Why does man want to rule? Why does he seek to control not only himself, but also children, women, society, nature, thought, time, even love? Why, throughout human history, has \u201cruling\u201d often become more valuable than \u201cliving\u201d? Perhaps the greatest break in humanity began right here: The moment man ceased to be a part of life and thought he was the owner of life...<\/p>\n
The desire to rule is not only a political issue. It is also a psychological, historical, cultural and civilizational issue. Much of human history is like the history of civilizations that ostensibly established order but in essence nurtured the desire to rule. Therefore, at the center of wars, exploitation, the suppression of women, the plundering of nature and the alienation of human beings from human beings is not only power, but a deep-rooted desire to rule.<\/p>\n
Because to rule is not only to dominate; it is also to feel powerful. The person who controls thinks he is suppressing his fears. That's why the desire to rule is often born not out of self-confidence but out of deep insecurity. Man is afraid of losing, afraid of being insignificant, afraid of being forgotten, afraid of appearing powerless. Managing gives him a false sense of center. The person who controls everything thinks he can make his own fragility invisible. This is why the desire to rule is often the child of fear, not of love.<\/p>\n
Human beings are not born wanting to rule. A baby does not want to dominate; it wants to connect, trust and be loved. Human beings are relational by nature. But the forms of civilization established throughout history, especially male-dominated systems, have gradually programmed people to rule. The understanding that \u201cthe strong rule\u201d, \u201cmen rule\u201d, \u201cauthority is unquestioned\u201d has been reproduced not only in political structures but also in the family, school, religion, army and in every aspect of daily life. Thus, ruling became not natural but normal.<\/p>\n
\u201cMasculinity\u201d here is not just a biological masculinity; it is a historical mentality that sanctifies control, possession, command, visibility and dominance. Therefore, a masculinized character is often formed in the one who rules. When a woman acts with the same power codes, she can turn into a carrier of the male-dominated mentality. Because the issue is the culture of domination rather than gender.<\/p>\n
This mentality sees life not as a space to build together, but as an object to be controlled. This is the basis of the understanding that sees women as property, the system that consumes nature as an unlimited resource, and the education that turns the child into an object to be shaped. As the desire to rule grows, the relationship is replaced by ownership. One no longer seeks to understand, but to shape. They tend to dominate, not to love.<\/p>\n
That's why someone who loves to rule too much often cannot love people fully. Because true love requires accepting the freedom of the other person. But the passion to rule does not love equality. The person who is always ruling starts to see the other person as an object to be guided, not a subject, without realizing it. Sometimes he even establishes oppression under the name of \u201cgoodness\u201d. Phrases such as \u201cfor your own good\u201d, \u201cyou are not ready yet\u201d, \u201cthis is needed for now\u201d are often the moral covers of domination.<\/p>\n
Today, many governments, organizations, or authorities often use the phrase: \u201cNow is not the time for democracy.\u201d Or \u201cfirst the struggle, then democracy\u201d, \u201cit would be democratic to demand democracy now.\u201d But constantly postponing democracy to the future is often a form of self-preservation of the desire to rule. Because real democracy is not just about elections; it is about sharing power, accepting equality and making space for the will of others. This is precisely what the desire to rule is uncomfortable with. This is why many structures, even while speaking in the name of democracy, do not want to give up the privilege of ruling. As democracy is postponed, power deepens; as power deepens, humanization regresses.<\/p>\n
The desire to rule sometimes becomes not just a political problem, but a psychological addiction. The desire to be constantly visible, the need to be approved by everyone, the desire to have the last word, the desire to be decisive over people's lives... These can be seen not only in states, but also in families, relationships, academia, revolutionary structures, even in friendships. Because power can be established not only in palaces, but also in people's language, gaze and soul.<\/p>\n
Maybe that's why the more man tried to rule everything, the further he got away from himself. The more he ruled, the less human he became. The more he possesses, the deeper he drifts into emptiness. This is partly the tragedy of modern man: The loss of his own inner world as he tries to control everything.
\nBut is a life without management possible? A life without any coordination at all may not be practical. But the issue is not the complete disappearance of management; it is the disappearance of domination. Because life together, of course, requires common decisions, responsibilities and organizations. However, this organization can be sharing rather than commanding, participatory rather than centralized, horizontal rather than hierarchical.
\nThe real issue is not to rule people, but to build life together. In one there is command, in the other partnership. In one there is fear, in the other trust. In one there are egos that want to be visible, in the other there are people who labor invisibly...<\/p>\n
Perhaps the fundamental question that will determine the future of humanity is still before us:
\n\u201cIt is not \u201dHow do we govern more powerfully?\",
\n\u201cHow can we live together without ruling each other?\u201d<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Human beings are not born wanting to rule. A baby does not want to dominate; it wants to bond, to trust and to be loved.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":35,"featured_media":285967,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[286],"tags":[289],"class_list":{"0":"post-285966","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-yazarlar","8":"tag-manset"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285966","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/35"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=285966"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285966\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":285968,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285966\/revisions\/285968"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/285967"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=285966"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=285966"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/halkweb.com.tr\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=285966"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}