Rule by force

Here's another gem that I've learnt from my time as a personal secretary of a prominent politician.

Over a casual conversation, our subject had turned about political rule and the wrestle of power by force.

"You know..." he said, "When a politician overthrows the country by force, that rule is only temporary, because he will always be looking over his shoulders to see who would be after his head next."

Simply put, unless one is democratically elected to that position and rule by the will of the populace, he will not be tolerated nor accepted. As opposed to the population making a "wrong choice" by electing a leader whom they may later regret, at least they won't be demanding his head literally. They, too, will bear the blame for having made their choice. But when rule is obtained by the barrel of the gun, it is almost alway certain that he will pay with the price of his head.

Likewise, this also applies to work. Unless a captain is democratically accepted by his men, that person will eventually suffer the wrath and consequence of his failure in obtaining their approval. Rule by force, intimidation or fear is older than "old school". That went out with France's King Loius 16th who, as you might recall, was executed in public in the 18th century. So, where that theory of rulership by force came from is anyone's guess...