Divide and rule

The principles of “divide and rule” isn’t new, having begun its roots from the mid 15th century even when kings and rulers used it to “ensure” that they remain relevant as authority heads. Lawmakers, landlords and the public were kept at each other with webs of conspiracies, distrust and suspicions. It was very much a tool of tyranny, of which, thankfully, the founding fathers of the United States recognised it and aptly denounced its use.

Today, this principle is widely used as an offence tool against enemies to cause their downfall.

Having said that, there are, however, some that still choose to use it within the same organisation that they oversee. I have seen how insecurities and lusts for power will inevitably result in its use.

How pitting staff against each other with favouritism, “secret missions” and inappropriate cover-ups just to buy favour is used widely to ensure that these organisation heads remain relevant to the company. Notwithstanding that such techniques are considered passe, their use, however, is highly detrimental.

So called leaders that aren’t in themselves adequate nor competent enough to “rule” by example and expertise still choose to engage its use. These are wannabes that figured that they will only still have jobs if they created animosity among the staff so that they can be seen as the “glue” that holds the fort.

The results? When you begin to see the leaving of staff in droves, sabotage and the likes, you will know that the old saying holds true : “When a fish rots, it begins at the head”.