Imperial Hubris: The Dark Heart of Leadership

1. Imperial Hubris: The Dark Heart of Leadership Duncan Waite Texas State University CCEAM June 7, 2014 Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada

3. The evolving nature of capital and of work (its roles and relations)

4. Some characteristics of Imperial Hubris

5. Neoliberalism Privileges , markets, free choice, entrepreneurial competition, and individual initiative in addressing social needs positions education as a resource for global competition and private wealth accumulation, for profit generation, and as an arena for business more stringent ‘accountability’ and increased consumerism CorporatismCorporativism Individual, personal identity attached to the corporate Business hierarchical Corporatist culture (ie, behavior and ways of thinking) and at the ontological level; business/ corporate language Imperial hubris (“El Rey”) Neoliberalism and Corporatism

6. Imperial hubris is the tendency of (some) leaders, nations, institutions, organizations or units of such to act out of a presumed privilege with either no regard or disregard for the rights, feelings, or concerns of others, such as those in less powerful positions and/or those over whom the leader exercises some authority. To be clear: not all leaders or organizations practice, condone, permit or encourage imperial hubris, but all too many do. Imperial hubris, as I show, may be exhibited by a superintendent of schools, a business CEO, a high school or college coach, a principal or a classroom teacher.

7. Imperial hubris: • Is or can be occasioned by caste-like systems (such as in the US and as are common in corporate organizations—see Waite, 2010), hierarchical structures (e.g., social status hierarchies and dominance hierarchies). Most/many value systems imply a hierarchy of values/valuing; • May or may not be intentional; • May be delusionary, that is, someone presumes a superior position and acts from that assumption, but it is not reciprocated and publics do not orient to the person so acting as superior; • May be active or passive (as in ‘a casual disregard for . . .’; in this case, it centers around our need for/desire for recognition).

8. money-law.blogspot.com nobility-association.com www.freemindforever.com

9. Hannah Arendt: Imperialists of ages past “. . .were therefore similar in their indifference and aloofness, in their genuine disinterest in their subjects, an attitude which differed as much from the cruelty and arbitrariness of native despots in Asia as from the exploiting carelessness of conquerors, and the insane and anarchic oppression of one race tribe through another. . . . Aloofness became the new attitude of all members of the British services; it was a more dangerous form of governing than despotism and arbitrariness because it did not even tolerate that last link between the despot and his subjects which is formed by bribery and gifts. . . . Integrity and aloofness were symbols of an absolute division of interests to the point where they are not even any longer permitted to conflict. In comparison, exploitation, oppression, or corruption look like safeguards of human dignity, because exploiter and exploited, oppressor and oppressed, corrupter and corrupted still live in the same world. --Arendt, H. (1950). The imperialist character. The Review of Politics, 12(3), p. 309

10. Brings to mind Rancière’s ‘distribution of the sensible’ and his discussion of politics—those who have no place or say in the distribution of the sensible and in the police order who fight/lobby/politic for a voice/place in that order.

11. http://thesocietypages.org/sexuality/Categories/teens/ flickr.com ¡Gracias!

12. Copies available: • Research Gate https://www.researchgate.net/home.Home.html Duncan Waite • LinkedIn Duncan Waite • Twitter @drduncanwaite • Email: dw26@txstate.edu