Logocracy - Chapter 15: Head of State

The moral and psychological role of one-man rule

Marcus Aurelius Distributing Bread to the People by Joseph-Marie Vien (1765)

In the U.S. the president takes on the roles of head of state, head of government, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the powers and responsibilities of which are laid out in Article 2 of the Constitution. Lobaczewski was not a fan of the extent of the American president’s duties and powers—not just because he saw the excessive concentration of power in the hands of one person as having too much potential for abuse, especially when that person had a personality disorder. He also had a simpler reason: “It is … preposterous in terms of human capabilities,” and constitutes “a workload that will exhaust the capacity of a man of full physical and mental fitness.”

In other words, it is simply not realistic to expect the chief executive to be able “to become personally acquainted with all [relevant] matters” to a degree sufficient for him to deal with them all competently. This leads to “oversights and inaccuracies” in the administration of the state.

By contrast, other countries, like the UK and Israel, split the positions, with the head of state (the king, president) having a largely symbolic, ceremonial role, neutered of any real power as compared with the prime minister, who acts as head of government.

Lobaczewski favors a split between the duties of the head of state and the head of government for logocracy, which by their natures have different psychological requirements. The head of state should have an inquiring mind, a broad perspective on history, politics, and science, and mature psychological insight. Former members of the wise council would thus make good candidates. The head of government, by contrast, should be “a younger man with a good memory and efficiency of mind, capable of acting energetically and prudently at the same time.” He should be knowledgable in law, administration, economics, technology, and defense. A wise thinker and an energetic doer.

Psychological experience teaches that these two types of talents do not occur together. This kind of person [the head of government type], however, will be able to appreciate the wise advice of the head of state. People with different natures work well together.

Whereas the first part of the logocratic constitution deals with the most general and permanent principles underlying the system, the second part spells out the specific details of this and forms this will take. For instance, depending on a nation’s traditions and current conditions, a logocracy can take the form of a monarchy or a republic. If a country has or develops a tradition of monarchy, kings may serve longer than republican presidents, and the pool from which they are chosen will necessarily be more limited (and thus have more lax psychological criteria). However, heirs to the throne should be raised in contact with normal society.

Regardless of the form, however, “The existence of a one-man head of state has proved in the light of historical experience to be the best solution.” Collective forms of leadership, by contrast, have proved impermanent and weak “because they lacked the necessary internal unity and did not form a sufficiently natural symbol of national unity”—functions traditionally and more effectively served by the chieftain, king, or emperor.

In essence, history has justified the form of one-man rule, even if it has also revealed its inherent dangers, e.g. autocratic degeneration, inefficiency, too frequent or too infrequent changes, all of which erode “the essential role of authority and its natural ethos.” A logocratic conception of natural law seeks to preventively mitigate those dangers, with the head of state having less formal power than the U.S. or French presidents, but significantly more than a modern European monarch-figurehead.

The head of state should take an intellectual, moderating, and culture-creating role, a mediator who uses his discernment and moral authority to provide good counsel—a role still somewhat present in Switzerland but sorely lacking in the U.S. He should he represent the unity of his nation within and without its borders, preserving ties on the international front as well as with the various groupings in his own country.

Recalling what he wrote about geniuses in a previous chapter, Lobaczewski says the wise council should take into account the potential head of state’s youth. A difficult youth is preferable to an easy and comfortable one, as it provides the crucible in which true genius is forged—conditions that “mobilize their maximum effort and realism of thought at an early age.” And as Abbé Faria puts it in Dumas’s Count of Monte Cristo: “Misfortune is needed to plumb certain mysterious depths in the understanding of men; pressure is needed to explode the charge.”

Part of the moral modeling provided by the head of state is his family life. The family itself acts as “a cultural and stabilizing factor in the moral healthy of society.” In a sense, the head of state will be a family, not just an individual—a model of propriety.

In neither republican nor monarchic logocracies will the head of state rule for life. Presidents’ terms will be limited by the constitution; kings’ by their age and health. While there are many means by which the head of state can be chosen, universal suffrage has the advantage of “creating a specific bond between the people and the president.”

