Ironically, conquering and subjugating a nation goes both ways within George Orwell’s Shooting an Elephant. Orwell’s complicated relationship with the natives persistently feel as though, while he is supposedly a member of the ruling class, he is not able to execute his authority on his own will. Rather, his actions end up being heavily influenced by the inferior masses around him, in practice, he really becomes their instrument, rather than an instrument of the nation he claims to serve. Shooting the elephant, an intimate decision that should be made at Orwell’s discretion, ends up being entirely made by the will of the masses. His experience with the elephant is a parallel to the United Kingdom’s greater struggle to maintain dominance of it’s larger empire. As nations develop under the empire, they become harder and harder to control, and eventually, it becomes the British who are controlled by their subjects. Once the empire is no longer serving the English, but is instead making decisions based on the will of native peoples from around the world, its benefits disappear, and it eventually disintegrates as a result. Orwell’s elephant incident, and the experiences of colonial empires around the world, exemplify the complications of political authority. All governments need the respect of their subjects to function properly, without it, the regime risks widespread disobedience or revolution, neither of which are profitable for anyone involved. This game of who rules who is also at play in democracy, as elected officials will never make decisions that will alienate too many voters. Authority is not simply given to those in power, there is much more than a single person’s will at work whenever a “powerful” individual makes a decision.