Facts and Arguments about the Introduction of Initiative and ...
Facts and Arguments about the Introduction of Initiative and ...
Facts and Arguments about the Introduction of Initiative and ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
swim against <strong>the</strong> stream <strong>of</strong> public opinion <strong>and</strong> who can st<strong>and</strong><br />
up for <strong>the</strong> truth at great personal cost. It is just <strong>the</strong> ones who<br />
have loved <strong>and</strong> been well loved, <strong>and</strong> who have had many deep<br />
friendships who can hold out against hatred, rejection or<br />
persecution. (...) It seems probable that <strong>the</strong> most important<br />
gratifications come in <strong>the</strong> first two years <strong>of</strong> life. That is to say,<br />
people who have been made secure <strong>and</strong> strong in <strong>the</strong> earliest<br />
years, tend to remain secure <strong>and</strong> strong <strong>the</strong>reafter in <strong>the</strong> face<br />
<strong>of</strong> whatever threatens.” (Maslow, 1943a, p. 388)<br />
In <strong>the</strong> self-actualizing person, <strong>the</strong>refore, a sort <strong>of</strong> inversion <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> Maslow pyramid appears: in <strong>the</strong> series <strong>of</strong> needs <strong>and</strong> motivations,<br />
those that manifest <strong>the</strong>mselves last now become<br />
primary. What was initially <strong>the</strong> top <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> pyramid becomes<br />
<strong>the</strong> new base. In this respect also, <strong>the</strong>refore, <strong>the</strong>re is a ‘turning<br />
inside out’ in <strong>the</strong> transition from <strong>the</strong> basic need to <strong>the</strong><br />
meta-needs [see 4 - 1].<br />
An important element <strong>of</strong> Maslow’s <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> motivation is <strong>the</strong><br />
proposition that <strong>the</strong> basic needs can indeed be fully gratified.<br />
These needs are not inexhaustible. The logical conclusion is<br />
that <strong>the</strong> approach to <strong>the</strong> basic needs has to be from a ‘negative’<br />
direction, since what we are essentially talking <strong>about</strong> is<br />
<strong>the</strong> removal <strong>of</strong> deficiencies <strong>and</strong> annoyances – not <strong>the</strong> fulfilment<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> unlimited cravings <strong>of</strong> ‘homo economicus’. Once<br />
<strong>the</strong>se deficiencies are removed, <strong>the</strong> inversion occurs <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
meta-needs <strong>the</strong>n become <strong>the</strong> driving force <strong>of</strong> our actions.<br />
The authoritarian character according to Maslow<br />
According to Maslow, <strong>the</strong> key to <strong>the</strong> authoritarian personality<br />
can be found in a specific view <strong>of</strong> mankind <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> world:<br />
“Like o<strong>the</strong>r psychologically insecure people, <strong>the</strong> authoritarian<br />
person lives in a world which may be conceived to be pictured<br />
by him as a sort <strong>of</strong> jungle in which man’s h<strong>and</strong> is necessarily<br />
against every o<strong>the</strong>r man’s, in which <strong>the</strong> whole world is conceived<br />
<strong>of</strong> as dangerous, threatening, or at least challenging,<br />
<strong>and</strong> in which human beings are conceived <strong>of</strong> as primarily selfish,<br />
or evil <strong>and</strong> stupid. To carry <strong>the</strong> analogy fur<strong>the</strong>r, this jungle<br />
is peopled with animals who ei<strong>the</strong>r eat or are eaten, who are<br />
ei<strong>the</strong>r to be feared or despised. Ones safety lies in ones own<br />
strength <strong>and</strong> this strength consists primarily in <strong>the</strong> power to<br />
dominate. If one is not strong enough <strong>the</strong> only alternative is<br />
to find a strong protector. If this protector is strong enough<br />
<strong>and</strong> can be relied upon, <strong>the</strong>n peace <strong>of</strong> a certain sort is possible<br />
to <strong>the</strong> individual (...) Once granted this world-view, everything<br />
that <strong>the</strong> authoritarian person does is logical <strong>and</strong> sensible. (...)<br />
If <strong>the</strong> world is actually jungle-like for an individual, <strong>and</strong> if human<br />
beings have behaved to him as wild animals behave, <strong>the</strong>n<br />
<strong>the</strong> authoritarian is perfectly justified in all his suspicions, hostilities,<br />
<strong>and</strong> anxieties. If <strong>the</strong> world is not a jungle, if people are<br />
not completely cruel, selfish, <strong>and</strong> egocentric, <strong>the</strong>n, <strong>and</strong> only<br />
<strong>the</strong>n is <strong>the</strong> authoritarian wrong.” (Maslow, 1943b, 1973, p. 141)<br />
However, Maslow states that only a small number <strong>of</strong> people<br />
(in particular, pronounced psychopaths) match <strong>the</strong> image <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> human being portrayed by <strong>the</strong> authoritarian personality.<br />
Maslow includes <strong>the</strong> following in his characterisation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
differences between <strong>the</strong> ‘authoritarian personality’ <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
