Abstract

This dissertation explores the salience of the question of ethical leadership for the radical activist left. It opens with a critique of horizontalism, an outlook that enjoys currency in activist and academic circles, and proceeds to make the case that hierarchies need not be authoritarian and can indeed be beneficial, both from democratic and ethical vantage points. I demonstrate that horizontalism is flawed by examining both its theoretical underpinnings and practical applications of it. In making the case for the desirability of leadership on the left, I draw on facets of Critical Theory, with an emphasis on the ideas of Erich Fromm. Engaging aspects of the famous Fromm-Marcuse debate, I argue that Fromm provides a more robust foundation for a theory of the transition from capitalism to socialism than does Marcuse. I then show that Fromm’s distinction between rational and irrational authority, in conjunction with his psychological ideal of productiveness, lays the groundwork for a theory of ethical leadership. While articulating a theory of ethical leadership, I take to task extant, mainstream theories of leadership for circumscribing the potentialities inherent to ethical leadership. I argue that ethical leadership can find its most authentic expression only in the domain of radical activism and politics. I then delve into the psychoanalytic problematic of identification, with an eye to demonstrating that certain interpretations of the process of identification encourage an understanding of authority that dovetails with the imperatives of ethical leadership. I conclude by providing two real life examples of ethical leadership, Errico Malatesta and Herbert Marcuse, and by discussing the possibility that charisma can be ethical. I contrast ethical charisma with authoritarian charisma and the manufactured celebrity charisma of the culture industry.