The Role of Authoritative Leadership in the Rise of Western Great Powers in Modern Times

Zhao Chengfu

(College of Political Science and Public Administration Henan Normal University，Xinxiang Henan 453007)

Ⅰ.Connotations of the authoritative leadership

1.The meaning of authority

In political science，“authority is usually conceived as the right of engaging in certain activities，including the right of establishing legal system and all the other secondary rights related to the national sovereignty”.〔1〕In the behavioral science，authority has close relationship with leaders’behavior.“Power，prestige and efficacy are the constituent of authority…power is its prerequisite，prestige is its basis and efficacy could make it stronger”.〔2〕From the perspective of national political leadership，authority is the rulers’legalization and internalization of power，and makes the ruled accept the influence of power initiatively and voluntarily.〔3〕

2.Connotations of authoritative leadership

To sum up the above-mentioned connotations of authority，the national author itative leadership could be understood from the following two aspects:on the one hand，the rulers dominate the country with their powers and prestige;on the other hand，the ruled voluntarily，freely and equally hand over the rights of social control and administration to the rulers authorized and supported by them.Both of these two aspects cannot be ignored，i.e.for one thing，the rulers do not possess the sovereignty unconditionally.Instead，they must obtain authorization from the ruled;for another，once the rulers have obtained authorization，the ruled must obey their laws and regulations，policies and orders.

Ⅱ.The important roles of authoritative leadership in the rise of great western powers in modern times

1.Enlightened autocratic monarchy

Most of the countries rising in the modern times were the European countries，and monarchs have played important roles in the rise of these countries，esp.Portugal，Spain，England，France and Russia and so on.A monarch with brilliant political skills and open mind would lay solid foundation for the future prosperity of his country.It is the monarch’s autocratic power and personal charm that helps him possess the authority a leader should have and receive obedience and support from his subjects，thereby realizing his personal ambitions and the prosperity of the country.Through encouraging opening up new sea routes，an act of political foresight，Prince Don Alfonso Enrique of Portugal and Queen Isabella of Spain made Portugal and Spain become the first colonial hegemons of the world;Queen Elizabeth was diligent all her life，and she ended the religious struggles，maintained the national unity，defeated the maritime overlord Spain and made the United Kingdom embark on the road leading to hegemon;The French King Louis XIV’s political and military achievements during his reign gained France unprecedented international prestige.After him，Napoleon’s political openness and military talents made the whole Europe overawed;The reform carried out by the emperor of Russia Peter I was the beginning of Russia’s getting rid of its backwardness.

Though many of these monarchs were also featured by despotic dictatorship，compared with the monarchs in the middle ages or earlier period，they not only had the supreme position and despotic power，what was more important was that they also had the post-Renaissance political and cultural open-mindedness.They could see clearly the trends of the historical development and combine the interests of their own with the interests of the country and the nation，and thus maintained their inherent despotic power on the one hand，and made their sovereign accepted by the masses on the other hand.The enlightened sovereigns’authoritative leadership had played important and irreplaceable roles in the rise of the courtiers transforming from the feudal autocracy to capitalism democracy in modern times.

2.The rational system design

The countries lacking monarchic history or having strong democratic culture，such as Holland and America，cannot rely on a despot to achieve their rise.Holland is a small country with small population，which had been controlled in turn by its powerful neighbors，and a legal monarch was hard to nominate;America has a very short history and has never been ruled directly by a monarch authorized by the American;moreover，it has been influenced by the concept of democracy and equality since the birth of its nation.So it won’t work to carry out monarchy in these two countries.However，the dominant leading group could ensure the authority of its dominance by designing a kind of reasonable political system which will represent the interests of the rulers and most of the ruled and thus achieve the ruler’s legitimate status and gain acceptance from the ruled.

Dutch rulers’authoritative leadership was maintained through the national political system of“Stadtholders— Estates General— Stock Companies”established by their leading group — the merchant class.The Stadtholders refer to the Orange family who led the Dutch to achieve independence at the end of the 16th century.From the first Stadtholder William I(the Silent)，the leader of the Independent Movement，to the last Stadtholder William V，the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands had gone through 7 Stadtholders succeeding basically in accordance with the hereditary system.The Stadtholders did not have the power like the despots，and on the whole they were of the same status as the constitutional monarch and were the spiritual leaders of the whole country.〔4〕The virtual sovereignty was mastered by the Stadtholder’s nominal consultative machinery—the Estates General constituted of the merchant class which was the majority of the country，and the policies were basically in their service.Though the underlying masses including workers and peasants did not have their representatives in the Estates General，the merchant leading group linked the interests of the masses with the national interests by selling them stocks of the actually state-controlled stock companies such as the East India Company and the West India Company.Though these stock companies were enterprises，in the colonial era they served as the machinery of national colonial expansion and had strong political nature.Leading comfortable and rich lives through buying the stocks which kept rising in value because of the colonial expansion and foreign trade，the masses trusted the government more，and the government’s prestige among people was further enhanced.So the rise of Holland was not simply caused by its national mercantilism，the primary cause was still the authoritative leadership achieved by the government’s system design.

America first established the system of separation of three powers，which put the governmental behavior under control and ensured that the government would exert its dominance over the masses within the framework of the constitution.This system would ensure the legitimacy of the government formed on the basis of the constitution.During the period of rapid development in the late 19th century and the early 20th century，the government gained support from the public and raised its prestige through strengthening the socioeconomic control and repairing the defects of monopoly capitalism.Every American government，so to speak，as long as it was elected legally and led the country through the crisis of its time，was actually the government of great authority and also had a highly prestigious president.E.g.the American government during the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt led the country to get rid of the crises and become prosperous by virtue of authoritative leadership.

