Lessons on Rebellion Part II

RAY HOPPER must be reading my stuff.

He seems to be using the lessons on rebellion I covered in last week’s article.  Go to the top of the class, Ray.

Last Friday I started a discourse on the lessons from the American War of Independence for rebellious LNP members.  One of the two lessons was that rebels will often blame the King’s deputies.

King George III, looking either serious or  unhappy. 

Ray Hopper on ABC Radio this week said Jeff Seeney and Tim Nicholls were the villains of the piece.  They had a cunning plan to encourage Campbell Newman to run for Ashgrove, whereas he would lose and they would end up as leaders.

Hopper gave credit to Newman for actually winning the seat and frustrating their plans.

But the third of the three lessons from the American War of Independence is that blaming the leader’s lieutenants for vindictive treatment of rebels can be fallacious and self-delusional.

Take heed Carl Judge, Alex Douglas and Ray Hopper – the stiff-necked and inflexible reaction against dissidents comes from the top.

Far be it that the leader is a dupe of his underlings.  He is the true author of the rebel’s miseries.

It is no use for Clive Palmer or Ray Hopper to appeal to Campbell Newman.  His style of leadership has set a pattern for intolerance of dissent throughout the organisation.

It was no good appealing to King George III in the 1770’s.  He was leading the charge against the rebellious colonists himself.

At the time it was not recognised fully, but after the Americans got their independence, it was clear that “at every turn of the way, it was the King who insisted on fighting on” (p.357, “The Long Fuse”, Don Cook).

One-time Minister and Opposition Leader Charles James Fox actually said later in Parliament that “it was the influence of the Crown … that enabled His Majesty’s Ministers to persevere against the voice of reason, the voice of truth, the voice of the people.”

And George III himself said to John Adams, the first American ambassador in Great Britain, “I was the last to consent to separation.”

Up to the English surrender at Yorktown in 1783 and even beyond, George III never wavered over the American Question.  He broke his own governments that did not accede to his views and persecution of the war.

Sooner or later, rebels have to recognise that the problems and judgement come from the top: ask any MBA graduate who has studied leadership.

Here’s another point.  Whether we are in colonial Boston or post-colonial Brisbane, we cannot assume that the rebels are erroneously focusing their discontent on the King’s lieutenants.

Ray Hooper, looking serious but not unhappy. theaustralian.com.au

 

It may be a deliberate tactic.  They may be fully aware of the leader’s culpability, but feel they cannot take him on.

They may be just shielding themselves from his power, and are focusing on easier and less risky targets.

So there are the three lessons of rebellion for the LNP members walking off the plank, and for those of us watching the shipside splashes with interest.

But the Hopper-Judge-Palmer-Douglas rebellion may not end with a split of the LNP empire.

Never underestimate the ability of politicians to recross those burnt bridges.  And never underestimate their desire to lavish compliments and praise upon powerful men.  Just in case.

John Adams, the leading American revolutionary and second American President, said to King George III he would be the “happiest of men if I can be instrumental in recommending my country … to your Majesty’s royal benevolence.”

The disaffected LNP members may not be revolutionaries.  Just disgruntled.  The choice of the leader is whether to make them rebels.

Follow Chris on Facebook, Twitter or Google+  

Blog Promotion Top Blogs


Blogs Blog Tools Allie Marie