Throughout history, individuals with unique characteristics have
occupied authoritative positions by revolutionizing nations, societies
and institutions of different origins, languages and cultures. Customarily
tagged as "political leaders," these people have been
examined independently for their ability to impact, to transform
and to revolutionize accepted standards of living with promises
for to change the societal norm. Leaders achieved greatness by and
through empires-both in the West and in the East-from Babylon (606-539
BC) to Rome (146 BC-476 AD), from the Chinese Qing Dynasty (1644-1911
AD) to arguably the modern day People's Republic of China (1949-present).
Despite the Western connotations of the word "charisma,"
the charismatic leader "ideal type" is best understood
through characteristics found in the people governed rather than
in the individual leader, providing a tool useful across time and
culture, based on the political techniques of Chairman Mao Zedong
and Augustine of Hippo. Despite the Western connotations of the
word "charisma," an "ideal type" of charismatic
leader not only embodies legal power, but also gains authority by
catalyzing the people's need for change. Historical analysis of
the political techniques of Chairman Mao Zedong and Augustine of
Hippo yields a social tool applicable across time and culture to
better understand the nature of revolutionary politics.
The Nature of Traditional Charismatic Leadership
According to traditional Western thought, it makes
sense to define a leader who combines religious and political leadership,
whose ability to enact change originates as a gift from the divine,
as "charismatic." However, use of the word "charisma"
when applied to revolutionary politicians' policies-in all degrees
of religiosity and cultures-may induce a rethink of the entire idea
because of parallel techniques that reside within varying degrees
of religious belief. Traditionally, authority acquired through personal
zeal has a special and privileged position in revolutionary politics,
for it is the principle of creativity, of innovation and of renewal.
The uncontested ideal political leader is one who combines rational
reflection or prudence with a sanctified aura of enthusiasm in his
actions. In this paper, the traditional definition of charisma will
be characterized by "voluntary obedience [from the people],
namely obedience to the strength of someone's character or to the
grace of a supreme authority that seems to be present in a person."
Accordingly, the charismatic authority of Mao and
Augustine can be respectively classified into three "ideal-typical"
forms: legal, traditional and charismatic domination. The traditional
form is the focus of comparison and redefinition here, although
the multi-faceted classification of this authority is relevant to
the deeper understanding of entire analytical tool. On the surface,
the Bishop of Hippo in North Africa and the Chairman of the Chinese
Communist Party identify with these categories. They first fall
into the "legal" category simply due to their power in
their separate hierarchic communities based on their institutional
positions of authority. This power is accompanied by their actions
as leaders in changing the previously accepted norms. Mao challenged
the established governmental legislation, or the State, with his
concept of "permanent revolution," while his own makeshift
infrastructure founded on the revolutionary zeal of the peasants
was on the brink of collapse. His decisions as leader of a nation
do not fit solely into the "legal" facet but were complex
and possibly detrimental to an entire nation that consisted of nearly
a billion people. Augustine, on the other hand, speaks against lust
for domination in his City of God. He cannot comfortably fit into
the domination category because of his beliefs. His audience of
Christians was remarkably smaller and the results of his decisions
were less widespread, but his drive to save souls through the Christians
believers-an undoubtedly different type of domination-can only classify
him into the traditional aspects of this concept.
Based on this three-pronged analysis of charismatic
leadership, cross-cultural examinations are significantly limited.
However, by analyzing these two political leaders, both with seemingly
charismatic characteristics, the traditional theory can be delved
into, possibly resulting in a deeper and more accurate cross-cultural
tool. The traditional ideal type determines that the leader's "authority
is based on belief in and submission to" him who possesses
"special qualifications of some sort." Like every analytical
tool, the "ideal" it is not an empirical reality. What
is "found empirically is always an impure mix of the different
types of authority." Likewise, to say that the reasons behind
Mao and Augustine's revolutionary power are legitimized only on
the traditional basis-an aspect of the "ideal type"-is
to force these men into unnatural conditions outside of their context.
A more effective tool would take into account their different cultural
circumstances and temporal positions while allowing for a greater
understanding of the broader techniques both men used to enact change.
Because the definition of the traditional charismatic authority
lacks recognition for this interaction between a leader and the
people, one might question its definition of an absolute source
of charisma.