3.Transforming the traditional authority

Among the great powers rising in modern times，some were first influenced by the foreign countries and then became members of the strongest countries through self-transformation.E.g.both Japan and Russia were influenced by the advanced western systems，science and technology and culture in the first place，and then followed in their footsteps to carry out westernized reform.Before the reform，these countries already had their traditional authoritative leaders，but they failed to promote the national development.Through learning from the advanced countries and then transforming the traditional authoritative leadership，these countries embarked on the road to prosperity.In this aspect，Japan was more prominent than Russia.

Before the Meiji Restoration，Japan was actually under the control of the shogunate(the military government)，who maintained its authoritative governance through the legality authorized by the Mikado(the Emperor of Japan)and the subjection of the masses to the Mikado who had no real power.The defect of this authoritative governance was that it mainly gave service to the interests of the downfallen aristocrats，whereas the rising merchant class and ordinary people who had been ruled all the time were suppressed to a great extent.The long-term foreign trade in the coastal area and the opening of Japanese gate by America with military force brought the advanced western thought and culture into Japan.The wish of the merchant and rising bourgeois class to overthrow the Shogunate and establish new systems became increasingly stronger，and finally they succeeded in turning over the Shogunate by virtue of the power of the masses.The following Meiji Restoration led by the Mikado was a reform conducive to the development of the capitalism.In this reform the Mikado was remained as the supreme ruler of the country，but policies and measures which were in line with the bourgeoisie’s interests and conducive to the social progress were adopted.In addition，the Japanese people’s respect for the Mikado and competitive spirit had always been solid and unswerving，which made the modern Mikado government gain both the traditional legality of its sovereignty and the support from the majority of the rising bourgeoisie.So the Mikado government’s governance over Japan had its authority and its innovative measures could be implemented more smoothly.Thus the rise of Japan in modern times became an inevitable trend.

Ⅳ.The defects of the authoritative leadership

Authoritative leadership had played important roles in the rise of modern western great powers，even till now many developing countries still choose this kind of leadership in their process of striving for prosperity and powerfulness.However，along with the changes of times and because of the different situations of each country，the limitations and defects of authoritative leadership come to prominence in its application in different countries，which determines that the authoritative leadership is not applicable to any country at any period.

In general，the authoritative leadership has 3 defects:

1.The possibility of transforming into totalitarianism

It is highly possible that the countries achieving their authoritative leadership through enlightened autocratic monarchy may transform into totalitarianism countries.It is fundamentally impossible for the rulers，i.e.the monarchs，to give up their autocratic right voluntarily.Even though they adopt various enlightened policies to meet the interests of the masses，their fundamental purposes are to mitigate conflict and maintain their dominant status.In this case，once the conflict has been mitigated and their status has become stable，the monarchs are prone to the totalitarianism of despotic dictatorship，for instance，Napoleon was a national hero of France in the beginning，but he became an autocratic monarch subsequently.Even though a monarch could keep his enlightened attitudes all his life，it is still questionable whether his successors will swing to despotic dictatorship，because the institution of the country did not make any changes.For example，after Elizabeth I’s“Golden Age”，her successors implemented dictatorial centralization in succession，which finally caused the breakout of the revolution.

2.Lack of power to mobilize the masses politically

Different from the totalitarianism，the authoritative leadership only emphasizes the ruler’s authority and demands for the people’s obedience rather than their participation in the politics，and even excludes people from the political arena.If the ruler’s policies are not directly related to the interests of the masses，people seldom participate in and so they may lack the spirit of keeping forge ahead in solidarity.For example，the decadence of Holland was not only caused by the military failure，but also the lack of national political vitality，inability to keep up with the British and French revolutionary pace of the same time and thus fall behind the times，which was caused by the fact that for a long time the masses had only cared about the stock value and the economic interests and left the national politics to the hierarchical and inefficient provincial Estates General.

3.Fostering the narrow-minded nationalism

The ruler’s authoritative leadership could be achieved by propagandizing the nationalism thought.This feature could be found in the fascism regimes appearing in Japan and Germany after the economic crises.By taking advantage of people’s nationalism，the militarists and Nazis pled for the legality of their dominance and cheated the masses out of their support and authorization.Therefore，nationalism became a powerful tool used by them to achieve their authoritative governance，so the nationalism was doomed to be intensified continuously.Gradually，these countries would be pulled into the road leading to despotic dictatorship.

Ⅴ.Conclusion

The history of the modern great nations’rise and fall has demonstrated that the authoritative leadership is only applicable to certain countries at certain period and cannot promote the national development forever，and its defects may mislead a country astray，or even endanger other countries and nations.In the contemporary era，democracy seems to be the general trend of the social development，and almost all the governments around the world claim that they are democratic government，but we can still see the features of authoritative leadership from the leadership systems of many developing countries in Africa，South America and Africa，which are certainly both advantageous and disadvantageous for the development of these countries.Authoritative leadership does not come to its dying-out period，whereas the democracy is not universally applicable.With regard to the leaders of modern countries，esp.the backward developing countries，it is a wise choice which will lead their countries towards prosperity to make the efficient division between the authoritative leadership and democracy in the national political leadership according to the actual conditions of their own countries.

〔1〕David Miller，Vernon Bogdanor，(Eds.)，The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Institutions，China University of Political Science and Law Press，1992，p.45.

〔2〕Jia Yifeng，Li Hongbo.(Eds.)，Dictionary of Behavioral Science，Shandong People’s Publishing House，1994，p.147.

〔3〕Chen Yao，The Democratic Transformation of the Neo-Authoritarianism Regimes，Shanghai People’s Publishing House，2006，p.20.

〔4〕Hendrik Willem Van Loon，The Fall of the Dutch Republic(Zhu Ziyi，Trans.)，Beijing Publishing House，2001，pp.26-32.