Great leaders must have enemies

To be a truly great leader, you must identify an enemy for your followers to hate and attack.

I hear the splodey heads.

History proves me right. If I am wrong, correct me. As Paul says, I will write a retraction, change my mind and probably throw in a good story about how I messed up and got corrected.


DEFINED

Lemme define great before I go on. By great, I mean:

Popular with a huge group of people, millions or more
Able to command said huge group of people
Followers, some of 'em, are willing to kill and die for the leader
Followers, some of 'em at least, give unquestioning loyalty

By great I do not mean:

Right or wrong
Good or evil
Moral or amoral
Kind or cruel
Nor any other ethical or moral judgment category.

Those definitions are too flexible. Your moral and ethical code are not universal.

Great, as I define it, must come with tangible, empirical measurements. How many people died at the leader's command? How many followers? Etc.

And still someone is gonna have splodey heads now.

DEUS EX HUMANA

Sometimes great leaders exalt themselves to be deities. Deus ex humana. The ancient pharaohs, kings and emperors did this.

Medieval Europe had something almost to that point - divine right of kings. Kings were considered appointed by whatever god was supposed to be in charge. Divine right is not exclusive to Europe, but it is the most familiar example.

In both cases, these leaders commanded people. Go there and do this. The people went there and did that.

GREATEST LEADERS

Consider some of the greatest - mind my definition! - leaders we know. Look at their legacy, at least what we know of it.

Alexander the Great
Genghis Khan
Hitler
Stalin
Pol Pot
Stalin
Mao Tse Dung
Mohammad
Jesus bar Joseph of Nazareth
Mahatmas Ghandi
Martin Luther King
Many of the kings in Europe
Rulers in the Western hemisphere, most of whose names we do not have.
Pretty much all US presidents, including the current liar in chief, the one he replaced the first time and others.

What did they all have in common? They identified an enemy and rallied their followers to resist, to attack and defeat the enemy.

No? Show me one of the above leaders who did not have a clearly identified enemy.

ENEMY IDENTIFIED

I better identify enemy before I go on.

An enemy can be:
A person
A people/race
A nation
An ideology
A religion
A concept
A practice
Morals
Ethics

Laws/Regulations
More I ain't gonna list.

The enemy does not have to be something physical.

And still someone will disagree with me.


NO ENEMIES

I hear it now - "Jesus had no enemies!"

We ain't reading the same Bible. You tell me where these quotes come from. "We fight not against flesh and blood but against powers and principalities." "Get thee behind me, Satan!" "What have you to do with me?" "Our time is not yet come." "He who has 2 cloaks, let him trade one for a sword."

Khan? Fought everybody he came across unless they surrendered.

Ghandi? Fought the British. Encouraged his followers to take up weapons.

MLK? He fought a system he saw as corrupt and oppressive.

Mohammad? At first he saw Jews and Christians as the enemy. In later years he shifted gears to say his version of Satan is the enemy.

The others should be self-explanatory. If they are not, do some research and edify yourself.

DEMAGOGUERY LIVES HERE

Demagoguery is the platform on which all great leaders build. Every. One.

Wikipedia has a pretty good definition of demagogue:

A political leader in a democracy who gains popularity by arousing the common people against elites, especially through oratory that whips up the passions of crowds, appealing to emotion by scapegoating out-groups, exaggerating dangers to stoke fears, lying for emotional effect, or other rhetoric that tends to drown out reasoned deliberation and encourage fanatical popularity. Demagogues overturn established norms of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue

I don't  agree with the "in a democracy" and "against elites" phrase. I can do that because this is my blog and I get to define my terms the way I want 'em.

Every one of the leaders I mentioned used these techniques. Reason and rationality are how you lose followers. R&R require people to think, which is painful to many. R&R takes too long to explain. R&R just does not work.

You can use logic to explain why X needs to happen. You detail the costs, impacts and benefits. Prove your point that everyone will benefit in the long run. Show how X is not only necessary, but vital.

A great leader will beat you down with just a few words - The bastards are coming to take away your Y or Z! Help me stop them to save you!

You lose. Not only do you lose, you become the enemy.

WRONG

I may be wrong. G'head. Prove I am wrong. You can't.