Any effective leadership requires two sets of actors:
the central leader who is looked to for guidance and the less enlightened
masses who respond to his bidding. Without interaction with his
followers, the charismatic leader cannot gain authority. Rather,
at the appearance of a charismatic leader, people and things become
organized in a specific way, experiencing it as their 'duty' to
obey to avoid contempt. Perhaps with Augustine of Hippo and Mao
Zedong, when both men demonstrated their techniques of charismatic
leadership through their search for alternatives to a decaying past
legacy, charisma is found in the zeal of the people as they react
to the policies put forth by the leader.
The Vision
Return to
Top
Augustine recognized a deep need in the Roman people
for security in their government for protection. Yet, with the sack
of Rome on August 24th, 410 AD by a Gothic army led by Alaric, Augustine
had to "deal with disillusioned Christians quite as much as
with angry pagans." Indeed, the pagans blamed Christianity
for the loss of the pagan gods' favor dating back to when the Roman
Christian emperor Theodosius I issued an edict that made Christianity
the official religion of the empire in 380 AD and outlawed pagan
worship in 391 AD. In his sermon on war and peace, Augustine put
these events into perspective for the disillusioned Christians and
gave them a mindset for the future-a revolutionary outlook, perhaps-since
truth was unclear, thereby leading them to believe what the non-Christian
pagans said about the Christian God. Using the destruction of Sodom
in the Old Testament as an example, where Abraham asked God to save
the city if ten just people were found, the pagans implied that
God would have saved Rome if the Christians were righteous since
"it's obvious that God did not spare the city." Augustine
replied that this idea was not obvious since God did not allow Rome
to be completely destroyed.
By rationalizing the idea that the fall of Rome was
not really "the fall" by complete destruction, as had
been in the case of Sodom, where both people and buildings were
destroyed in a fire sent from Heaven, Augustine possibly demonstrated
a characteristic of the non-traditional charismatic "ideal
type." Rather than saying that God destroyed the city, Augustine
said this "lash [against] the city" was a saving mechanism.
It was one that the remaining people of Rome should be thankful
for because a city is made up of people, not walls, and the Christians
left alive were now to revolutionize Rome by saving souls. Augustine
reminded the followers of their relationship to God through a passage
from Proverbs: "If the Lord loves someone, he corrects him;
he lashes every son whom he receives." Augustine said that
the pagans were wrongly "laying siege to our scriptures out
of unbelief, rather than asking questions of them as believers"
when they pointed to Abraham's talk with God. By reaching a "new
state of ecstasy" as a charismatic leader, Augustine promulgated
a new orthodox standard by rationalizing the devastation of Rome
in his sermon and giving the Christians a greater vision to follow
beyond the existence of the Roman Empire.
According to Bathory, Augustine directed the people
with techniques of unity that he gained from past rulers. The problems
that "confront the 'stabilizing leader'" like "maintaining
peace and stability in an already existing polity that is presumably
functioning smoothly" becomes intensified when "the stabilizing
leader faces grave difficulties" because of "any sort
of crisis or disruption" like the sack of Rome. The leader's
only hope, according to Bathory's understanding of Augustine, was
"to evoke a sense of that common interest and shared dedication
instilled in that people at the time of [the institution or State's]
origin." This hope comes with a "harsh call to action"
when Augustine attempts "to move men both to fear and to hope."
Thus, the question remains whether charisma has its
"locus in the personality or qualities of the leader, in the
relationship between leader and followers, in the cultural media
by means of which it is expressed, …or in the relation of its
possessors to the centers of social order. It seems most probable
that the locus of charisma is found among the participants in a
revolutionary movement. By this definition, charisma is not so much
a personality as a message, recognized in a society or institution
because it resonates with and gives authority to people's expectations
and assumptions. Perhaps a revolutionarily charismatic leader gains
his power through situations where expectations of great change
have been boiling up and people look to one person for unified change.
Support for this ideal resides in the Augustine case
study. According to Bathory, Augustine's success in representing
unity and order rested on his readers and his God. Bathory writes:
"If people were given access or a hint of real perfection,
the imperfection of their present lives would become more apparent.
