I was talking to someone the other day about the elections going on in Saskatchewan and the US and they called themselves an anarchist, where political hierarchy is abolished and no one is considered “in charge”. Rather, they count on the goodness of humans to manage their communities. I guess you could respond to that as a political scientist or psychologist, but my first thought was astrology. Having just listened to a lecture on Triplicity rulers, where depending on sect, certain planets in your chart help certain people rise to prominence or take them away from the limelight, I thought about how some leaders are born because it’s in their charts. Yes I believe in free will, but I also belive that our planets determine a large part of our lives. A Christian would call it pre-destination. An Indian would call it karma. An astrologer would call it fate.
I’d rather live in a democracy our charts are allowed to express themselves, but where we have charters, laws, and regulations that determine what a person can and cannot do in leadership. If anarchists are restricting the whole idea of leadership itself out of derision for the actual idea of someone sticking out above the crowd, they might be forcing some of their Enneagram type six or nine issues onto the group out of an insecurity of being their own authority that they have themselves. An emotionally intelligent approach to leadership won’t throw the baby [authority] out with the bathwater [ego]. A good leader brings emotional intelligence, balance and groundedness to the role, and they can do a lot of good for society. A bad leader is one who is not self-aware and is a slave to their appetites, in other words, someone who hasn’t done a lot of inner work. Wouldn’t anarchists rather focus on what people do with the contents of their charts rather than suppressing their expression?