Beyond the Strongman: Hegemonic Masculinity and the Crisis of Global Politics
It is becoming increasingly apparent that the persistent, interlocking political crises defining our current moment, both within the United States and abroad, are not disparate phenomena. While analysts frequently point to polarization, economic displacement, or digital misinformation as primary causes, these diagnoses focus on the reliable processes of political decay rather than the fundamental justification structure that enables them. A closer examination, rooted in social and political philosophy, reveals these crises to be symptomatic of a deeper, foundational poison to humanity: traditional hegemonic masculinity.
We are witnessing a global epidemic of "strongman" politics and adversarial governance. To understand this, we must move beyond the mere external reliability of political trends and look to the internalist "J-factors" (justifying factors) that govern the actions of political agents. These agents are often operating under a system where power is defined solely as dominance, and relationality is viewed as systemic weakness.
§1 Defining the Poison: The Structure of Hegemony
To understand how traditional hegemonic masculinity functions as a political toxin, we must first recognize it as a structural principle, not merely individual behavior. Sociologist R.W. Connell famously defined hegemonic masculinity not as a fixed character type, but as "the configuration of gender practice which embodies the currently accepted answer to the problem of the legitimacy of patriarchy". It is the normative ideal that guarantees (or attempts to guarantee) the dominant position of men and the subordination of women and marginalized masculinities.
Politically, this translates into a value system that prioritizes zero-sum competition over cooperation, suppression of vulnerability (often manifested as anti-intellectualism) over reflective thought, and aggressive assertion over compromise. This system creates a political climate where the "will to power" is corrupted into a will to dominate.
§2 The Domestic Symptom: The Adversarial Crisis in American Politics
In the United States, this hegemonic structure has paralyzed democratic processes. We see its expression in a hyper-adversarial political sphere where compromise is coded as "weakness" and cooperation is viewed as "capitulation." The "J-factors" justifying action in Congress, for example, are frequently externalist concerns about maintaining the perception of masculine strength within a specific political base, rather than the internalist reflective awareness of the common good.
Consider the events of January 6th, 2021. This was not merely a political protest gone wrong; it was a performance of hegemonic masculinity. It was a violent, reactive assertion of dominance when relational, democratic processes (the counting of votes) did not yield the desired result. As bell hooks argued in The Will to Change, "patriarchy requires male dominance by any means necessary". The refusal to acknowledge defeat is the ultimate refusal of vulnerability, a refusal demand by the patriarchal script.
This adversarial orientation has replaced governing with a perpetual performance of dominance. When the political binary is reduced to "alpha" versus "beta," the nuanced, cooperative work required to solve social problems holistically becomes culturally impossible.
§3 The Global Symptom: The Strongman and the Erosion of Rights
Abroad, the crisis is even more pronounced. We are witnessing a global surge in authoritarianism, marked by the rise of leaders, from Putin in Russia to Bolsonaro in Brazil (until recently) and Orban in Hungary, who explicitly market themselves as patriarchal archetypes. These "strongmen" cultivate a cult of personality based on brute force, the rejection of multilateralism (which is inherently relational), and the suppression of marginalized groups.
This trend directly aligns with the logic of patriarchal power. Feminist philosopher Kate Manne argues that misogyny, the enforcement mechanism of patriarchy, works to "police and enforce" the subordination of those who challenge dominant structures. This logic is applied globally not just against women, but against minority groups, immigrants, and the LGBTQ+ community. The strongman's power is reliably caused by creating an out-group to dominate, thus reassuring the dominant group of their status.
The invasion of Ukraine, for example, is the culmination of this logic: a hyper-masculine assertion of a sphere of influence, a violent rejection of a neighbor's sovereign agency, and a refusal to participate in the relational constraints of international law. It is a terrifying manifestation of power divorced from care.
§4 Toward a Post-Hegemonic Politics: A Holistic Call
My intellectually-optimistic side hopes that recognizing these crises as symptoms of hegemonic masculinity will lead to a broader, holistic call for political transformation. We can only begin to hope to solve these social problems by understanding their multitude of causes.
This requires the interdisciplinary collaboration I advocated for in my previous post on self-care. We need academic philosophers, sociologists, psychologists, and political scientists to work together to dismantle the "legitimacy of patriarchy" in our political institutions. We need to replace the externalist desire for "reliable dominance" with an internalist commitment to "reflective care" and interdependency.
The antidote to this poison is not a passive acceptance, but a dynamic, relational politics. We must cultivate a public discourse where strength is defined by the capacity for connection, vulnerability is viewed as a source of reflective insight, and power is understood not as the ability to dominate, but as the collective capacity to care for one another. If we are to survive the current crises, we must outgrow the strongman.
Works Cited
- Connell, R. W. Masculinities. 2nd ed., University of California Press, 2005.
- DiAngelo, Robin. White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism. Beacon Press, 2018.
- Ferreira, Rebeka. "A Reasonable Compromise: Solving the Debate Between Internal and External Epistemic Justification." RF Writing Sample, 2024.
- hooks, bell. The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love. Atria Books, 2004.
- Manne, Kate. Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Oxford University Press, 2017.
- Nussbaum, Martha C. The Monarchy of Fear: A Philosopher Looks at Our Political Crisis. Simon & Schuster, 2018.
- Snyder, Timothy. On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century. Tim Duggan Books, 2017.
- Young, Iris Marion. "The Logic of Masculinist Protection: Reflections on the Current Security State." Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, vol. 29, no. 1, 2003, pp. 1-25.