Lobaczewski then gives a sketch of what he would propose for his own country, Poland. Some details:

• A maximum of nine candidates put forward, one each, by the outgoing president, the council of ministers, the logocratic association council, the councils of the five independent authorities, and the lower house of parliament.

• After wise council approval, candidates will then be vetted by the senate, e.g. for family requirements. If three or fewer candidates remain, the seeding institutions can put forward alternatives. Approved candidates would then start campaigning for the two-round election.

• A presidential term would be 3 years. Sitting presidents would not need to interrupt their duties to run for re-election (“an unnatural and harmful situation”). Term extensions would be approved by the wise council and a simple majority of both houses. Maximum normal duration of office would be 12 years. “Such an arrangement would allow for both a relatively quick replacement of a less successful president and a fairly long reign by one who had earned well-deserved popular respect.”

• Due to uniquely Polish conditions, the outgoing president should have the ability to designate a successor (with wise council approval) in the event that holding a normal election or term extension are not possible. In times of war, the wise council may also put forward its own candidate.

• While monarchy is a dead option for Poland, it could conceivably work if a union of ex-communist countries were to be formed. “The king would be a link of great emotional and traditional value for the nations, which would retain a wide range of autonomy, electing their own presidents.”

• “In sum, then, the President of Poland would have considerable scope for orchestrating state policy, and the economic, social, and cultural life of the country. He should also have considerable moral authority, office, and knowledge. But since the legislative power would remain with a logocratic parliament, much more efficient than a democratic one, giving the president the right to easily veto parliamentary bills or even decree laws would be unnecessary.”

---

Chapter 15: Head of State

The first part of the logocratic constitution must not decide whether the country is to be a monarchy or a republic, what the head of state is to be called, or prevent the development of another form with regard to the supreme power. These matters will be decided in the second part, according to the tradition and historical time of the nation concerned. All solutions, however, should be based on an understanding of natural laws and will therefore betray important similarities. The functions of the king and the president will resemble each other, while maintaining tradition and some more significant differences, such as the ways in which they are elected and their time in office. The existence of a one-man head of state has proved in the light of historical experience to be the best solution, justified by the laws of nature to a large extent, though not entirely. This is why most of the aforementioned thinkers speak in favor of this kind of supreme power, but always with some concern that this power should not degenerate into tyranny. All collective organs of supreme power proved to be impermanent forms because they lacked the necessary internal unity and did not form a sufficiently natural symbol of national unity.

In a monarchy, the council of the wise will be able to confirm the candidacy of only a person of princely tradition but with somewhat more liberal psychological requirements. Nevertheless, it would be advisable for there to be several candidates for the throne, since this arrangement would make it possible to bring up the heirs to the throne in normal contact with society and educate them without exposing them to danger, and then to choose the best candidate. Indeed, the isolation of the heirs to the throne from natural life experience and even from knowledge of the real problems of the country has proved to be one of the important causes of the degeneration and decline of European monarchies.

Logocracy accepts the existence of a one-man head of state, but such a system should produce a balanced solution to the problem of supreme authority, based on natural law, so as to permanently eliminate the dangers of both autocratic degeneration and inefficiency. In our Polish geopolitical conditions, this power should remain as effective and stable as the assumptions of a logocratic system will allow.

The forms of individual leadership that have been produced in many countries have raised significant questions about their compatibility with natural law. There have been numerous and dramatic examples of the degeneration of the role of national leaders. Both the overgrowth of supreme authority, its holding in one hand for too long, and its weakness or frequent changes, lead to the loss of the essential role of that authority and its natural ethos. The weakness of this power creates the danger of its role being taken over by an autocratic entity under its formal patronage. As already pointed out, the worst consequences occur when this supreme role begins to be played by an individual who betrays pathological character traits.

