created equal.” Thus, although hierarchies exist in the
modern world, the egalitarian culture of most
REPUBLICSmakes them difficult to justify. An authority
separate from the egalitarian one of personal prefer-
ence is required to justify hierarchy. This can come in
TRADITION(as in hereditary monarchy or aristocracy),
God (or the Bible), race, knowledge, or efficiency. In
the democratic culture of most Modern, secular states,
only functional (work) superiority is considered a
valid reason for hierarchy, so a successful executive
earns higher position and wealth as a consequence of
greater productivity.
Only very CONSERVATIVEideology embraces hierar-
chy in the contemporary world. Like the ancient and
MEDIEVAL, they base superior rank on the basis of cul-
ture (Western civilization), gender (men over women),
education (classical), and religion (Judeo-Christian).
Such hierarchy is not widespread or POLITICALLY COR-
RECT. In egalitarian, democratic society, every person
and every opinion is considered equal to every other.
This view lends itself to a kind of ethical relativism in
which no standard exists for judging competing ideas
or values. One effect of this is to attempt a separation
of fact (science) and values (morality), but the politi-
cal consequences of this, as in NAZI Germany, have
been troubling. U.S. PLURALISMsolves this dilemma by
allowing formal legal equality for all citizens (in the
public sphere) but allowing considerable hierarchy in
the private sphere (family, business, clubs, religious
organizations, etc.). The political battle between egali-
tarian and hierarchy then takes the form of defining
publicand private,with LIBERALegalitarians trying to
expand the public to every aspect of life (e.g., family,
private associations) and conservatives trying to
expand the private sphere (free from government regu-
lation).
For hierarchical thinkers, the debate will continue
because hierarchy exists in the universe and nature and
cannot be eliminated from society and politics. The
most radical attempt to abolish hierarchy, MARXIST COM-
MUNISM(by seeing all people as common workers and
“comrades”), ended in a most AUTHORITARIANsystem.
Hindu political thought
The political viewpoint of regions (especially India)
where the Hindu religion predominates. The Hindu
religious tradition, with its multiple gods and god-
desses (polytheism) and belief in many spirits that
affect human life, has influenced the basic political
worldview of Hindu cultures. But certain aspects of
Hindu political thought (such as the class and caste
system) suggest that some Western ideals (such as
PLATO’s Republic) may have influenced Eastern thought.
Most of Hindu political thought views the universe
in animist terms as a cosmic whole that is animated by
divine Truth or intelligence. So unlike Western Judeo-
CHRISTIANtheology in which God is the creator of the
universe and outside it, Hindus see the natural order
itself as a deity and worship it. The individual has a
God-given (and hereditary) “place” in this divine uni-
verse, so staying in one’s place and performing the
duties of that place is JUSTICE. This explains the rather
static, fatalistic attitude of society and also explains the
poor as just part of the divine natural order, to be
accepting of their unchanging position in society and
oblivious to improving their conditions. If people wish
to improve their social and political situation, punish-
ment and repression may be properly imposed; Hindus
call this the path of rectitude—remaining in one’s
given place, performing one’s function diligently, and
not questioning this “divinely ordained” system.
The society is conceived as a collection of commu-
nities or classes, reflecting specific economic functions
or occupations, into which one is born. A HIERARCHY
controls and manages this society, so Brahmans or
rulers, soldiers, workers and those performing the
meanest, dirtiest tasks (“untouchables”) are suppos-
edly determined by a universal divine order. Any
attempt to change or get out of this system is seen as
sinful, self-love, pride, and corrupt INDIVIDUALISM; such
self-assertion is creating a “bad karma” that will be
punished later by being reincarnated as a lower being
(or in a lower caste). In short, the poor wretched peo-
ple can be shown contempt or cruelty because they are
getting their just punishment.
This does not lend itself to sympathy for the poor
and oppressed, but rather further abuse and EXPLOITA-
TIONof them. The CHRISTIANview that this is oppres-
sive and uncharitable is dismissed by Hindu thought
as unenlightened. So, Hindu views of inevitable, static,
caste order regards Western FREEDOM as confusion,
chaos, and lawlessness. Government should suppress
such dangerous freedom. The leader of the state, or
ideal king, serves this stabilizing function: He should
promote commerce, prosperity, and the “righteous-
ness” of this Hindu order. He may properly use vio-
lence, intrigue, bribery, deception, and cruelty to
accomplish this task. He rules with the “seven organs”138 Hindu political thought