Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

One Seat To Rule Them All

the one ring the one seat fascism authoritarianism

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 08:59 AM

When we get discussing Trump and his minions, and the formation of his cabal, I get to thinking about the myopia caused by seeing oneself as the person at the centre of things, and how and why the One Seat is a corrupting influence on a lesser person susceptible to confirmation bias.

A number of times the subject of "government run as a business" has come up as well, and I would like to address one particular flaw in this line of thinking, as it pertains to the former.

It is common knowledge these days that CEO's and other corporate heads tend to be sociopaths, malignant narcissists, and other socially-destructive types that are throwbacks to the Feudal era. Moreover, US-style corporations are anything but Democratic (as opposed to countries like Japan). They're run like Feudal fiefs.

You might say that it's a job made for a Fascist, as the person at the centre tends to be a thug who rules by way of a cult of personality. This term, "cult of personality", is worrisome in itself, because it lies at the heart of modern media culture. Media types study the cult of personality and apply it to the job of being a television or radio anchor.

The term has its origins in Authoritarian regimes. Both Hitler and Mussolini actively cultivated a cult of personality as part of what made up their hold on absolute authority.

Any person who finds themselves in the hot seat automatically realises that there is an insidious temptation to grasp the reins of power in the literal sense. This is in stark contrast to the way in which a Democracy is actually run. Effective business leaders know this as well, just as they know the difference between running an organisation by bullying, and learning how to delegate responsibility to others. The term for this is "management".

Sociopathic types tend to invent an alleged opposite to management which they term "leadership". But leadership is not the opposite of management. It's a different quality entirely, and one does not preclude or outweigh the other. Some leaders have poor management skills, which renders them ineffective, whereas some managers have poor leadership skills, which likewise renders them ineffective.

There is a certain type of person, who is naturally inflexible in their thinking, who is given to absolutes, who, if not a tyrant at the outset, is certainly at risk for devolving into one. This is an area where mental illness often comes into play. Absolute thinking is a hallmark of bipolar disorder, and people with even marginal bipolar tendencies are at risk of falling into the One Seat To Rule Them All trap. Another disorder with equally susceptible tendencies is Borderline Personality Disorder, or BPD.

People have been saying for years that CEO's and other persons in positions of authority should be carefully screened for mental illness. The next four years are going to be an experiment in which the consequences of not screening the President will become glaringly obvious.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#2 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 12:13 PM

Interesting perspective. I would ask that you offer evidence in support of two sentences, one from your third paragraph and one from your last paragraph, as they appear to me to represent more or less generalized opinion or "pulled out of arse" argumentation as opposed to verifiable fact. They are....

"It is common knowledge these days that CEO's and other corporate heads tend to be sociopaths, malignant narcissists, and other socially-destructive types that are throwbacks to the Feudal era."
(What published studies by psychology professionals or even anecdotal links are available to substantiate this observation?)

and

"People have been saying for years that CEO's and other persons in positions of authority should be screened for mental illness."    (Who and how many?)

To someone like me who has a healthy distrust of CEO's and authoritarian figures in general, these assertions have a certain ring of "truthiness" to them, to quote Stephen Colbert, but my rational logic-centric bs detector finds them wanting.

#3 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 01:37 PM

You want published studies? Okay:

http://www.telegraph...an-study-finds/

http://www.patheos.c...tudies-say-yes/

https://www.thestar....rest_of_us.html

https://en.wikipedia...n_the_workplace

http://time.com/3264...ths-the-fewest/

https://www.linkedin...sm-sajjan-singh

https://www.research..._we_do_about_it

http://www.theatlant...hopaths/260517/

http://www.globalres...e-world/5383706

Those are just a few of the URL's I have bookmarked. If you want more reading material, I could post several pages.

I also have a good many scholarly papers and articles bookmarked, if you're into heavy reading.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#4 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 01:42 PM

Here are a couple of scholarly articles, just for example:

http://www.nowandfut...ychopaths(boddy).pdf

http://org.sagepub.c.../22/4/530.short

http://s3.amazonaws....ets--Narcis.pdf
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#5 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 02:25 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 12 December 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

You want published studies? Okay:

http://www.telegraph...an-study-finds/

http://www.patheos.c...tudies-say-yes/

https://www.thestar....rest_of_us.html

https://en.wikipedia...n_the_workplace

http://time.com/3264...ths-the-fewest/

https://www.linkedin...sm-sajjan-singh

https://www.research..._we_do_about_it

http://www.theatlant...hopaths/260517/

http://www.globalres...e-world/5383706

Those are just a few of the URL's I have bookmarked. If you want more reading material, I could post several pages.

