I've been studying The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli as of late (know your enemy type shi) and it's got me thinking a lot of anarchic thoughts:
If politics demands cruelty to succeed, maybe the problem is not that people are too soft... it's that the system rewards sociopathy (and it should not).
We don't have to accept that rule by heartlessness and cruelty are the only ways to exist!
Machiavelli writes The Prince at a time where godliness and benevolence were virtuous traits in a leader. He writes it like an instruction manual for any wanna-be successful politician. Essentially, he says be feared, not loved; rule with cruelty because kindess is easily forgotten. "A man will sooner forget the death of his father than the loss of his inheritence" is a good way to set the vibe.
In my opinion, if morality and politics are incompatible, that says more about politics than it does morality. And every single leader today has to be Machiavellian to be successful. You have to cheat and feign and backstab constantly to get to power.
When power is built on cruelty, it's going to favour those socialised to wield it.
Now, while this is already obviously harmful on its own, it's also so incredibly exclusive. Machiavelli (to some extent) almost touches on this in The Prince but in a very sexist way... because it is. Women and men are not socialised the same and men, due to socialisation, are better at politics (and who set that system up???). The way women are socialised puts us at a disadvantage in political spaces.
🔆 In the UK Parliament, men are much likely to get their points heard because they are more willing to interrupt in an obstructive manner. This is an illegal action but, being men and often being white and gerontocratic, they do not care. Women are less likely to be heard or valued because they do not interrupt obstructively. (Shaw, S. 2002)
🔆 Another UK example, Margaret Thatcher (😬) had voice training in order to sound more like a man and used to wear shoulder pads in order to look like a man.
🔆 In the US Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor had to make her idiolect more like a man in order to be valued more. (Jacobi, T. Schweers, D. 2017)
Women are unacceptable in politics. That should not be accepted. And if it continues to be, politics should not be accepted.
While I haven't read any studies specifically referencing disabled people, queer people, or people of colour in Western politics (likely because there are too few examples of this), if you've ever understood any intersectional theory, you'll understand that this applies to anyone who isn't a white man.
Our political system isn't broken because it's cruel, it's corrupt because it punishes kindness, compassion, and creativity.
I don't believe that this is human nature. We are collaborative creatures inherently. Perchance, capitalism has eroded that but through mutual aid, community care, and solidarity I truly do believe that we can form a society where a system like the one we're in doesn't need to exist. We already know how to exist like that in little ways. We do it every time we share, protect, or love someone without expecting power in return. Anarchism is in finding time to take your peace outside of the grind and talking with people you love, finding joy in nature, and creating anything at all that isn't inherently 'profitable' or 'productive'. We can do this on a larger scale, too!!
If power demands cruelty, then maybe true power is what happens when we refuse to be cruel.
That is why I'm an anarchist.
