Tuesday, 14 January 2025

Power and corruption - Is the evil of power an amplification, a temptation, or the fundamental nature of things?

In ancient times, it seems that power was regarded as A Good Thing - the only problem was getting it! The assumption was that gaining power simply enabled good people to do good things. 

Power was wanted for Us, and Our power was good. The evil of power was when They had it, and exercised it on Us. 

When someone with power did evil, then the ancient assumption was that power simply revealed their real nature - which had previously been thwarted of expression. 


Power for the ancients was thus an amplifier

It was as if goodness and evil were innate qualities; "a good man" given more power would, by his nature, do more good; and vice versa

The best society was therefore one such as King Arthur's Camelot; in which there was a good and powerful ruler. 

The era of power-as-amplifier also includes the assumption that the goodness of the ruler's power would permeate the people (as if the people would inevitably absorb the goodness of power, like a sponge). So, a good and powerful ruler, would lead to a better people. 


The idea that power corrupts, was a product of the modern era; and became socially dominant especially in the middle 20th century. 

We see it in literature such as the depiction of the Emperors and their courts in Robert Graves's I Claudius and Claudius the God - when many basically-decent individuals such as Augustus, Tiberius and Claudius himself, become corrupted by their power. (And those who are not corrupted get eliminated.) 

The corrupting effect of power was supposed to work such that a normal, or even good, person who got enough power, would strongly tend to be corrupted by it. So that a powerful monarch, or in the 20th century a secular dictator, might start out doing overall good; but would tend to become worse, get more selfish and paranoid, and do increasing harm...

The more power someone had, and the longer he wielded that power - the more corrupted he would become. 

Thus, in contrast with the ancients; the "power corrupts" idea was that power would itself tend make individuals evils: power was understood as a temptation

The more power, the longer the power was wielded: the greater the temptation.


From the late twentieth century the idea began to emerge that power was intrinsically corrupt: power just is corruption

While it is true that power amplifies innate evil, and also corrupts; in this most recent era there is more to power. It is not just a question of power bringing-out evil, plus tempting people to evil; on top of (and underpinning) these: power always is evil in its fundamental nature

This analysis asserts that power cannot be good, that power always is evil - because of what power is

Such an idea can be seen emerging in the depiction of the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings - where the temptation of power is, in practice, unstoppable in its corruption- such that even the most good and pure of people (Elrond, Galadriel, Gandalf, Aragorn) know they they would be unable to resist it.  

Here we may see hints of the current concept that the very nature and operation of power is evil (yet not quite fully in place, because the legitimate monarchical power of Aragorn is regarded as unproblematically good). 


Yet now, the situation is that power is regarded as coercion; as operating by compulsion of one by another; or of the masses by the minority rulers; or of people by the totalitarian System or "machine". 

A literary exponent of this vision of fundamentally evil power is Philip K Dick; with the depictions of future (and present day) dystopias as the Black Iron Prison; in which the whole structure of societal power is regarded as evil incarnate, set against each individual - who is a victim of power regardless of his position within The System. 

The operations of power are therefore such as to spread evil; in that power compels. Power propagandizes, coaxes, and forces behaviour - power deploys punishment for failure to obey; and power allocates rewards for compliance.  

In other words: power is all about bribes and sanctions and the like - these are not means to an end; but propaganda, bribes and sanctions, and brute force are what power is

The corruption spreads; because power is about getting others to behave in accordance with fear and greed, and the lust for power. 


This development in the understanding of power is, I believe, a consequence of the changing nature of human consciousness - the development by which human behaviour began as spontaneously and unconsciously immersed in the group-mind; and then (via transitional stages) became a alienated modern situation, in which each human experiences himself as cut-off from other people, from reality - even from his inmost self.

Whereas ancient power was diffused among the group mind - so that it was intrinsically shared-between the members; now power is experienced as external compulsion of one upon others.

Power makes everybody worse - the powerful, and those upon whom power is exercised! 

This is why the making of structures of power - power to shape, destroy and compel the world (as its people) - has been so much the focus of demonic strategy through most of the modern era. 


This has many and deep consequences; such that whereas the ancients could do good by power; we moderns cannot - power only does evil in the modern world, and can only do evil because of its nature. 

This applies to all humans with power - all are evil; and to all institutions with power, including Christian churches. 

Insofar as a Christian church is powerful, it is evil - it can only be evil. Whatever Christian churches do to increase their power is based on the false argument that power will enable them to do more good... The reality is that more-power simply makes churches more-evil. 