Every nation needs its wise man, with a deep moral and mental culture, a broad view of world history and of his country. Such a man will serve an important function, although his formal authority would be very limited, for he will act in the informal way of good counsel and mediation, using the moral authority of his office, person, knowledge, and wisdom. To some extent this role of head of state is preserved even in Switzerland, where the function of president of the federation is assumed for a period of one year by one of the ministers of the government, and their formal role is limited to representative functions mainly for foreign policy purposes. A similar intellectual, moderating, and culture-creating function is severely lacking in the United States of America. Therefore, an excess of power in the hand of the head of state seems more unnatural and dangerous than its weakness.

The head of state should perform essential functions. He represents the country and its unity inside and outside the country. He is a moral model of steady family life. He possesses constantly deepening knowledge of history, politics, and biohumanities, as well as in the field of current achievements of science and technology. He has a constitutionally limited scope of political power, which is significantly extended in the event of a threat to the country from its enemies. He has broad powers in the field of the law of clemency. This scope of power, which is greater in the person of the president and lesser in that of a monarch, should be much more limited than that of the President of the U.S.A. or even France, but always greater than that of the crowned head who reigns but does not rule.

The man holding the office of head of state should not be burdened, especially in peacetime, with an excess of current political responsibilities. His fundamental duty is to constantly deepen his knowledge and culture, to be aware of events, changes, and their genesis in the whole world so complicated today. His task is to be a man of good counsel, based on an accurate discernment of causes and anticipation of consequences. In addition to these duties, the head of state must perform representative duties, maintain contacts with his peers abroad, and preserve the ties with the broad circles of his own society. If to this is added the performance of the necessary duties of state authority, it will constitute a workload that will exhaust the capacity of a man of full physical and mental fitness.

To burden the head of state with the duties of executive power deprives the nation of this guiding and educating function of an office and a man of comprehensive cultural and intellectual qualities. It is also preposterous in terms of human capabilities. Such an arrangement as we have in the United States, for example, leads to many oversights and inaccuracies in the operation of the administration of the state, caused by the inability of the chief executive to become personally acquainted with all matters. For, as a matter of fact, in all the space from the Atlantic to the Pacific, no man has yet been born who can handle all the duties which the American Constitution imposes upon the President. Logocracy, as a system guided by psychological realism, must recognize that we are all human and have natural limits to our abilities and a certain type of giftedness.

The functions of the head of state and the activities of the head of the executive power present such far different psychological requirements that they can be well fulfilled, and at the same time well cooperated with, by people of different natures and different talents. It would, therefore, be most advantageous if the head of state were a man with an inquiring thinker’s mind, capable of seeing things in the broad perspective of the laws of nature and history, and a good psychologist. It should therefore happen frequently that a member of the council of the wise should be elected president of the country.

The head of the executive power should be a younger man with a good memory and efficiency of mind, capable of acting energetically and prudently at the same time. In the modern world, his function requires a wide range of knowledge in law, administration, economics, technology, and defense. Psychological experience teaches that these two types of talents do not occur together. This kind of person, however, will be able to appreciate the wise advice of the head of state. People with different natures work well together. Usually, therefore, promoting the prime minister to president of the country would prove to be a less favorable solution.

Candidates for the aforementioned three highest offices will have to obtain the approval of the council of the wise. However, it should also be borne in mind that modern psychology doubts the existence of born geniuses. As already mentioned, exceptional creators grow out of gifted people under conditions that mobilize their maximum effort and realism of thought at an early age. A difficult youth, therefore, should not be a justification for discrimination. Since the fullness of normal human nature is an essential condition for holding high office, the council of the wise will take into account above all this aspect of the candidates’ personalities.

The head of state, together with his family, is a cultural and stabilizing factor in the moral health of society in the country. Therefore, the choice of candidates and then the person should take into account the spouse and some of their relatives. In a republican system, the wife (or husband) of the head of state should formally accept her husband’s candidacy and her role with him. She must fulfill the office entrusted to her by the constitution, which will oblige her to assist her husband in particular in his representational duties and to keep the state secrets known to her. In addition, she will be able to formally undertake certain public functions appropriate to her position and her skills. In this sense, the head of state should be the family, constituting, as far as possible, a model of good manners, which is in accordance with natural law. This in turn will make the office of the president of the republic to some extent similar to that of a monarchical head of state.

