Instincts of Power

Let us put a magnifying glass to elite behaviour and relationships

Anybody familiar with my work knows that I tend to use abstract models and theoretical frameworks in my study of power. I have engaged with the Italian School of Political Theory (including figures such as Machiavelli, Pareto, or Mosca), as well as various other social theorists (Foucault, Ellul, Althusser, Luhmann). However, it has become increasingly clear to me that only the meticulous study of actual history allows me to gain a much more concrete understanding of how power operates.

My detour into history began with Bertrand de Jouvenel, whose monumental work On Power involves deep dives into the particular evolution of state power throughout the age of European revolutions. Through his specialised focus on one particular historical period, namely the period between the Glorious Revolution in Britain, the French Revolution, and the Communist Revolution in Russia, he showed that the erroneous idea of a separation of powers has become one of the most persistent myths of the enlightenment era.

Attempts have been made, but in vain, to uncover the intentions of the members of the Constituent Assembly. True, they approved the separation of Power into an executive, left with the king, and a legislature, to be taken over by the representatives of the people. True, they also committed local administration to local elected bodies and in that way effected a further division of Power. But these dismemberings of authority, however great the importance attached to them by their authors, are without historical significance. For the Assembly's work, even as its final repentance shows, was, despite itself, the complete transference of Power.

Bertrand de Jouvenel. On Power.

The reason De Jouvenel could convince me with his analysis was the myriad of examples and facts he presented from the historical record. His deep understanding of European history enabled me to gain insights into the development of state power which had been missing from the theorists I had studied until then. Ever since, I have shifted my focus towards reading good sources on world history.

In a way, the journey from the more abstract models of power dynamics towards a more concrete study of history has allowed me to figuratively look behind the veil and understand the hidden forces driving the course of our history. However, each time I gain another level of depth in my understanding of power, I find that I am missing the final degree of concreteness: A look into the real interactions, motivations and goals of individual powerful personalities. I wish it was possible to read Dostoyevsky-style novels that were historically accurate about various personalities, but alas, not even our best historians can look into the minds of people.

Whether it be protagonists of history such as Napoleon, Stalin, or Hitler, or covert operators and diplomats such as Medici, Fugger, Talleyrand or Bismarck, by looking at the specifics of their day-to-day activities we are able to complete the picture of elite behaviour and its overall contribution to the historical consolidation of global power.