We gave democracy a chance but it could just never really cut it. Nature’s way of leadership is obviously dominance. Of course dominance can be down right abusive and brutal, else we never would have tried fooling around with democracy.
For most of humankind’s existence, people everywhere instinctively turned to the most dominant personality for leadership, whether it was at the tribal, village or city level. Then perhaps to limit bloodshed among dominant contenders, the leadership game tried a system of inherited leadership, the divine right of kings. This was seriously flawed because there was no guarantee that the father’s son would receive the father’s strong genes. So it eventually evolved to where the people would literally vote for whom they felt was the best leader — democracy.
In theory it was assumed that in a democratic system where individuals were given a chance to pick their leaders, they would most likely choose the smartest, most experienced and wisest personalities among the lot. At times that seems to have been the case.
In reality, however, the ideals of democracy have always been a sham. Humans are still hardwired to respond to dominant personalities (the dominant ones not always being the smartest and wisest choice) the way they have done for tens of thousands of years. So in this video intense age where the personalities of those vying for leadership are constantly on display, as never before in large societies, we may call the process democracy but actually it’s the old system of personal dominance returning with a vengeance.
When one understands this phenomenon, the rip-roaring success of the blustering, “I will make America great again,” Donald J. Trump makes perfect sense — he’s heading the return of the alpha male system, even though we will likely keep insisting on calling it democracy.