I look sharp, I am charismatic, and people follow my orders blindly. What am I? A leader. In the allegorical novel Lord of the Flies by William Golding, a group of British schoolboys is stranded on an uninhabited island where they are forced to survive. Though the boys attempt to create order, they ultimately fail disastrously without adult supervision and strong leadership. Additionally, English philosopher Thomas Hobbes is among the world’s greatest philosophers and is known for his views on how civilizations can achieve political and social order when people are constantly being influenced by the naturally savage nature; in his writing, he emphasizes the importance of strict government, harsh punishments, and suppressing the power of the people. These examples support that people act upon their primitive instincts, however they are also influenced by discipline and the tendency follow an authoritative figure, often blindly. Therefore, it is only with both a strict and principled authority that society can maintain order.
To remain on task and preserve society’s order, humans require consequences. In Lord of the Flies, the actions of the boys are influenced by both their past civilization’s strict laws/punishments and their primitive inclinations. When Roger, the “dark boy,” throws stones at Henry, “there [is] a space round Henry, perhaps six yards in diameter, in which he dare not throw. Here, invisible yet strong, [is] the taboo of the old life. Round the squatting child [is] the protection of parents and school and policemen and the law. Roger’s arm [is] conditioned by a civilization that [knows] nothing of him and [is] in ruins”(62). Roger’s act of violence towards Henry is driven by his primitive instinct to show aggression and attack others. However he cannot bring himself to actually hit Henry because the fear of being punished by the grownups and authorities in his prior civilization still haunts him. This shows that having clear leaders who established harsh punishments for breaking the laws is an effective way to control people’s actions; because he fears the punishments, Roger does not completely revert back to his primitive state and hit Henry. However, trouble is near. Roger is likely to realize soon that there are no longer authorities who are establishing and enforcing laws — sure, Ralph is the “leader,” but his title reflects nothing more than his good looks and conch. In reality, he’s powerless. He does not establish consequences for the boys when they trail off and neglect their responsibilities, and the boys goof off during his assemblies. Sooner or later, this will cause the boys’ civilization to fall apart, because people’s actions, when not “conditioned” by an authority’s rules and punishments, are influenced by their primordial desire to cause destruction and be violent. Well aware of the primitive instincts exemplified by the boys in Lord of the Flies, famous philosophers have voiced their agreement that an authoritative figure is essential to society. In Moral and Political Philosophy, Thomas Hobbes communicates his belief that people cannot remain civilized without fearing and being restrained by the power of a leader by painting a picture of the disaster that threatens society if it does not live under a government. Hobbes argues that “the alternative to government is a situation no one could reasonably wish for, and that any attempt to make government accountable to the people must undermine it, so threatening the situation of non-government that we must all wish to avoid.” In other words, if there were no government and everyone was free to act as they wished, people would create constant chaos and havoc. This type of situation must be avoided at all costs, and the only way to suppress the savage ways of human nature is by strict and unquestionable leadership. By having a government, we are giving one person/a group of people the power to control our actions with laws. Furthermore, when these laws are broken, there are consequences such as jail time and fines. These powers of the authority keep us from escaping the responsibilities we are tasked with as civilians. Therefore, a government, even one that is “artificial,” is essential to address the needs of our society.
Leaders essentially control the actions of their people because humans are inclined to obey the orders of authority without considering why they are doing what they are told and whether they agree with the action being taken. Therefore, the government must be moral in order for society to act morally. In Lord of the Flies, when Roger asks Robert why Jack is planning to beat up Wilfred and had the hunters tie him up, Robert “[shakes] his head doubtfully. ‘I don’t know. He didn’t say. He got angry and made us tie Wilfred up … I never heard [the chief, Jack], say why”(159). Jack’s hunters do not know why Jack requests that Wilfred be captured, however they do not question his order and respond to it with acquiescence. This shows that when there is a clear leader, people become depenent on him; they trust him to do the right thing without bothering to understand his decisions for themselves. After all, your leader’s reasoning triumphs over your own reasoning. Why question the man on the podium who is wearing a uniform and tie? When people sacrifice their independence and own judgement like this in the process of appeasing their leader, the intentions of a leader are reflected in the actions of his people. While this can be positive when a leader is virtuous and gives laws and order that forbid violence and require people to show respect, it becomes dangerous when the leader is cruel, because people living under such a leader will follow his satanic demands without question. Being blind to your own morals in the face of an authority is not unique to the boys of Lord of the Flies. In 1974, psychologist Stanley Milgram tested the extent of human trust in authority. He seated volunteers in front of fake electrical switches, which he lied were connected to test subjects behind a curtain on whom they would test the effect of being punished with pain on memorization. The volunteers were instructed to administer a stronger shock each time their test subjects got an answer wrong, despite the make-believe cries that the subjects let out. According to The Roots of Evil by Sharon Begley, the outcome of the experiment was that when the volunteers were seated alone, “more than half administered the maximum (and potentially fatal) 450-volt shocks — even as their victims screamed in mock agony. Then [when Milgram or his associates accompanied the volunteers and showed no qualms about torturing the learners], a full 92 percent of the volunteers administered potentially lethal jolts. They went along. They obeyed orders.” In this quintessential confirmation of the correlation between blind compliance and evil, volunteers were willing to put the lives of innocent others at risk, simply because their action was approved by a seemingly knowledgeable man in a professional lab coat. Consequently, as the volunteers let go of their common sense, they acted with violence and sheer barbarity. After all, since when is it common sense to lethally electrocute someone because he couldn’t memorize an insignificant pattern? The role that Milgram played in this experiment is no different from that of Jack in Lord of the Flies or George Patton, who we selected in cass as the person we would like to become our “leader”; because these three individuals took on a leadership position and maintained it with charisma (Jack’s strength and command) or a uniform/batch of leadership (Patton’s uniform or Milgram’s lab coat), people followed their commands, even when they were destructive and violent. In order for this situation to not occur in our own society, the individuals in government must have a grasp of what actions are acceptable for society to follow and what actions are inappropriate and should not be encouraged. After all, if leaders promote negative acts, it is unlikely that the people will speak up.
Leave a Comment!
