Democracy means ‘government by the people’. Aristocracy means ‘government by the best or most noble’ (no comment on whether it really is that; that’s just what the word means etymologically). Kakistocracy is the antonym of aristocracy; it means ‘government by the worst or basest’. And kleptocracy means ‘government by thieves’.
There are various governments around the world that might seem to fit either of those last two. But I have an itch for a word that conveys more of the moral reek that some governments have. When a government is run by people who, however venal and vicious they may be, are not of low status or low achievement, kakistocracy might not be le mot juste. And when their effect on the government is not simply bleeding money and goods off but rather opening the gates to a complete takeover of criminality, an installation of a method of governance that is a sort of civic cancer, so that using it for actual good would itself require a sort of diversion or subterfuge, then kleptocracy doesn’t really cover it.
There are various terms that have been used for governments that have run this way: some of them are monarchies or autocracies, some oligarchies; some have been fascist, some communist; but none of these terms describe the kind of people who are running them. Which is why I prefer scelerocracy.
To hear scelerocracy, it sounds like seller-ocracy, as in everything is for sale, and in a way that’s true, if the price is right, but at the same time some things will be pocketed and some things will be subverted and some things will simply be killed or left to wither away. It also sounds like accelerocracy without the ac, and indeed a bit of criminality in government can, if it takes hold, accelerate in a spiral. And it looks a bit like sclerocracy, with the same scler- as in sclerosis, which refers to a hardening (as in hardening of the arteries), and this has an appropriate tone of sickness, though there is at the same time a kind of softness of decay that pervades a scelerocracy.
Scelerocracy is, in brief, criminal government. The root sceler- is from the Latin root for ‘crime’ and ‘criminal’, scelus – which can also mean ‘criminality, wickedness’ or ‘evil deed, crime, wicked thing’. From scelus we get scelero ‘I defile’ – and indeed scelerocracy is a defilement of government – and sceleratus ‘criminal, villain, wicked person’. So the root covers all levels and aspects, and it presents an entire orientation that built on lies, deceit, greed, hatred, degradation… the fundaments of a criminal organization, in which all those who are “in” view those who are not “in” as suckers and marks, and all kindness is seen as weakness. It is not merely being bad, and it is not merely theft. It is a whole way of being, exemplified by the quote from Agamemnon by Seneca: “Per scelera semper sceleribus tutum est iter” – the safest way through crime is by further crime. Once you have started the way of crime, honesty is your enemy, for it will weaken you.
English has other words that contain scel – scelerate, scelerous, scelestic, scelestious – but they’re hardly ever used. However, French has the commonly known word scélérat, which means not just ‘criminal’ but ‘major criminal’ – as Littré says, “Coupable ou capable de grands crimes.” It’s like English villain but worse, and it hisses contempt in the saying. (It is also used for humorous exaggeration: a cat that has killed a mouse might be called un scélérat, as might someone who has toyed with your heart.)
Do we truly need this word scelerocracy? English does have the word corruptocracy, and it’s clear enough, but I don’t really fancy it; it’s too… obvious. Also it focuses merely on the corruption, whereas scelerocracy presents an image of an organization not just venal but bent on subjugation and degradation. And it hisses with a vicious erudition. The objection that corruptocracy mixes roots from different languages is valid, but it also holds for scelerocracy: the -ocracy is from Greek, not Latin. But in a scelerocracy, rules are whatever the people running the show decide they are, and consistency is mere weakness. So why shouldn’t the word embody that too?
It would be nice, of course, if we had no need for this word. But there are too many scelerocracies around the world, at various levels of government from nation all the way down to town, and their numbers increase from time to time. But take heart: their numbers also decrease. “Per scelera semper sceleribus tutum est iter,” but when they run out of consistent crime, or when they run up against those who robustly confront and punish crime, they may eventually find themselves on a plane out of the country, or caught like a rat in a dirty little hole, or on public display in a way they would not have chosen for themselves. Or even, sometimes, mercifully, just voted out. And then follows a lot of clean-up and repair.
Sesquiotica 