Furthermore, the universal perspective that [Augustine] offered
would, he felt, engage people in a regular confrontation with their
imperfection." This "prophecy of qualified hope"
could be found in the unified body of Christ and could result in
a beautiful order in the City of Man on earth-which was an eschatological
hope at best. Bathory quoted Augustine's claim in his Confessions
that "a body, which consists of members, all of which are beautiful,
is by far more beautiful than the several members individually are,
by whose well-ordered union the whole is completed." His view
of unity was not a call to stagnation because of humanity's inability
to achieve God's perfection. Rather, "it was a call to action."
While this somewhat romanticized view of politics working with religion
appears ambiguous in terms of practicality, Augustine's unique balance
of patience with politics could inspire the Christians to enact
change.
Augustine's political task of "building community
from the bottom up" remained concerned with the whole context
in which a community develops, not solely in the Christians who
heard his sermons as an exclusive group. By seeing his own role
as an intermediary between the people and its governmental leaders,
Augustine realized that the everyday problems of the State could
deflect the leader's attention from fundamental problems. His writings,
specifically the City of God, attempted to use Rome and Roman institutions
as "vehicles for a public instruction," which were intended
to awaken men to "their enslaved existence." A united
voluntary spirit subtly exists as a thread throughout Augustine's
writings and is more difficult to observe than Utopian vision or
ideologies on dealing with dissident groups. However, it is key
to grasping the fullness of both political leaders' charismatic
rise to power.
Augustine "hoped to strengthen and make beautiful
individual parts of the soul and individuals in society, so human
beings might more easily recognize their place in God's beautiful
order." Through his experiences as a pastor Augustine clearly
saw the need to change the Roman society, especially since its fall
in 410. His attack on pagan institutions was more direct since political
decay had become vivid to his audience. When Augustine studied the
history of Rome in the City of God, he hoped to "alter the
attentive and self-conscious reader," offering a political
therapy to apply to the disenchanted society when combined with
his " 'therapy of self-examination'" in his Confessions.
Through Augustine's letters to Lord Nectarius, a pagan
born in the town of Calama who rose to a high position in the imperial
civil service, one can grasp Augustine's Christian understanding
of civic ideals and how Christians might aim to reach the City through
actions on earth. As a Roman pagan, Nectarius hoped to impress Augustine
with his loyalty and love for his hometown and his desire to leave
Calama in a "flourishing" condition before his death-a
desire that would, in Augustine's opinion, ultimately prevent justice
from being served. In Calama, a pagan group had celebrated an idolatrous
ritual on a pagan feast day, even allowing an "outrageous group
of dancers" to perform in front of the church, and no one had
prevented it despite the law. Augustine noted that when "the
clergy tried to prevent this utterly illegal and quite inappropriate
behavior, (the pagans) threw stones at the church." Augustine
commended Nectarius' love for his city but insisted that there is
a love for a "certain country beyond" that Augustine would
"love to count" Nectarius "too as a citizen of."
For it is "because we love that country with a holy love-as
far as we can-that we accept work and danger among the people we
hope to benefit by helping them to reach it." It is from this
concept that Augustine outlines the actions a Christian can do here
on earth in order to advance the Utopian City of God in the afterlife,
which he was "eager never to leave."
Augustine encouraged Nectarius to focus on leaving
his hometown filled with piety and reformed characters, who "must
be converted to a true worship of God and to chaste and pious habits."
He must reform those who have done misdeed and be merciful to those
who are afraid since there are "ways of punishing evil men
that are not only gentle, but even for their benefit and well-being,
and Christians too can make use of these." Nectarius' fell
into the trap of using the incomplete attempts of secular Rome at
fixing society's ills, and Augustine offered an alternative to Rome's
lax virtues. His alternative included instruction to his readers
in " 'true piety,' which could lend reality to classical virtues
and all men to 'look forward with endurance' to true happiness."
Augustine's vision consisted of several parts to remind
the Christians of their greater purpose in this life. His charismatic
leadership adds substance to the 'ideal type' through his writings
in the City of God, his sermon with a passage from Proverbs where
he quoted, "If the Lord loves someone, he corrects him; he
lashes every son whom he receive" and through his letters to
Nectarius. He also reminded these followers of their origin, their
dependence on God's grace and their greater purpose. Like a true
revolutionary leader, he asserted that the smaller sacrifices were
worth the end eternal gain and that action today would be beneficial
in the City of God after death. Life should be spent giving people
every opportunity to receive salvation. Since Augustine's vision
could never result on this earth because of Man's fallen nature,
he created hope through unity. If Mao's techniques can be found
as parallel to Augustine's, then the "ideal type" of charismatic
authority will revolve around the promotion of a Utopian vision.