Because power is evil by its nature in the context of modern consciousness; institutional activity to "do good" that was normal in the past, is impossible in the present. 

Even when the intent to do good with power is genuine; insofar as power is attained, evil will in fact be done. 

This corruption of power is not just a temptation that might (in theory) be eschewed; the corruption of power is unavoidable, because it is in the fundamental nature of power. 

**

Note: What of the future? Well, it seems clear to me that, when power is known as innately evil; Christians need to lose their past keenness on getting and wielding power via - whether personally, or via institutions. The antidote to a world of power, is a world of love - and that is Heaven; and the mortal realities of Heavenly love that we may experience on earth. But even our idea of Heaven needs to be purged of past infatuations with power. We should also distinguish between the zero-sum games of power, which is all about arranging what is already created; and our potential for adding (eternally) to the sum and varieties of divine creation - through our own divine freedom, in harmony with ongoing creation. Of course, in our mortal lives in this mixed world, permeated by entropy and evil; we cannot eschew power, and necessarily participate in it - but we can and should recognize and repent the necessity. 

Further Note: Lest I be misunderstood - the situation is Not symmetrical. Although power is evil, power-less-ness does not mean good-ness. To be wholly good, power must not be operative. To put matters positively - goodness works by love, not power. Power is the destruction of loving relationship. 

However; in this mortal earthly life, love and power are always mixed in actual Men and their actual relationships, in a manner analogous to the inevitable mixture of good and evil in the hearts of each Man. Only after we have been remade and transformed by resurrection can Men (and other Beings) become wholly-loving. So, the situation in this earthly mortal life is that we cannot Be goos and loving (except partially and intermittently) but we can , and should, to affiliate to the side of love, just as we can/should affiliate to the side of God. It is not a matter of total reform and purification (which is impossible in this world) - what matter is a matter of taking sides; and, when it comes to values and matter of taking the right side.   

Acknowledgement: My awareness of the changing understanding of power originated from Tom Shippey's discussion of the One Ring in his magisterial The Road to Middle Earth, and some further discussion in the essays Roots and Branches.  

4 comments:

Andrew Lomas said...

According to Pope St. Gelasius I (Pope from A.D.492-6), “Christ, knowing the weakness of human nature, and careful for the welfare of His people, separated the two offices [of king and priest], giving to each its peculiar functions and duties”. This became the standard understanding of the early Middle Ages (R.W. and A.J. Carlyle, “A History of Mediaeval Political Theory in the West, Vol. I). So it would seem that the temptation and corrupting potential of power was recognised at this time.

The recognition is also implicit in mediaeval kingship. For the power of the king was hedged round by law, custom, Church, the barons, guilds, etc.. In particular the king, unlike the modern State, did not have a monopoly on lawful violence. As I see it Tolkien’s Aragorn becomes a limited monarch of this sort. The Power of the Ring is inevitably corrupting because of the type of rule it enables, not just because it enables rule.

Bruce Charlton said...

@Andrew - Yes, the process I am talking about was incremental or gradual, and spread over many centuries.

This meant that eras of human consciousness are not completely clear cut and sequential - and indeed there are people nowadays who seem to deny the ancient assumption that power brings out innate evil (that would otherwise not have been evident).

There are even people who seem not to recognise the temptations of power, and that it tends to corrupt people - despite what I regard as multiple and very obvious instances of this kind of corruption in public life (i.e. when individuals, and institutions, become rich, influential, high status etc ) - so that corruption looks more like a law than a tendency.

The continued general interest in politics, and the high levels of optimism associated with changes in the personnel of the ruling class; make it evident that there are Not many people who would agree with my characterization of power as being (here-and-now) evil by its very nature.

Gary said...

The first type of power, the one you mention the ancients spoke of, which was 'good' as long as a 'good' person had it, could to an extent be considered proper of a Luciferian age, in the sense that in the Luciferian age the normal appetites are still present... man is still "whole" (as opposed to 'broken' in the ahrimanic age and 'done away with altogether' in the sorathic age) but specific appetites which are good and normal in an of themselves can become monstrous (usually sexual desire, the desire for possessions and and the desire for a positive self-image and social standing) if in the hands of the wrong person.

Bruce Charlton said...

@Gary - A good point. It fits well!

I should probably have said that this current age creates the problem of power as innately, inescapably, corrupt, but also provides an answer; in that Men now (as never before) have the absolute freedom to detach from the situation in which they find themselves, and to make their own decisions and affiliations.