The prevalence of the hubris syndrome

Is modern politics predominantly marked by a hubris syndrome? The Bangalees do not have to be in high position to demonstrate an overdose of hubristic trait. Or, how do you explain a man on the street of no consequence yelling to another of his counterpart, "Do you know me? I'll take your eyeballs out". If ordinary mortals can be so hubristic, those more equal than others wielding power at the highest level can go insane with the intoxication of the combined elevated influence of money and power. Listen to Roy Porter what he has to say in his A Social History of Madness: Stories of the Insane, "The history of madness is the history of power. Because it imagines power, madness is both impotence and omnipotence". He goes further, "Threatening the normal structures of authority, insanity is engaged in an endless dialogue---a monomaniacal monologue sometimes ---about power".

Then what has lunacy or insanity to do with hubris. Sheer madness in the ordinary sense has nothing to do with hubris. But a magnified feeling of pride and confidence on the verge of megalomania in political leaders certainly qualifies to be super hubris. That is the time when power makes political elements blind. It happens not only in countries like Bangladesh but also in advanced societies where charisma is replaced by flamboyancy, patriotism by racism and religious radicalism, broader vision by popular narrow interests. Hollow demagogues pose to be iconic leaders and can sway public opinions in their favour. Actually, they say what the public wants to listen to.

But by the time they pull off their surprising victory to the disbelief of sane people, they do not wait long to show what they really are. The promises they make to deliver are beyond their power; instead they turn dictatorial and in case of developing or underdeveloped countries hubristic leaderships start considering public wealth their own. In the advanced societies, personal gains are permissible up to a level but the real danger comes from their eccentric moves with incalculable damage and destruction of the peaceful and balanced world order. In both cases, though, the dictatorial power-wielders lose touch with the people. So megalomaniac they grow that this does not cause them sleepless nights. However, any miscalculation on the part of the hubristic leaders in the Third World can have adverse impacts mainly on their own peoples but in case of the First World, its cataclysmic effects are far-reaching and on the entire population of the planet.

Now how can the hubris syndrome prevail is no mystery. The majority of the public too are conceited rather than modest and humble, reluctant to make humility a virtue for them to inculcate. Conceited people are better qualified to be attracted by the hubristic leaders who are gifted with the talent of churning out lies only a few can detect. It is like a vicarious pleasure for the conceited who can take a plunge into the pool of hubris given the opportunities. Even when they become disillusioned by the break of promise, they hanker after another round of sugar-coated lies and promises.

Hubris survives albeit in a different style and a coat of a very shiny colour next time. Intriguingly, there is no end to this process of recurrent emergence of ingratiating rhetoric. Thus the humanity has been paying heavily for the social divides created over the centuries. Isn't it surprising to know that in the United Kingdom (UK) 7.2 million people comprising 11 per cent of the population including 17 per cent children experienced food poverty in 2022-23. The number of food insecure rose by 2.5 million within a year. Even in the USA, 47 million people including 14 million children remain food-insecure annually.

Unless insanity and hubris together with a grain of narcissism make round in politics, why should such societies experience food insecurity on this scale? The element of narcissism is not quite out of place because it may not care for power but self indulgence makes one totally indifferent to the sufferings of others. Modern politics has brought radical changes to the way of ruling the people or the relations between governments and the governed but essentially the kingly and imperial rule of the past still has its residues dormant in the system. It is because of this, the lavish living, large retinues and imposing protocols have to be maintained ---a sure sign of hubris and eccentricity with a small dose of narcissism.