CDZ How do we prevent sociopaths from gaining power?

[there4eyeM]

An interesting aspect of this question has to do with a threat to society. In many times and places, the problems a people/nation faced was ascribed to some group. It is usually some minority that is variably identifiable. The Jews, for example, have been targeted as being subversive or seeking power. They were thus imagined to be to blame for many ills and repressed systematically.
The group we are discussing here has nothing to do with that situation, yet it devolves to a similar outline. Of course, "the Jews" are not different from the rest of mankind, but sociopaths are. Every mass murdering authoritarian in history has been one. It is not an imaginary group. Discrimination against it would not be unfounded. It isn't a matter of interring or eliminating them, but they must be excluded from the power to harm en masse.

 

[jwoodie]

Putin is another profound example of the tragedy that occurs when an inhuman personality rises to power. The history of our race is one of similar catastrophic individuals. We have the means to identify such disorders. We have the interest to exclude them from gaining control. This is not a matter of ideology, religion, race, ethnicity or gender (though, obviously, men preponderate in the historical records). The sub-category of our fellow humans that lack the capacity to feel empathy must be controlled; that is the proposition.

Precisely when did you come to this brilliant conclusion? Was Putin a "sociopath" when Obama was in office? Did he become one when he "colluded" with Trump to steal the 2016 election? Was he a sociopath when Biden approved his Nord Stream pipeline or when he was asked to participate in nuclear arms "negotiations" with Iran?

Or did he suddenly become an evil sociopath (oxymoron noted) when Biden's domestic problems and family finances started becoming front-page news?

 

[sartre play]

Some have so many words that it distracts from focus on there actions. Do we look for the wrong things in what we use to measure leaders? how do we unlearn inbred bad habits & learn better ones?

 

[LibertyKid]

An interesting aspect of this question has to do with a threat to society. In many times and places, the problems a people/nation faced was ascribed to some group. It is usually some minority that is variably identifiable. The Jews, for example, have been targeted as being subversive or seeking power. They were thus imagined to be to blame for many ills and repressed systematically.
The group we are discussing here has nothing to do with that situation, yet it devolves to a similar outline. Of course, "the Jews" are not different from the rest of mankind, but sociopaths are. Every mass murdering authoritarian in history has been one. It is not an imaginary group. Discrimination against it would not be unfounded. It isn't a matter of interring or eliminating them, but they must be excluded from the power to harm en masse.

Yet, as "crazy" as these sociopaths are, the "not crazies" will follow them.
Sociopaths can be identified, but what is worse? The sociopath, or the thousands or millions that follow them despite inhumane words and actions?
We see it through all of history, and not just political leaders. Religious cult-like leaders are a great example. The followers have to realize that this man/women who is sleeping with their children has to be crazy, but they don't act upon it.

So we have two parts of this equation. The sociopathic leader and those that follow. Then you have a subset of the followers. Those that recognize the sociopath and leave. Those that recognize the sociopath and now are too sucked in or afraid to leave, or those that are just as crazy as the sociopath.

 

[there4eyeM]

Yet, as "crazy" as these sociopaths are, the "not crazies" will follow them.
Sociopaths can be identified, but what is worse? The sociopath, or the thousands or millions that follow them despite inhumane words and actions?
We see it through all of history, and not just political leaders. Religious cult-like leaders are a great example. The followers have to realize that this man/women who is sleeping with their children has to be crazy, but they don't act upon it.

So we have two parts of this equation. The sociopathic leader and those that follow. Then you have a subset of the followers. Those that recognize the sociopath and leave. Those that recognize the sociopath and now are too sucked in or afraid to leave, or those that are just as crazy as the sociopath.

Thanks, but part of the important reality of this group is that they are not crazy. Admittedly, we have evidence that some certainly became crazy if they hadn't already been. Most simply apply exactly what all around them are doing. They do not in any way mind using others for whatever reason. The true target of our concern is the intelligent to very intelligent ones who quickly "get" how things works and sprint to first place in seizing the reins. The Lenins, Hitlers, Pinochets, Genghis Khans...These people have not the slightest qualm about doing whatever it takes to get whatever they want done. The rest of us are always oppressed, squeezed, murdered by these few.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What is the empirical metric for empathy? How is it measured? With what instruments?

If you come across someone whom you feel doesn't have enough empathy, or doesn't empathize in the way you prefer they do, how precisely do you "control" them?

The fact is, all you know about this man, or any other man in the public eye, is precisely what you've been told by others.

Godwinist Foreign Policy

Yeah, but it's fun to demonize a foreign leader. Pathetic losers get a thrill out of feeling like comic-book superheroes taking down imaginary villians.

 

[LibertyKid]

Thanks, but part of the important reality of this group is that they are not crazy. Admittedly, we have evidence that some certainly became crazy if they hadn't already been. Most simply apply exactly what all around them are doing. They do not in any way mind using others for whatever reason. The true target of our concern is the intelligent to very intelligent ones who quickly "get" how things works and sprint to first place in seizing the reins. The Lenins, Hitlers, Pinochets, Genghis Khans...These people have not the slightest qualm about doing whatever it takes to get whatever they want done. The rest of us are always oppressed, squeezed, murdered by these few.

