152 REFLECTIONS ON CHARACTER AND LEADERSHIP
How despotic regimes are maintained
One interesting question is why it is that some societies can pass
through an initial despotic phase into freedom while others become
mired in despotism. How does the process of despotic rule evolve?
Niccol ò Machiavelli viewed the despot ’ s role as a natural phase
in nation - building — one that would, of necessity, last until the nation -
builder had achieved his or her primary goals (Machiavelli, 1966 ).
However, many leaders take on the role of tyrant without hesitation,
and then fail to temper their violence or modify their rule after they
have consolidated their power base. Unable to make the transition
that Machiavelli believed to be possible, many rulers have unleashed
powers that then they could not ultimately control. They turn into
the sorcerer’s apprentice. Because of that intemperance, such countries
never become societies based on the rule of law.
Nonetheless, many political scientists share Machiavelli ’ s outlook
that dictatorship is simply a transitional phase that many countries have
to go through on their way to democracy (Boesche, 1996 ; Friedrich
and Brezezinsky, 1965 ). Those who support this view argue that non -
democratic political confi gurations do not thus deserve the harsh con-
demnation they receive from democratic idealists. Like it or not, they
remonstrate, simplistic Western political formulas do not suit certain
societies at an early stage of development. Given the mindset of the
people in these developing societies, democratic structures would prob-
ably be highly ineffective — worse, in the end, than a transitional tyranny.
The people in these societies are simply not ready to deal with the
freedom that democracy not only offers, but also demands.
While acknowledging the darker side of dictatorship, these propo-
nents are quick to point out the advantages of being ruled by an auto-
cratic government. Although despots repress their citizens, they also
protect the population from outside dangers, reknit a society torn apart
by violent upheaval, put an end to internal strife, introduce law and
order, and eradicate certain forms of corruption. Some despots even
create a new prosperity (or at least the illusion of prosperity) by embark-
ing on great public works and by providing such services as schools,
housing, hospitals, and roads.
What these Machiavellian adherents fail to acknowledge is the like-
lihood that autocratic leadership will turn into all - out tyranny. I would
argue that, positive contributions notwithstanding, shadow sides of
power - based leadership will almost inevitably come to the fore. As time
passes, most leaders with despotic tendencies are likely to feel increas-
ingly entitled to do whatever they want as their feelings of entitlement