Customer Reviews

King of the Mountain: The Nature of Political Leadership

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

It is surprising that the proponents of evolutionary psychology have not paid more attention to this book. Ludwig argues that the human desire to be the supreme political ruler is rooted in the same biological nature that supports the dominance of alpha males among monkeys and apes. He supports this argument with analysis of the 1,941 chief executive rulers of the independent countries in the 20th century. He illustrates his points with lively anecdotes from the lives of the 377 rulers for whom he had sufficient biographical information.

Of the many interesting points that he makes, one is that he can explain one of the universal traits of human politics--that the highest positions of political rule tend to be filled predominantly by men. Political scientists rarely acknowledge--much less explain--this remarkable pattern of male dominance. Ludwig explains it as a manifestation of male primate tendencies rooted in the neurophysiology of the male as shaped by natural selection in evolutionary history. (Surprisingly, Ludwig does not mention Steven Goldberg's book WHY MEN RULE, which makes a similar argument.)

There is one bright spot in Ludwig's otherwise dark vision of politics dominated by Machiavellian brutality--he shows that democratic leaders in established democracies act with more restraint than those in other kinds of regimes. He doesn't explain this. But he could have argued that even this has biological roots by appealing to Christopher Boehm's claim (in his book HIERARCHY IN THE FOREST) that there is a biological basis not only for the natural desire for dominance but also for the natural desire to resist dominance, and that modern democracy expresses that ambivalent political nature by allowing ambitious individuals to compete for high office within the constraints of constitutional structures that protect subordinates from being exploited.

I have developed some of these points in my book DARWINIAN NATURAL RIGHT: THE BIOLOGICAL ETHICS OF HUMAN NATURE.

Despite its hard science dressings, this book is primarily a popular (versus academic) account of modern political leadership. Although Dr. Ludwig is obviously knowledgable about psychology, the scientific discourse in this book is kept to a minimum. Mostly, the book consists of a series of highly entertaining anecdotes about famous political figures, collected to support his thesis that political greatness equates possesing the characteristics of the "Alpha Male". The acceptability of this amoralistic conception of "greatness" - where Mao and FDR are co-ranked the greatest modern political leaders with Stalin a close second - is up to each reader to decide.

This is one of the most ambitious and interesting works I've ever seen. The author, apparently on his own and without institutional backing, took on the study of political leadership and addressed it empirically, coding 182 features of different leaders during the 20th century. Although replete with entertaining anecdotes, the book is based on statistical analyses that are presented in a clear and intuitive manner. There are literaly hundreds if not thousands of new facts and observations. By examining so many leaders and identiying types, he shows that individuals such as Hitler are not mere anomolies but share common traits - independance of interests, excellent memories, supreme confidence in their own vision, etc. This book is similar in approach to my own (Personality, Character, and Leadership in the White House) but extends analysis to leaders in all sorts of governments. My only complaint is that some of the metholdogy underying the study could be more fully explained (for example, how many raters provided jdugments on personality traits and how these were defined?), but most readers will not miss this. A tour de force.

I loved reading this book as much as I enjoyed the funny picture on the cover. The thesis that most if not all leaders of people are similar to primate alpha males in the sense that they have more concubines and children, not necessarily more intelligence or ability but more macho desire to rule over others for the sake of ruling (whether known or not by the agent), and that much in the politics of primates and that of humans is remarkably similar is fun to examine and read about. My only desire was that after ten years of studying and researching for this book, maybe the University of Kentucky emeritus psychiatry professor could have focused even more on the roots of the nature of political leaders, both in the primate and strikingly similar human realms. I expected much from this book and did not get as much as I would have hoped, but it was still an excellent read thanks to the depth of research it contains. All national leaders from the 20th century collated and examined as a whole in comparison with primates: maybe there is ample reason to be disappointed in a 400 page book trying to take on so much. Nonetheless, the accounts of the idiosyncracies of certain leaders, the primate-like actions of many, the sloth and greed of others, and other remarkable accounts make this a fabulous book for almost any reader interested in the imperfections of people, especially the most visable people: leaders.

An excellent research result, that has lasted for 18 years from one of the most prominent phyciatrist. This book is an eye opener that reveils the basic fundamentals of a leadership in the animal kingdom, humans included. One can see and understand the well known male dominance in all of the societies, the causes of the wars etc. A must read book by all of the present and future leaders.

This is one very interesting and entertaining book. A relative recommended it to me and although he made it sound interesting, I was still a little apprehensive. I thought the book was going to be how average human leaders have similar traits as monkeys and half the book was going to be talking about 5 year studies in the jungle done by National Geographic types. I was wrong. The author completed one mammoth feat of research by researching every leader of a country from 1899 to 2000. He spent 18 years doing it and read thousands of books and articles on the subjects. Over1,900 mostly men were studied and the author came up with common personality traits that the leaders shared. The book details out these traits and how the author interpreted them in relation to political leadership and slightly how they stacked up against monkey hierarchies. .

I really enjoyed how the author detailed out certain traits and then used examples from his research to show how those traits came into being with the different leaders. What came out of the book right away was that a certain type of man has the drive to become a leader, the alpha male, and that very few leaders just happen to fall into being the man in charge. Not only was the psychology of the book interesting, but the vast coverage of interesting bits of history made the book enjoyable to read. The author would dig up relevant and many times amusing, antidotes from his research to describe a particular ruler. He also did not just focus on the most well know leaders, but showed the reader how the traits on display covered leaders from all aspects of the spectrum, from democratically elected leaders to dictators and Kings.

Probably the only sad section of the book dealt with the ways so many of these men hung one to the very last minute to the power they had and that the obsession with keeping the power tended to facilitate the circumstances for their down fall. Overall I really enjoyed the book. It is interesting and well written. It could have very easily been a dry and dull study, but it comes no where near this. The authors quirky sense of humor helped to keep the book light and fast paced. If you are interested in politics and the men on stage then this will be a good book to add to your collection.