It may be possible to say that the frustrations and
fears of the Romans during the sack of Rome echoed across generations
and nations and into 20th century China where the Qing Dynasty was
overthrown with the 1911 revolution by a great national leader named
Sun Yatsen. Since 221 BC, China had survived through the Imperial
Era, but with this revolution a search for a modern political and
social order began. In a difficult stage of transition, the Chinese
people followed new forms of government ideologies, including a
failed Republicanism and a corrupt Nationalist Rule. Their eventual
rejection of Western imperialism-a distaste that would flavor international
politics for generations to come-culminated in the Chinese Communist
Party's (CCP's) gain, of power and the instatement of Mao Zedong
as Chairman.
The Yan'an period of the Chinese revolution catalyzed
the CCP's rise to power with a sense of mission and purpose. The
period initiated a revolutionary spirit beginning with the Long
March, a journey that began on October 15, 1935 where 80,000 men
and 35 women embarked on a torturous 6,000-mile trek across China
and arrived with Mao in Shaanxi Province, just south of the Great
Wall. With the Guomingdang Nationalist forces in hot pursuit, the
10,000 people that survived the deadly mountains, rivers and marshes
of western China, where troops and warlord armies awaited, would
regroup in Yan'an and unite to become the unified Chinese Communist
Party. This march became the prelude to what would be a victorious
period of the Chinese Communist Revolution under the leadership
of Mao Zedong. Mao realized the importance of this unity and would
continue to radicalize his politics in later years to renew this
sense in the continuing generations of revolutionaries.
Such revolutionary history influenced the daily political
decisions of Mao Zedong and his revolutionary political techniques.
Mao's vision would not transpire in the heavenly regions like Augustine's
but could actually be realized on earth in the culmination of a
socialist Chinese State. In his speech, On the People's Democratic
Dictatorship, given on the first of July in 1949 to commemorate
the 28th Anniversary of the Communist Party of China, Mao outlined
his vision that "Human society" will "move to a higher
stage." He spoke to the Chinese people using strong rhetoric
that would lead to a rise above the "Chinese feudal culture,
the so-called old school of learning" with the withering away
of the State apparatus. Exhausted with other political ideologies,
China would look to the Russian legacy and "enter an entirely
new era, both in thought and in life" through Marxism-Leninism,
a "universal truth which [was] applicable anywhere." Mao
claimed that the new era of leadership would rest on the shoulders
of the Chinese people through a "democratic dictatorship."
The consciousness of the Long March survivors-that
they had lived while so many had perished-lent a sacred character
to the revolutionary mission of the early Chinese Communist Party
(the CCP) and empowered "an almost religious sense of dedication"
to Maoist policies and ultimately his Utopian vision. Given the
conditions of the CCP in China's post-1949 and in keeping with the
so-called revolutionary "Yan'an Spirit," Mao stated his
ideological vision with the claim that the "only path to universal
harmony is through a people's republic led by the working class."
Mao ingeniously linked a new generation to the hopes of the old
that came before them much in the same way Augustine had reminded
the Christians of their greater vision beyond the limitations of
this world and the Roman empire. Mao's "principle of creativity,
of innovation and of renewal" allowed the revolutionary spirit
to continue through his rule as Chairman of the Chinese Communist
Party and to unify the Chinese people for a common goal.
Mao promoted a concept known as "permanent revolution"
in his later political techniques. Similar to Augustine's reminder
to the Christians of their origin and their purpose, as outlined
by Bathory, Mao strove for China to exist in a continuous state
of change, always renewing that initial sense of mission and vision
for the future. Perhaps the unrest that Mao desired for China, which
would inevitably "struggle" the bad elements out of society,
cannot be found in Augustinian political techniques, but both men's
aims at a greater good demonstrate a vital component of the true
charismatic leader's 'ideal type'.
One possible characteristic of the "ideal type"
charismatic leader could be his ability to give orders or guidance
to the masses during times of crisis and uncertainty through an
encouraging use of rhetoric. Mao Zedong sent orders on October 8,
1950, for the Chinese People's Volunteers to "assist the Korean
people in their war of liberation, to repel the attacks of the American
imperialists … and to defend the interests of the Korean people,
the Chinese people and the people of all Eastern Countries."
