by Gunther d’Alquen, 1937
The greater the tasks that an age gives to men, the more distinctly the group of those who are only apparently qualified for those tasks manifests itself. Where the highest values are concerned, the inferiors will always try to drape themselves in the appearance and attitude of the superior men of the elite.
Let us imagine a good and totally insignificant fellow citizen whose ardent wish is to be able to command one day. He does not want to wait until he is finally given a mission that places great responsibility on his shoulders. For he will probably be able to wait a long time; if he has no ability, he has a consuming ambition and this alone would prevent him from achieving it. Let us assume: Little Moritz, with his power complexes, becomes a big Moritz, and the misfortune is that he first learns to simulate non-existent abilities.
Our friend becomes a leader in some capacity. He knows that the importance of his personality is now accepted (only for a while). Former comrades who have not risen in rank imagine themselves to be inferior to the above-mentioned figure. Emphatic speeches persuade the citizens of the authority of the great Moritz. In his new offices, the telephone facilities were transformed. A listening table was set up in the chief s room to ‘deepen trust’, the posts were reorganised and the first circular questioned the established competences.
Unfortunately, mastering the job is not so simple. The newly-qualified superior does not like to show that he is not yet fully qualified and that he has to be advised. He sees his authority wavering and does not want to show the same little weaknesses as everyone else, nor his lack of basic experience. The lack of internal self-confidence must be compensated for by an even greater external self-confidence. The distance to former comrades is growing by leaps and bounds. Who is his favourite now?
The ‘subordinate’ is his favourite, because he willingly and often publicly confirms that he, the ‘superior’, is a particularly deserving individual. In his stupidity he certainly does not notice that the ‘subordinate’ says exactly the opposite behind his back. But if he were to notice here and there realistic objections from one of these “subordinates” or even counter-proposals on any issue, then the “boss” would infallibly see that he has a dangerous opponent before him. So he is brought down and, if necessary, secretly plotted against, being convinced of his own undoubted worth and the other’s ineptitude.
But this man is always on the brink. Woe to him when the moment comes when he needs his collaborators to correct his work, in a joyful collaboration, with a sense of absolute and resolute devotion to their leader! This ordeal can happen every day, by chance, when a mistake or an absolute task requires it. A painful situation arises when the superior no longer has the confidence of his men. His fall is therefore certain. Fate is fulfilled with an iron logic.
There is another kind, apart from the ambitious turned savage, pocket- sized tyrants, the fussy bureaucrats. They often have unquestionable knowledge. But what distinguishes them from real leaders is the fact that they are absolutely unwilling to accept any responsibility whatsoever. They accept everything patiently and carry out regulations and orders to the letter. They only see the apparatus, the organisation and its cells. The way a York acted in the wars of independence is an abomination to them. They would not have followed a Hitler, but a Kahr.
In both cases, these are caricatural distortions of the nature of the leader. The first sees only men. It sees leadership exclusively as a rank of precedence of persons. The century of democracies and parliamentarianism was totally successful in opposing this domination of men over men, and was quite right in the face of those leaders who see only personal preponderance in their rights.
The old authority had lost its internal legitimacy. The selfish and ambitious princes no longer had any right to power because they no longer saw themselves as servants of the state, but saw the state as a tool for personal power. When this false authority became a rule and a system, the time had come for a more structured organisation of the people. Thus, in our country, false authority is destroyed by internal logic, while education and selection produce a genuine elite that develops naturally. There is no question of abandoning this mission to the next millennium, for the creation of a new class of leaders was never in history a matter of a few years. What is important is the progress of our people in this history, not the little informers and undisciplined characters. In the end, they serve no purpose and do no harm; our strength lies in action, in creation and in the future. Sincere fighters in the service of an ideal always make history.
From character came action.
Darré
No comments:
Post a Comment