The right man

In the war of all against all, the strongest, by definition, will prevail, because having prevailed is both necessary and sufficient evidence of strength.  For the academics out there, it's tautological, a truth by definition, but then a truth nevertheless.  The one at the top of the hill raises his (or her) arms in a Rocky like victory dance at the top of the stairs, and proclaims "I have prevailed against all others, and therefore I am the strongest."  He can continue in his victory dance, until, of course, someone comes and pushes him back down the stairs, and so, in this Hobbesian state of nature, to get there, and to stay there, one must be willing to exercise violence, without hesitation or compunction, against all who impede or threaten one's position.

In the war of all against all, might, the means to exercise one's will regardless of others, brute strength, does make "right," but here, of course, is where it gets a bit slippery in the slime.   We see this in our candidate Trump.  Here is a man who has prevailed in the capitalist struggle, and many admire or respect him for having done so.  He is at the top of the stairs in his Manhattan penthouse, and has arrived in his opulence in part because of the advantages of birth, in both senses of the word -- the good fortune of being born with the "right" attributes  to the "right" parents.  If one's method of keeping score is casino style opulence, then Trump is, in every respect, the "right" man in the "right" place.  It's not surprising that his promise to "make America great again" has achieved a following.  He promises greatness, and we want to believe that the "right" man will confer greatness upon us, but of course, it cannot work that way.  He is a great man, not because he has conferred greatness on others, but because he has prevailed over others.  Like the school-yard bully, to be his sycophant may confer benefits over others who are not his sycophants on the playground, but never enough that you will challenge his position as the "right" man in the "right" place.    If you do, of course, it follows that "you're fired!"       

Here there comes a subtle (well, not so subtle) shift in our notion of "right" and "rights."  It is one thing to say, "I am the right man in the right place, and I know this because I have prevailed against others."   There we are referring to nothing more than a darwinian fit within the prevailing environment.  It is quite another thing to say, "consequently, I have the 'right' to exercise my will over you."  He does, of course, but it is a wholly circumstantial right.   He does, that is, but only so long as he retains the position of being the strongest, a position that, in the war of all against all, will be perpetually challenged -- a position that must be perpetually defended by making one's self relatively greater and greater and greater, or conversely by making others lesser and lesser and lesser.   The former usually entails the latter, and so it seems, historically, every despot I know has gathered to himself the populist strength of the people to become despot, but after has governed through varying degrees of violence and the fear of violence, without hesitation or compunction, against those self-same people, else he won't remain despot long.  To be his sycophant may confer benefits over others who are not his sycophants, but never enough benefit that would allow one to challenge his position as despot.  If you do, of course, you either prevail and become the strongest or, as the saying goes, "you're toast!"

So, principle two -- we are never without "government," even if it merely the "government" of the "strongest."  Those who, out of wishful thinking, want to wish away what passes for government today, are to the same degree simply wishing into place a government of the school-yard bully.  If the last century taught us nothing, it should have taught us that.  Hitler, Stalin, Mao, all were the right men in the right place.  There is no Edenic paradise of all for all, not so long as Satan lurks in the bushes, and Satan really is just desire.  If one desires something, and wishes to make it his own, and wishes to be unfettered in his "right" to do so, and does not wish to confer on all others the same unfettered "right,"then I have wished into place the post-lapsarian war of all against all.