Just as Augustine led the Christians in Rome to endure difficulties,
Mao warned the volunteer army not only to "fully anticipate
all sorts of difficult circumstances," but also to "be
prepared to exercise a high degree of enthusiasm, courage, caution
and a spirit of perseverance in overcoming these difficulties."
Mao capped off his circulating document by saying: "If only
our comrades are resolute, brave, good at uniting with the local
people and at fighting against the aggressors, the final victory
will be ours." Such was the nature of Maoist politics, creating
a unity greater than the nation of China through belief in a visionary
purpose for all the Communist nations. In policy execution, Mao
and Augustine differed greatly, but the same push for a greater
vision guided both politicians' decisions.
The Communists took power in China on October 1, 1949-just
three months after Mao outlined his Utopian vision in a speech-thereby
terminating the hyperinflation that Chiang Kai-shek had created
in China. Chiang and the Nationalists had fled to Taiwan and remained
under the protection of the United States, thus "prolonging
the life of the remnant Nationalist regime and tying an internal
Chinese political conflict to a potentially explosive international
one." During the following year, 1950, Mao would face obstacles
on all fronts-international, domestic and ideological. The nature
of Maoist politics can be further examined in the exchanges that
resulted from such crises to determine how they relate to the ideal
type charismatic leader.
Internationally, China would be faced with a threat
to the survival of the new republic through the war in Korea that
consequently precipitated an "era of internal political terror"
and coupled with the rise of the specter of counterrevolution. The
cause of the war in this bordering communist land remains murky,
but it was not until the United States troops threatened the Manchurian
border in November of 1950 that Chinese troops crossed the Yalu
and inflicted on the forces of General MacArthur the "greatest
defeat in American military history." Given this historical
background, the new Republic would find itself amidst a tense aftermath
of international politics with the possibility of internal backlash.
Mao Zedong rose to power by offering alternatives to the unsuccessful
political ideologies in China after 1911. His policies appealed
to the masses and focused on equalizing society's benefits while
minimizing corruption. Prior to the international and domestic dealings
of the 1950s, Mao Zedong gave a speech on June 1, 1943 that outlined
his intended methods of leadership amongst the masses. He said,
"There are two methods which we Communists must employ in whatever
work we do. One is to combine the general with the particular; the
other is to combine the leadership with the masses." He continued
his outline by stating that a general goal for political advancement
should be given to the broad masses while persons in leadership
positions, known as cadres, should look to the individuals in subordinate
positions for guidance. This advice was based on the peasant's experience
rather than education, producing a policy that seemed contradictory.
Yet, this would be the basis for Mao's implementation of "reeducating"
the masses in Communist Chinese society and establishing a transition
into socialism that would continue throughout Maoist political thought.
All policies were linked closely with the masses, allowing them
to take part in the movement, however active the leading group may
have been. Mao said that group activities would "amount to
fruitless effort by a handful of people unless combined with the
activity of the masses."
One of these activities that would advance the culmination
of the Socialist State was known as Agrarian Reform. In a speech
given on June 6, 1950 in Beijing to the Third Plenum of the Seventh
Central Committee, which made final CCP decisions, Mao summarized
the Party's first step toward achieving his Utopian vision. He said,
"This coming autumn we will begin to carry out land reform
over a vast area with a population of about 310 million in order
to overthrow the entire landlord class." Mao hoped to restructure
society, to eliminate the useless classes of society, by redistributing
the ownership of land. The poor peasants were extremely pleased
with this measure of equalization. However, many rich peasants were
dissatisfied, but since he viewed the peasants as the component
of society with the ability to correct the society's ills, these
actions were made according to the greater good. Mao's civil ideals
are somewhat parallel to Augustine's, in that they gave followers
a path to take and advance the chances of reaching the Utopian vision.
Augustine and Mao were in agreement in their opinions regarding
the need for the participation of the people in revolutionary activities.
