we are told that it is not the will of the people that rules, but rather the will of the people who elect the government. We are also told that those who support the government do so because they want to see that it serves the best interests of all Americans, and not just a small group of wealthy donors. Yet these noble and just men are willing to sacrifice the common good of all for the welfare of their elitist class. But it is a noble cause that they claim to support, yet it only helps maintain the elite power structure and maintain the class system that has been destroying America since the beginning. So when you hear someone say "the people have the right to rule" what does this mean, and how can anyone claim to be anything other than a lying scoundrel?
You see, there is nothing noble about claiming that you are better than anyone else. This is a lie, because if it were true, then those who support the government would indeed be lying to the people, because they would be claiming that it is the government's will that must be followed, and anyone who disobeys their bidding must therefore be subverting the will of the people. You see, the concept of a "nobility" is an oxymoron, because in any social order there are always those who rise to the top, and those who fall to the bottom. And in any civilization or society, the concept of an "aristocracy" is a lie, because there is always a power elite that controls the distribution of resources through the process of law and force.
So remember that aristocracy doesn't lie in being superior to anyone else, because it is a lie. Arguably, there are many who are indeed superior to others in their particular civilizations and societies. However, this doesn't mean that everyone is inferior, or that some are better than others. Indeed, it is possible for some people to be much better than others, depending upon the specific culture and society that they live in. We all know that this is true of all human cultures and societies.
Now then, if we want to understand the concept of thatarchy, then we need to understand what it really means. A simple definition is "the superiority of one social institution over another based upon hereditary position or rank." Now I would like to push this even further, and define "ranks" as something like "inferior positions in society" based upon social positions or aristocratic birth positions. This way of thinking is obviously erroneous, and something like "everyone is equal because they are all of a similar rank" also seems very false.
Now then, we already know that in any civilization and society, there will always be some people who are better than others, but what does this have to do with something like "inferior" societies? Consider this for a moment. Would you say that in such a society, where some people are better at some things than other people, that they are in some ways "inferior"? And that someone who is better at some things than other people would be considered "equally as good" as someone else who might be better at something else? Now then, this might seem very silly and self-refuting, but it isn't quite so.
Take for instance, that someone who is better at sports, or is a good athlete, is generally considered to be of a higher class, or at least a more highly ranked class than someone who isn't. Why is this so? It is because the society in which those people are involved view sports and athletes as something that only men can participate in, but that the women are not as successful at. And thus they see themselves as "lesser", or not as good as the men, or better than those who are better at sports, etc. And so therefore, they will try to impose their own version of equality, where those who are better at sports are seen as "equals", and those who aren't, as "lesser". In the real world, of course, this is not the case at all.
Further, consider that in a "real" or true "world", those who are in leadership and positions of power, generally tend to be those who are better looking, more intelligent, more ambitious, and so on. And so, as people look at these sorts of things, they automatically assume that they must be inferior, and that those who are more attractive, or more ambitious, or whatever might be the sort of person that one wants to be, are better at it, and therefore, should hold the position of power. This is why some of the most despising things that can be said about certain "leaders" or "elite" people are things like "She has a face like a horse", or "He smells like an ashtray".
So, remember that hierarchy dont lie in being superior to anyone. It is usually the opposite, in fact. It is normally something to be proud of, and to be motivated by. It is meant to spur on creativity and drive, to make people step up to the plate and do their best, because they know that those who are at the top are doing something right, and they should feel superior simply because they are. And so, if you have a true desire to be a "leader" or "emaxtreme boss" (whatever you want to call yourself), then you will stop giving anyone any orders, or suggestions, and instead strive to lead by example, and you will earn respect, instead of fear.