corporatisation of our political and economic life. ... As the general election approaches, Tam’s book is an important reminder of the risks of crude neoliberal ideology.” (Frances O'Grady, General Secretary, TUC – Trades Union Congress)
“Half asleep, the UK is becoming an ever more elitist society, that has left fairness and common-sense behind; ... What we need is Henry Tam's absurdist vision of Whitehall to help wake us all up.” (Dr. Simon Duffy, Director, Centre for Welfare Reform)
"The narrative is all the more compelling because Tam's world is often as familiar as it is fantastical. This is not so much a lesson from history as a warning from the here and now. It's a cautionary tale and a call to action, but also a gripping read." (Peter Bradley, ex-MP and Director, Speakers’ Corner Trust)
“Beautifully, deftly written, Whitehall through the Looking Glass is dark and compelling reading. A deeply sobering wake up call to us all against the political complacency of our times.” (Dame Jane Roberts, Chair, NLGN – the New Local Government Network)
Whitehall through the Looking Glass is the second novel by Henry Tam. His first novel, Kuan’s Wonderland, is a widely acclaimed political fable, which has been recommended by educational institutions such as the Equality Trust, WEA and the Cooperative College. His non-fiction books include the seminal Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship, nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order; Progressive Politics in the Global Age; and Against Power Inequalities.
He has previously worked as the Head of Civil Renewal in the Home Office, and Deputy Director in the Department for Communities & Local Government. He is currently an academic at the University of Cambridge and blogs on ‘Question the Powerful’.
****
The E-book version is available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US.
The Paperback version is available from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace.
To see in full what have been written about Whitehall through the Looking Glass, see: http://hbtam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/public-commentators-on-whitehall.html
In his new novel, Whitehall through the Looking Glass, Henry Tam, a political analyst and former senior civil servant, presents us with a disturbing vision of what’s in store for us.
The story is set in the near future, when the Consortium, working in cahoots with multi-billionaire monarch, George VIII, dictates terms to those in charge of governing both Britain and the US. It tells how the Consortium expands its power until there is no one left who can stand in its way. Or so it appears, until a defiant civil servant and a secret resistance movement threaten to bring its reign to an end.
The novel combines a fast-moving plotline, satire and futuristic invention to bring home the nightmare awaiting any society that allows its government to be taken over by the corporate elite. As one reviewer observed, it is “funny and scary in equal measure.”
Leading figures in politics and government have been forthright with their praise:
“Henry Tam knows how government works, and how fragile democracy is. With his insider knowledge and surreal imagination, he has given us an extraordinary dystopian tale about corporate greed and political collusion.” (Baroness Kay Andrews, former Government Minister)
“Forget ‘Yes, Minister’ and ‘The Thick of It’; if you want a sharp satirical look at life inside the corridors of power, read Whitehall through the Looking Glass … Tam’s novel also has a serious message about the dire consequences when corporations take over the running of a government.” (Sonny Leong, Chief Executive, Civil Service College)
“This is a timely reminder of the dangers of the rapidly-accelerating corporatisation of our political and economic life. ... As the general election approaches, Tam’s book is an important reminder of the risks of crude neoliberal ideology.” (Frances O'Grady, General Secretary, TUC – Trades Union Congress)
“Half asleep, the UK is becoming an ever more elitist society, that has left fairness and common-sense behind; ... What we need is Henry Tam's absurdist vision of Whitehall to help wake us all up.” (Dr. Simon Duffy, Director, Centre for Welfare Reform)
"The narrative is all the more compelling because Tam's world is often as familiar as it is fantastical. This is not so much a lesson from history as a warning from the here and now. It's a cautionary tale and a call to action, but also a gripping read." (Peter Bradley, ex-MP and Director, Speakers’ Corner Trust)
“Beautifully, deftly written, Whitehall through the Looking Glass is dark and compelling reading. A deeply sobering wake up call to us all against the political complacency of our times.” (Dame Jane Roberts, Chair, NLGN – the New Local Government Network)
Whitehall through the Looking Glass is the second novel by Henry Tam. His first novel, Kuan’s Wonderland, is a widely acclaimed political fable, which has been recommended by educational institutions such as the Equality Trust, WEA and the Cooperative College. His non-fiction books include the seminal Communitarianism: a new agenda for politics and citizenship, nominated by New York University Press for the 2000 Grawemeyer Award for Ideas Improving World Order; Progressive Politics in the Global Age; and Against Power Inequalities.
He has previously worked as the Head of Civil Renewal in the Home Office, and Deputy Director in the Department for Communities & Local Government. He is currently an academic at the University of Cambridge and blogs on ‘Question the Powerful’.
****
The E-book version is available from: Amazon UK or Amazon US.
The Paperback version is available from: Barnes & Noble or CreateSpace.
To see in full what have been written about Whitehall through the Looking Glass, see: http://hbtam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/public-commentators-on-whitehall.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)