However, the charismatic leaders differed in their view of the reason
behind that interaction. Mao saw the peasants as uncorrupted, poor
and blank-a fresh page ready to have Chinese socialism transcribed
upon them and with the ability to reeducate the upper classes. Augustine
recognized the fallen nature of all men who were dependent God's
grace for salvation. No group of society was any better off than
the next. Rather, only the Christians had the ability to cleanse
themselves of their sin through the death and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
Ideologies for Dealing with Dissident Groups
Return to
Top
For Mao, there was no question of whether counterrevolutionaries
should be suppressed. He was not concerned with how harshly these
enemies amongst the Chinese ranks were treated or what people said
as a result. Rather, Mao was well aware of possible foreign invasion
combining with civil war, resulting in the fall of the People's
Republic of China, as had occurred in new regimes through history.
As a result, Mao's repression of the relatively weak internal forces
of counterrevolutionaries in 1950 became increasingly controlling
throughout the country in 1951.
While there was nothing novel about repressing counterrevolutionaries
in Chinese history, nor would quieting dissident groups seem unusual
for the developing definition of the charismatic leader "ideal
type," a Maoist decree on February 21, 1951 held a somewhat
different purpose. His "Regulations Regarding the Punishment
of Counterrevolutionaries" not only extended the scope of political
repression by more broadly defining counterrevolutionary activities,
it also was designed "to instill an atmosphere of terror in
society through public campaigns against all forms of political
dissent." During the following ten-month period, general secret-police
repression would be accompanied by an "endless series of mass
meetings in the major urban centers where the more prominent of
accused counterrevolutionaries were publicly denounced and sentenced
to death." Although the People's Republic never revealed comprehensive
statistics on the number of victims of the terror, such "fragmentary
official reports… do suggest that the number was substantial,"
where local authorities "reported some 28,000 executions"
in the Guangdong province of China alone.
Mao's manner of suppressing the dissidents with an iron fist reveals
his inflexible nature and his intolerant pursuit of a Utopian vision.
If a charismatic leader if defined as one who is able to rule because
of a component of his or her personality, then Mao's decision to
eliminate the people who had intentions contrary to the People's
Republic of China was justified. However, if power to lead with
charismatic authority was acquired by another means-possibly through
the support of the people that were executed under the orders of
Mao-then in this situation, Mao demonstrated a politician on the
brink of losing his power.
Several centuries prior to the establishment of the People's Republic
of China, Augustine, the Bishop of Hippo, had a manner of dealing
with dissenting groups unique to that of Catholic Christianity,
the official religion of the Roman Empire. The Donatists, a dissident
sect of the Christian religion that held a majority of the Christian
population in their ranks in North Africa, were heretics bound to
suffer the punishments of governmental legislation. Thoroughly condemned
at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 AD under the guidance
of Theodosius I, Augustine was still surrounded in North Africa
by a majority of Donatists in the 400s. As a result, he dealt with
the group in a merciful and yet in a political savvy manner because
Catholic Christians had less strength in number in his diocese.
Thus, Augustine demonstrated a patient political ideal as he pleaded
with Marcellinus for mercy in regards to the fate of criminal Donatists.
As a high-ranking official with the power to maintain public order,
Flavius Marcellinus heard the trial of two Donatist men from Augustine's
diocese of Hippo who confessed to murdering a Catholic priest, Restitutus,
to beating another, Innocent, and to "gouging out the latter's
eye and cutting off his finger." Marcellinus received Augustine's
letter "urging mercy for the Donatists who [had] been convicted
of the murder and mutilation respectively of two Catholic priests."
The Bishop of Hippo feared that Marcellinus might punish the men
"harshly" according to the Roman law, inflicting the same
pain on the men as they afflicted. At first reading, Augustine's
request seems like an undermining of the Roman law where he begged
mercy for the counterrevolutionary groups and an entirely apolitical
stance on the matter at hand.
However, Augustine did not request their release without punishment.
Rather, he suggested that the authorities might reach a balance
between retaliation on the Donatists because of their stand with
the Catholic Church and no punishment at all, which would allow
the men to go free and to continue offending. By proposing that
the men be left "alive and physically unmutilated," and
instead assigned to "some useful work" to return them
to the "peacefulness of sanity," Augustine revealed his
savvy political mind that bridged the gap between the majority group
in North Africa. In a sense, Augustine's political decision formed
a treaty between the Catholics and the Donatists and demonstrated
his realization that charisma is not established by personal character
but instead is granted through the unified consent of the people.
The more that remain alive, the more authority a leader with charisma
might gain. Beyond uniting the sect with the Church, Augustine realized
these hate crimes might be stopped with a little political maneuvering.
