AUCTORITAS AND IMPERIUM

Every month the world’s major organizations sack hundreds of CEOs. Their constituencies look eagerly for new heroes, and the rite goes on. High stakes imply rising conflicts, often managed without a clear-cut understanding of the leaders’ task: the current trends in international affairs couldn’t speak louder. A gloomy fate is affecting elected politicians as well as haughty autocrats, but it doesn’t spare financial magnates and senior officials trained in classy schools. Even a favourite mantra in the business community, value creation, is revolting against the establishment.

Entangled in a net of professional analysts, challenged by the shifting jury of public opinion, the strongest bosses endeavour to escape their trial. Hard job. The overall game called evaluation takes place far beyond any domestic jurisdiction. Just consider the impact of the Sarbane-Oxley statute or the rules issued by the European Union, not to mention the striking flow of international standards and ratings.

Quite obviously leaders don’t enjoy being judged and measured. Yet there is no escape route when a lack of auctoritas occurs. Decreasing reputation may reduce the capital of influence and destroy substantial leadership. Feudal mandarins still survive, but the top ranks of power, i. e. imperium, now call to mind a roller coaster or rather Dante’s fearful forest.

Brand loyalty is declining? Jurassic rulers anxiously look at their watches? As usual, strong brands and authoritative bodies require a sort of constitutional force which truly connects service providers (administrators) and stakeholders in a community established upon visible results. Not necessarily within short-term perspectives, since this vital force needs time and a proper environment to flourish.

The major boardrooms of governments and corporations cannot control large channels of authority, while financial investors, knowledge networks, and mass culture retailers play in the middle of the road. Sometimes central institutions, such as the Federal Reserve, try to sell their rules. Notwithstanding those gracious tunes echoed in Mary Poppins’ world, we realize that sweet pills may not gain the best score.

USEFUL READING

(1) Emile Benveniste, Le vocabulaire des institutions indo-européennes (1969). Compare the keen analysis of the term auctoritas and the Greek concept of “nomos” with Carl Schmitt’s economy of power.

(2) Ernst Cassirer, The Myth of the State (1945). Dangers and crisis of “sovereign” powers observed through an insightful witness.

(3) Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes (1994). The analogy between the European civil war 1914-45 and the decline of the ancient Roman republic, at the eve of Augustan age, should be carefully investigated.

(4) Johan Huizinga, Geschonden wereld (1943). The dark night of Word War II strikes reason and life. In 1935 the Dutch historian had already described what happens if trust among people and states vanishes: see In de schaduwen van morgen (In the Shadow of Tomorrow).

(5) Hans Jonas, Das Prinzip Verantwortung (1979). The Imperative of Responsibility commits constituencies and administrations towards future generations. Such a typical issue of modern governance is profoundly linked to the shortage of substantial authority in current times.

(6) José Ortega y Gasset, El tema de nuestro tiempo (1923). In Modern Theme the Spanish philosopher introduces a critical approach to new despotism. Absence of responsible leadership condemns all institutions, deprived of true auctoritas and overridden by authoritarian substitutes.

(7) Carl Schmitt, “Nehmen/Teilen/Weiden” (in Gemeinschaft und Politik, no. 3/1953). Conflicts and settlements on a global scale make even harder any legal management of values.

(8) Sondra Steinbrenner, “Patron Augustus-Client Rome” (web site roman-empire.net). A new ruler blends traditional republican values and tactical tools, including propaganda, to restore pax romana.

(9) Alfred Weber, Kulturgeschichte als Kultursoziologie (1935). Less known than Burckhardt’s or Toynbee’s cycle theories, this study reinterprets the relationship between historical facts and the driving forces of human action. Culture, complexiy, and creative reason in the morphogenesis of social life.