Right, and all valid. I think what I'm trying to say is... these sociopaths that "get it" are still just 1 person. There has to be enough people that recognize the red flags that can then stop the one person, even when that one person has gone way too far and are in control. But for some reason, the followers allow the reign to go "too far". Interesting discussion.

 

[Mac1958]

Seems to me that the goal should be to form and maintain an electoral system that minimizes a sociopath's ability to exercise their worst impulses.

For example, when a politician's highest priorities are fundraising, pleasing the base and re-election, are their instincts and behaviors not going to be slanted towards acting in ways that support their own selfish priorities?

Do we really think that a politician would act and behave the same way if fundraising, pleasing the base and getting re-elected were not their highest priorities? I don't think so. Not for a minute.

 

[there4eyeM]

The essential element in this picture is a populace that is manipulable. We know that the higher intelligence layer of the population always rules the rest. When the combination with our sociopath occurs, voila.

 

[LibertyKid]

The essential element in this picture is a populace that is manipulable. We know that the higher intelligence layer of the population always rules the rest. When the combination with our sociopath occurs, voila.

Wish I could say that for our country lol

 

[there4eyeM]

Wish I could say that for our country lol

For whatever it may say about your country, it is how it is. Remember, intelligence is relative. More than half the population has insufficient capacities to fully understand the modern world and how it functions. They need love and protection, not exploitation. Even if you don't like them, they are still exploited in ways that exploit you.

 

[Colin norris]

At 14, you are already bragging about your being an expert.

Fascinating.

I'll take that as a badge on honour.
I can't imagine being a mature human in the prime of your life still voting for a dictator in USA yet ridiculing someone who clearly has the ability to reduce your stupidity to the status of effluent.

Fascinating.

 

[MarathonMike]

Nancy Pelosi empathizes for the cameras ...

View attachment 628963

Talk about psychos in power, I see two of them.

 

[there4eyeM]

Precisely when did you come to this brilliant conclusion? Was Putin a "sociopath" when Obama was in office? Did he become one when he "colluded" with Trump to steal the 2016 election? Was he a sociopath when Biden approved his Nord Stream pipeline or when he was asked to participate in nuclear arms "negotiations" with Iran?

Or did he suddenly become an evil sociopath (oxymoron noted) when Biden's domestic problems and family finances started becoming front-page news?

Putin has always had this psychology. It is no different from any mafia don.

 

[there4eyeM]

Talk about psychos in power, I see two of them.

"Psychos" are not the topic.

 

[MarathonMike]

Putin is another profound example of the tragedy that occurs when an inhuman personality rises to power. The history of our race is one of similar catastrophic individuals. We have the means to identify such disorders. We have the interest to exclude them from gaining control. This is not a matter of ideology, religion, race, ethnicity or gender (though, obviously, men preponderate in the historical records). The sub-category of our fellow humans that lack the capacity to feel empathy must be controlled; that is the proposition.

Who would be the global authority administering the psychological tests? Why would independent countries comply with the results of the global authority? Why would/should these countries trust them?

 

[koshergrl]

Putin is another profound example of the tragedy that occurs when an inhuman personality rises to power. The history of our race is one of similar catastrophic individuals. We have the means to identify such disorders. We have the interest to exclude them from gaining control. This is not a matter of ideology, religion, race, ethnicity or gender (though, obviously, men preponderate in the historical records). The sub-category of our fellow humans that lack the capacity to feel empathy must be controlled; that is the proposition.

You squash authoritarians and their minions without mercy, physically, and completely.

 

[there4eyeM]

Who would be the global authority administering the psychological tests? Why would independent countries comply with the results of the global authority? Why would/should these countries trust them?

Identification on the part of great numbers of qualified psychologists would doubtless be convincing to most people, but there certainly are many aspects to be worked out.

 

[MarathonMike]

"Psychos" are not the t

Identification on the part of great numbers of qualified psychologists would doubtless be convincing to most people, but there certainly are many aspects to be worked out.

I agree with you that modern human history is stained with multiple sociopathic leaders that caused human suffering on a massive scale. I just can't think of any way you could prevent the next sociopath in some random country from taking power by some global test organization.

 

[Captain Caveman]

What is the empirical metric for empathy? How is it measured? With what instruments?

If you come across someone whom you feel doesn't have enough empathy, or doesn't empathize in the way you prefer they do, how precisely do you "control" them?

The fact is, all you know about this man, or any other man in the public eye, is precisely what you've been told by others.

There isn't, as Paul Bloom says, empathy is just often a warm embrace of prejudice, it leads to inequality and immorality.

Against Empathy - The case for rational compassion

Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion

New York Post Best Book of 2016. We often think of ou…

www.goodreads.com