Thus, by granting his request, political official Marcellinus also
adhered to Augustine's patient and political decree: "Condemn
injustice without forgetting to observe humanity." But this
example did not mean that Augustine had no spine or that he bowed
to the Donatists in all situations-characteristics contrary to that
of an ideal politician of any association, and one that wouldn't
remain in office for long. Indeed, he fought fiercely against this
majority Donatist group in North Africa and later sought the political
intervention of Caecilian, who served as praetorian prefect of Italy
and Illyricum and was the emperor's chief-of-staff from judicial
and administrative matters arising within those civil dioceses.
By letter, Augustine stated his need for repressing the dissident
heresy, saying that he grieved "that the region of Hippo Regius…
[had] not yet deserved to benefit from the vigor of which [Caecilian]
as governor [had] applied [his] edict." Augustine requested
Caecilian to enforce his edict against the Donatists in his region,
if for nothing else so that the hate crimes between the heresy and
the Catholic Church might subside.
The edict mentioned by Augustine was one of a repressive series
of edicts enacted by Emperor Honorius in 405 AD and declared the
Donatists "heretics." It banned their religious assemblies,
allowed for the confiscation of private homes used for Donatist
meetings, threatened the Donatist clergy with exile and denied certain
rights concerning contracts and inheritance. Augustine's desire
to enforce such an edict was not a soft request, but was forceful
because it extended mercy.
The comparative analysis of Mao Zedong and Augustine of Hippo results
with obvious differences in the political policies of Mao and Augustine,
disclosing a key component in the understanding of the charismatic
leader and adding a new dimension to the concept of charismatic
authority. Positing an "ideal type" of charismatic leader,
the differences in time and culture of the two case studies require
a very generalized definition to encompass the varying aspects of
politics. However, an analysis of Mao and Augustine's political
techniques is beneficial for a greater understanding of the nature
of politics. The comparison is fruitful to grasping the vast differences
in the motivations behind vastly different governing auspices.
Given the limitation of the historical analytical "ideal type"
to only impurely portray the empirical reality, the old traditional
analysis of charismatic authority, defined the "voluntary obedience,
namely obedience to the strength of someone's character," still
proves insufficient to classify the ideal type persona. The majority
of the techniques analyzed in the above case studies would have
no impact if the people were not in need of change and revolution.
Both Mao and Augustine were leaders who enacted change, and their
policies display characteristics of a type of charismatic leader.
Their differences could be attributed more to their legal positions
rather than their sources of charisma. But with a new working definition
of traditional charisma, more conducive with reaching a cross-cultural,
cross-temporal aim of establishing an 'ideal type,' a greater understanding
of the varying nature of political action is achieved.
Return to
Top
Works Cited
Augustine. Augustine Political Writings. Trans. Atkins,
E.M. and Dodaro, R.J. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University
Press, 2001.
Bathory, Peter Dennis. Political Theory as Public
Confession: The Social and Political Thought St. Augustine of Hippo.
New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1981.
Brown, Peter. Augustine of Hippo: a biography. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2000.
"Theodosius I." Elibrary (2002): n.pag.
On-line Tucows, Inc. April 15, 2002. Available
Feuchtwang, Stephan and Mingming, Wang. Grassroots
Charisma: Four Local Leaders in China. London and New York: 2001.
Lemmen, M.M.W. Max Weber's sociology of religion:
its method and content in the light of the concept of rationality.
Trans. H.D. Morton. Hilversum: Gooi en Sticht, c1990.
Meisner, Maurice. Mao's China and After: A History
of the People's Republic. The Free Press, New York, N.Y., 1999.
"On the People's Democratic Dictatorship: In
Commemoration of the Twenty-Eighth Anniversary of the Communist
Party of China, June 30, 1949." Speech by Mao Zedong, The Search
for Modern China: A Documentary Collection, Ed. Cheng, Pei-kai and
Lentz, Michael. New York: Norton, 1998. 351-357.
The Writings of Mao Zedong, 1949-1976. Ed. Kau, Michael
Y. M., Vol. 1, September 1949-December 1955. M.E. Sharpe, Inc. Arkmonk,
New York/London, England, 1986.
Back to Main Portfolio
Page
Last updated Nov. 15, 2002