‘democratic personality’:<br />
• The authoritarian personality shows a preference for hierarchy.<br />
“People are ranked on a vertical scale as if <strong>the</strong>y were<br />
on a ladder, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y are divided into those above <strong>and</strong> those<br />
below <strong>the</strong> subject on this ladder. The democratic person in<br />
contrast tends (in <strong>the</strong> pure case) to respect o<strong>the</strong>r human<br />
beings in a very basic fashion as different from each o<strong>the</strong>r,<br />
ra<strong>the</strong>r than better or worse. He is more willing to allow for<br />
1<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir own tastes, goals, <strong>and</strong> personal autonomy so long as<br />
no one else is hurt <strong>the</strong>reby. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, he tends to like<br />
<strong>the</strong>m ra<strong>the</strong>r than dislike <strong>the</strong>m <strong>and</strong> to assume that probably<br />
<strong>the</strong>y are, if given <strong>the</strong> chance, essentially good ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />
bad individuals.” (Maslow 1943b, 1973, p.142)<br />
• The authoritarian personality shows <strong>the</strong> tendency to generalise<br />
‘superiority’ <strong>and</strong> ‘inferiority’. Stronger people are<br />
considered superior in all domains. In its most caricatured<br />
form, we recognise this in <strong>the</strong> personality cults surrounding<br />
dictators like Mao or Kim il Sung. Propag<strong>and</strong>a slowly<br />
converts such characters into capable leaders or outst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
writers, artists, scientists <strong>and</strong> sportsmen [or women].<br />
This type <strong>of</strong> personality cult takes advantage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tendency<br />
for authoritarian-minded people to generalise. The<br />
democratic-minded individual does not show this tendency<br />
to generalisation, but sees superiority or inferiority only in<br />
specific, functional domains <strong>and</strong> in relation to <strong>the</strong> capacity<br />
for tackling tasks efficiently.<br />
• The authoritarian personality shows a strong craving for<br />
power (power is essential to survival in a jungle). The democratic<br />
personality seeks strength ra<strong>the</strong>r than power.<br />
• The authoritarian personality shows a strong tendency to<br />
see o<strong>the</strong>rs “... as tools, as means to his end, as pawns on<br />
his chessboard, as objects to be exploited.” (Maslow, 1943b,<br />
1973, p.145) Here we find ano<strong>the</strong>r reason why an authoritarian<br />
person will usually be opposed to direct democracy.<br />
An important element, which Maslow also addresses, is <strong>the</strong><br />
tendency <strong>of</strong> authoritarian people to reinterpret in an authoritarian<br />
sense attitudes <strong>and</strong> beliefs which are diametrically opposed<br />
to <strong>the</strong> philosophy <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> jungle. Maslow gives as an<br />
example: “... <strong>the</strong> Christian ideal [that] has been corrupted<br />
<strong>and</strong> perverted into its very opposite by various churches <strong>and</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r organized groups.” (Maslow 1943b, 1973, p. 147)<br />
Inner motivation <strong>and</strong> democratic disposition<br />
Maslow’s ‘self-actualizing’ person is one whose daily activities<br />
<strong>and</strong> feelings <strong>about</strong> life are not dominated by basic needs<br />
that have remained ungratified. Self-actualizing people act<br />
out <strong>of</strong> very strong, personalised inner motives: “Just as <strong>the</strong><br />
tree needs sunshine, <strong>and</strong> water, <strong>and</strong> food, so do most people<br />
need love, safety, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r basic need gratifications<br />
which can come only from without. But once <strong>the</strong>se external<br />
satisfiers are obtained, once <strong>the</strong>se inner deficiencies are satiated<br />
by outside satisfiers, <strong>the</strong> true problem <strong>of</strong> individual human<br />
development begins, i.e., self-actualization.” (Maslow<br />
1950, 1973, p.188)<br />
One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> most surprising characteristics that Maslow emphasizes<br />
with this type <strong>of</strong> person is <strong>the</strong>ir ‘democratic character<br />
structure’: “All my subjects without exception may be said<br />
to be democratic people in <strong>the</strong> deepest possible sense. (...)<br />
These people have all <strong>the</strong> obvious or superficial democratic<br />
characteristics. They can be, <strong>and</strong> are, friendly with anyone<br />
<strong>of</strong> suitable character, regardless <strong>of</strong> class, education, political<br />
belief, race, or colour. As a matter <strong>of</strong> fact, it <strong>of</strong>ten seems as<br />
if <strong>the</strong>y are not even aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se differences, which are for<br />
<strong>the</strong> average person so obvious <strong>and</strong> so important. They have<br />
not only this most obvious quality, but <strong>the</strong>ir democratic feeling<br />
goes deeper as well. For instance, <strong>the</strong>y find it possible<br />
to learn from anybody who has something to teach <strong>the</strong>m<br />
– no matter what o<strong>the</strong>r characteristics he may have. In such