Size matters to leaders – especially to male leaders, though only to some male leaders.
In an earlier post titled “Male Leaders” (link below), I pointed out that even eons after humans separated from other great apes, mostly it was males who led. I further pointed out that mostly it was males who sought to lead, to control, to dominate not just their own groups and organizations but others as well.
This particularly pertains to leaders at the national level where proxies serve as warriors. National leaders have at their disposal militaries, intelligence services, and weapons, many of which are deadly. So, in our own time it is male leaders at the national level who are most likely to emulate their great ape analogues.
While in the past males were prone to aggression either because they wanted more sex or because they wanted more territory, now sex is less of a factor. Not only is it much more freely available than it used to be, but procreation, having as many offspring as possible, is less desirable.
But the appetite to acquire more territory continues unabated. Leaders, though only some male leaders, continue to want not only to dominate their own domains but to acquire other ones as well, all of which they then can control.
Safe to say that some male leaders feel more powerful and successful – more manly – if the domain they dominate is larger as opposed to smaller. Enlargement, expansion, and extension are good. Stasis, not speak of shrinkage, are bad.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is an obvious example of the syndrome. Three years ago, Russia invaded Ukraine. Why? To acquire it, to swallow the country whole so that Russia could get significantly larger and Putin could feel significantly more virile.
Another example is China’s president Xi Jinping. Why did China undertake its Belt and Road initiative, considered one of the most ambitious infrastructure projects ever? To gain geopolitical and military influence in far flung regions of the world including Africa, Oceana, and Latin America. Why did China seek to reassert control over Hong Kong? To make clear to Hong Kongers as well as to the rest of the world that the island was an integral part of China. Why does the West worry that someday not far into the future China will compel Taiwan to become part of the mainland? Because Xi has made clear he considers Taiwan to be part of China, which is to say it has no business really functioning as an independent state.
Finally, there is President Donald Trump, who recently floated the idea that Canada should become the 51st state. Who recently indicated his interest in purchasing Greenland from Denmark. And who recently suggested that under American leadership Gaza become “the Riviera” of the Middle East. All of these and more gestures toward American enlargement, American expansion. All of these and more indicators that if only the United States could grow in size so, as Trump sees it, he would grow in stature.
The bigger the better. To some male leaders – specifically to those with authoritarian preferences and proclivities – size matters as much as or even more than anything else. Lebensraum anyone?
—————————————————————-