Comparing and Contrasting Leadership Styles in Orwell’s Animal Farm
Napoleon (Authoritarian), Snowball (Transformational), and Squealer (Manipulative)
George Orwell’s Animal Farm is not just an allegorical tale about the Russian Revolution but also a profound exploration of leadership dynamics. Three central characters — Napoleon, Snowball, and Squealer — each demonstrate distinct leadership styles that can be interpreted through the lens of authoritarian, transformational, and manipulative (or propagandist) leadership respectively. These styles, while interlinked within the political narrative of the novel, differ significantly in philosophy, method, and impact.
1. Napoleon: The Authoritarian Leader
Key Characteristics
Napoleon represents the quintessential authoritarian leader, characterized by:
-
Centralized control
-
Suppression of dissent
-
Use of fear and violence
-
Elimination of political rivals
He mirrors Joseph Stalin in the Soviet allegory, and his rule is marked by autocratic decision-making. Napoleon emerges as a figure who prioritizes power over ideology, often manipulating or outright abandoning the principles of Animalism to consolidate authority.
Theoretical Framework
Napoleon’s style aligns with Authoritarian Leadership Theory, as described by Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939), where leaders make decisions unilaterally and maintain strict control over followers. This style often reduces creativity and morale but increases obedience.
Examples from the Text
-
Expulsion of Snowball: “Nine enormous dogs wearing brass-studded collars came bounding into the barn. They dashed straight for Snowball...” (Orwell, 1945, ch. 5).
-
Use of Terror: The public executions of animals after false confessions demonstrate rule through fear and repression.
-
Suppression of Information: Napoleon bans debates and uses Squealer to manipulate facts.
Implications
Under Napoleon, the farm becomes a totalitarian regime. Productivity declines, and the original ideals of equality and justice vanish. The animals live in fear, lacking voice or agency, as Napoleon's rule suppresses both innovation and participation.
2. Snowball: The Transformational Leader
Key Characteristics
Snowball represents transformational leadership, where the leader:
-
Inspires and motivates followers
-
Emphasizes intellectual stimulation
-
Advocates for collective progress
-
Is future-oriented and idealistic
He envisions an egalitarian society where animals can uplift themselves through education and technological progress — a nod to Leon Trotsky in the Soviet allegory.
Theoretical Framework
Burns (1978) and Bass (1985) define transformational leaders as those who inspire followers to exceed their own self-interest for the good of the group. They are proactive, visionary, and empowering.
Examples from the Text
-
Education Initiatives: Snowball organizes reading classes and committees to involve every animal in governance.
-
Windmill Project: “He talked learnedly about field-drains, silage, and basic slag... The animals found it inspiring.” (Orwell, ch. 5).
-
Democratic Engagement: Snowball supports open debates and votes.
Implications
Snowball’s approach fosters engagement and progress. While some of his plans are impractical, they reflect visionary thinking. His leadership is cut short by Napoleon’s coup, but his brief tenure leaves an impression of what participative, intellectual leadership might have achieved had it been allowed to flourish.
3. Squealer: The Manipulative Communicator
Key Characteristics
Squealer is not a leader in the conventional sense but plays a vital role in sustaining Napoleon’s regime. His style is best characterized as manipulative or propagandist:
-
Twists language to serve power
-
Suppresses truth and reason
-
Reframes oppression as progress
-
Exploits the ignorance of the masses
Squealer embodies the propaganda apparatus, akin to Soviet media like Pravda or figures such as Vyacheslav Molotov.
Theoretical Framework
Squealer's tactics reflect principles from dark-side leadership theories (Conger, 1990), especially pseudo-transformational leadership—appearing to care about followers while exploiting them. His manipulative communication draws on rhetorical strategies and psychological control, exploiting the animals’ limited literacy and critical thinking.
Examples from the Text
-
Rewriting History: “Squealer could turn black into white.” (Orwell, ch. 2).
-
Gaslighting the Animals: “You do not imagine, I hope, that we pigs are doing this in a spirit of selfishness and privilege?” (ch. 6).
-
Altering the Commandments: He secretly changes the rules to justify pigs’ behavior.
Implications
Squealer ensures that Napoleon’s authoritarian regime is intellectually and emotionally internalized by the animals. His rhetoric obscures truth, eliminates resistance, and reshapes memory. While he does not rule, he enables tyranny through linguistic manipulation and strategic deception.
Comparative Analysis
| Dimension | Napoleon | Snowball | Squealer |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership Type | Authoritarian | Transformational | Manipulative / Propagandist |
| Goal | Power consolidation | Societal improvement | Support the regime |
| Means of Control | Fear, violence, surveillance | Vision, education, innovation | Deception, misinformation |
| Decision-Making Style | Unilateral | Participative | Indirect (as a communicator) |
| Ethical Foundation | Machiavellian | Idealistic | Amoral / utilitarian |
| Outcome | Tyranny | Interrupted progress | Intellectual oppression |
Conclusion
Orwell’s Animal Farm serves as a powerful case study of contrasting leadership styles. Napoleon’s authoritarianism creates a regime based on oppression; Snowball’s transformational ideals offer a glimpse of democratic progress; and Squealer’s manipulative rhetoric ensures the populace remains docile. These contrasting styles highlight Orwell’s broader critique of power, ideology, and the corruption of revolutionary ideals, offering timeless lessons on the nature of leadership in both political and educational contexts.
References
-
Orwell, G. (1945). Animal Farm. London: Secker & Warburg.
-
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. Harper & Row.
-
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. Free Press.
-
Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271–299.
-
Conger, J. A. (1990). The dark side of leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 19(2), 44–55.
-
Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happens, Why It Matters. Harvard Business Review Press.