Bossism by Alton Miller

Bossism is an epistemological approach to politics, business management, religion, family and other personal relations, rooted in the fallacy that for any problem there is one and only one perfect solution, among various imperfect options; and that the job of a "boss" is to discover that solution and implement it. (Check out this link for more traditional definitions of bossism).

Thus the concept centers on the definition of "problem," and is epistemological in the sense that it depends on how we agree to recognize a "problem."

Bossism is an idealistic approach – in the same sense that George H.W. Bush is an "idealist." The opposing realistic approach says that social problems must always be defined dynamically, through a process that engages everyone who might be affected by the "solution." In this realistic approach, therefore, there is never an ideal "best" solution, but rather a range of alternatives that come into focus only through interaction of all those affected. Sorry to sound so wooden, but precision is important here as will be elaborated later.

Bossism can be reflected in a personal attitude, and held up as a patriotic virtue: one thinks of Davy Crockett's maxim, "Be sure you're right, then go ahead." But Bossism ultimately generates pyramidal organizational systems through which a boss considers alternative proposals, determines the one true solution, and directs the implementation of necessary measures through his minions (the masculine pronoun is used advisedly).

In the best case, a "good" boss will surround himself with counselors, as well as minions . . . sources of good advice as well as facilitators and implementers. A "good" boss will convince himself that by heeding good advice he is doing what he was hired or elected to do, and will be satisfied that he exemplifies the ultimate in efficiency and productive management.

This idealistic position is in opposition to the realistic political, managerial, and personal style that works to foster and focus the responses of all those who are affected, and to thereby (re)define the problem from multiple perspectives, providing for perhaps multiple solutions to the (re)defined problems that are identified through this process.

Bossism is at the root of all principled authoritarian, corporatist, paternalistic, male chauvinist, fascistic systems.

A convincing case for Bossism can be made by advocates of a strong executive, who deplore the dithering of parliaments and extol the advantages of decisive leadership, especially in emergencies. When Hitler and Stalin ridiculed do-nothing parliaments and promoted the “Führer prinzip” or “dictatorship of the proletariat” (a transparent rhetorical fiction), they were embraced by many who would inevitably be oppressed by their regimes, men and women who grew up in a 19th Century world dominated by monarchs and the grand narrative of monarchy – not only in politics: after all, a "man's home" was his castle, and their object of worship was King of Kings and Lord of Lords – and who were distrustful of democracy.

Many voters today will prefer a mayor who promises to "run this city like a business," and will deplore politics and politicians for the same reasons (if not the same conscious rationale) that Hitler's enthusiasts shared his disdain for politics. And many employees shy away from organized labor in the workplace, preferring that their workday be ruled by a monarch than that they have to "play politics" within a union in which some of their peers are to be privileged by the system.

The practical problem of Bossism is that the boss, having arrived at a course of action, but not having cultivated the consent of those affected, must enforce his decisions more or less ruthlessly. There is an advantage in effective public relations – what Walter Lippmann called "manufactured consent" – to palliate a testy public. But most day-to-day decisions must necessarily be carried out by minions. These second-level lackeys, who may wear impressive uniforms and carry themselves with a swagger, are completely in the thrall of their boss, without whom they would be out of a job – just another pompous boor, or club-footed misfit. Below the level of commissioner, whose mission it is to implement the will of the boss, is typically another layer of petty bosses, necessary to carry out the instructions of the level above. These men, too, are often chosen for their loyalty, and are often unsuited for other employment.

Typically, fear is a necessary motivating force, and Bossism thus lends itself to systematized terror.