This is just another one of those "I can't imagine how it can be anything but thus, therefore it must be thus" line of arguments. But it is not a proof of impossibility, it is merely evidence of this particular man's limit of imagination/knowledge.
It seems to be a common fallacy engaged in by philosophers, and religious philosophers are no exception.
.... another way of escapism expresses a more active and compensatory attitude: this is when people experience great democratic leadership, the charismatic aspect of the democratic myth.
Powerlessness is never better concealed than when people place themselves in the shadow of a great leader, those momentous personas with whom the people can identify.
There are almost no limits to the generosity and the hopes but also to the deceptions – that the democratic masses invest in their leaders, their father figures. The self-esteem of the masses is here raised to sublime heights. If the possibilities of identification between the leaders and their followers are sufficiently strong, then every feeling of powerlessness is obliterated.
In democratic leadership we see manipulation and the psychological phenomenon of projection at the highest level. The leader will be the incarnation of the volonté générale, the bearer and executor of what is said to be the people's inner "will."
These strong and charismatic leading figures are the magnified images of what the masses want to be themselves. The leader is the "mirror" delivering man from perceptions of his own powerlessness and insignificance; he is the father figure, giving to his adherents what they believe is the real Popular Will.
p.s. Have you any idea where I would go for more information on this company? Just a curiosity. Seems so odd -- don't it though -- that a Russian would incorporate under "Volonté Générale".
Will you be posting the answer to that question?
Much of his explanation of human motivation is identical to Nietzsche's Will to Power. Nietzsche said that a civilization's teleological function is to produce (only a few) great men. I'm interested to see if Lindbom agrees. Every popular attempt at societal analysis/futurism concentrates on "megatrends". Small is beautiful.
I've heard of Lindhom (only because of the Swedish connection) and never read him. You probably know he was a social democrat for many years before he started writing. It's impressive to even find these types, and generous to post them. Thank you.
(Library-full-of-books)