In a logocratic system of any kind, the head of state will not hold his office for life. The president’s time in office will be limited by the provisions of the constitution, and the monarch’s time in office by his age and health. In both cases the council of the wise will have the right to request the termination of the office of head of state. The election of a successor should, if possible, take place in advance to ensure that the elector enters upon his duties. The election of the monarch should follow normal parliamentary procedure and would be a legislative act. The election of the president may be by parliamentary means, but the alternative of universal suffrage, according to a properly considered procedure, may have the advantage of creating a specific bond between the people and the president. The experience of recent years, however, I consider as a warning that the latter solution conceals a danger for the Polish nation.

For a republic, especially for Poland, I propose the following procedure of electing a president. The right to nominate one candidate will be vested in the outgoing president, the council of ministers, the civic association council, the councils of the five independent authorities, and the lower house of parliament. Together, it will be possible to put forward nine candidates. If some of these institutions do not exercise this right in time, there will be fewer. The candidate will have to obtain the recognition of the council of the wise no earlier than one year before taking office, but before presenting his candidacy. The Senate will further select the candidates also taking into account the mentioned requirements of their families. This will be a negative vote pushing back some candidates. Since the ejecting institutions will be aware of this and will take it into account in their selections, often the senate will approve all the candidates, or push back a few. However, in the event that the senate leaves only three candidates, the seeding institutions will have the right to put forward new candidates. The speaker of the senate will present a list of approved candidates to the parliament and the people and they will be able to start campaigning. Elections will normally be in two stages.

The election of the president would ensure that he remains in office for three years. Extending his term, however, would not require a general re-election, thereby involving the president in an election campaign, which creates an unnatural and harmful situation. With the approval of the wise council, it would be done through normal parliamentary procedure and would require a simple majority in both houses. I propose the following deadlines for extending the office of the President:

• General election - 3 years,

• First resolution of parliament - 5 years,

• Second resolution of parliament - 3 years,

• Third parliamentary resolution - 1 year.

The longest normal duration of the presidential office would thus be 12 years. In exceptional circumstances, especially in wartime, the Senate would have the power to extend this term by one more year. Such an arrangement would allow for both a relatively quick replacement of a less successful president and a fairly long reign by one who had earned well-deserved popular respect.

Due to Poland's extremely difficult geopolitical conditions and its tragic history, it seems reasonable to retain a provision, like Article 24 of the April Constitution of 1935, which will take into account the situation when a normal election of the president or an extension of his term will not be possible. Then the outgoing president will have the right to designate his successor with the approval of the council of the wise. Accordingly, the retention of the council of the wise in the most dire situations would be a vital necessity. Its functions would then be extended to include the right to put forward its own candidate, which it will not have in times of peace, possibly also the right to extend the term of office of the head of state.

For Polish conditions, I do not consider the alternative of a monarchy, because such a tradition has already died out in our country. If, however, a union of countries freed from pathocratic rule were to be formed, then such a possibility should be seriously considered. The king would be a link of great emotional and traditional value for the nations, which would retain a wide range of autonomy, electing their own presidents.

In our country, therefore, the President’s power should have a scope somewhat broader than that assumed in the Constitution of March 17, 1921, but much more limited than that conferred upon him by the Constitutional Law of April 23, 1935. This scope of power will be sketched in turn in the following chapters, particularly discussing the five independent authorities, as a kind of patronage over each of them. The president would also be the supreme head of the armed forces. In sum, then, the President of Poland would have considerable scope for orchestrating state policy, and the economic, social, and cultural life of the country. He should also have considerable moral authority, office, and knowledge. But since the legislative power would remain with a logocratic parliament, much more efficient than a democratic one, giving the president the right to easily veto parliamentary bills or even decree laws would be unnecessary.

Note: This work is a project of QFG/Red Pill Press and is planned to be published in book form.