I also have a good many scholarly papers and articles bookmarked, if you're into heavy reading.

I have read the links you have provided and not found them fruitful in substantiating your claim that "CEO's and other corporate heads tend to be sociopaths, malignant narcissists, and other socially destructive types that are throwbacks to the Feudal era". To describe CEO's as "tending to be" of the subject grouping set infers that either all or a majority of CEO's are contained within the set of sociopaths. Your linked information does not substantiate that assertion.

Your first link cites from a University in Australia cites a study that finds perhaps one in five CEO's could be so classified as being sociopaths.

Your second link cites a study citing perhaps a one in twenty-five chance of a CEO being a sociopath.

Your third link suggests maybe one in ten CEO's might be a sociopath.

Your fourth link (Wikipedia) suggests there might be a 3 to 4 % incidence of CEO's being a sociopath.

Your fifth link is from Time magazine, and presents an unscientific and unsupported list with CEO's leading all professions (with lawyers # 2 and chefs # 9) of perhaps being a sociopath. No percentage of incidence offered.

Your sixth and seventh links are opinion pieces supporting your opinion that corporate hierarchy is reminiscent of Feudalistic times in history. Interesting reading, but offers no support for hypothesis that a majority of CEO's are sociopaths.

Your eighth link suggests that sociopathic tendencies can be found present in some political office holders and candidates, and that such tendencies can make them more effective candidates by not being affected by stress that having empathy can engender. Interesting and reasonable, but not referring to CEO's, the subject of the discussion, or pertinent to the percentage incidence or relative prevalence of sociopathic tendencies in leadership positions.

I also saw no mention in any of the links of any "people" saying that CEO's and other positions of authority should be screened for mental illness, as much as the idea appeals to me.

So therefore I submit that you have not proven either of your points in question despite your best efforts and I shall now bow out of the discussion, unconvinced. Thank you for your exhaustive effort to persuade. I appreciate it.

Edited by yadda yadda, 12 December 2016 - 02:26 PM.


#6 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 05:53 PM

Those studies were done by various researchers using various criteria and various methods and at various times. Of course there are variations. Studies of this nature always produce someone different results. You're conflating that with the act of recreating one particular study in order to see if the results are reproducible.

Those studies also referenced full-blown sociopaths. People with varying degrees of sociopathic tendencies are another matter entirely.

The Time article is an opinion piece on The Wisdom of Psychopaths by psychologist Kevin Dutton. Dutton's book is a case by case study of "functional psychopaths". In other words, the source material for the article is not opinion-based.

Nice try.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#7 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 06:10 PM

Here is the reason studies of psychopaths vary so much. Psychopathy varies in individuals, and there are a good many variations.

Variations that fall into discrete categories do so because the people studied belong to widely varied groups, from prison populations to world leaders to CEOs to any type of group one wishes to study. Certainly some occupations are conducive to psychopathy, but in many cases the reverse is the factor driving aggregate populations, the way poor people are forced to live in run-down areas as opposed to the poor moving to those areas because they find them desirable, aka the difference between internal and external forces, or choice vs environment.

https://www.cambridg...F527842056329C1
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#8 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 06:19 PM

Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in. Sigh...

I'm not doubtful of your link's methodology or results. I'm doubtful of YOUR conclusions and assertions made and not proven out by those results. As I stated before, the various results you use as supportive evidence range from .04 % existence of  CEO sociopaths, to 3% CEO sociopaths, to 10% CEO sociopaths, to an outlier of 20% CEO sociopaths. None of these relevant percentages of CEO's being sociopaths, if true, come close to validating your assertion that CEO's tend to be sociopaths. Indeed, employing your linked information would tend to prove the opposite, that CEO's do not in fact TEND to be sociopaths. The great majority of them, anywhere from 80% to 99.6% check out as non-sociopaths.

If you can provide a link, study, or evidence purporting that 51% or more of CEO's are sociopaths, I would be more inclined to lend credence to your assertion

Otherwise, fair to middlin' try.

Edited by yadda yadda, 12 December 2016 - 06:54 PM.


#9 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 11:46 PM

Heh- two questions, just for you:

1) It's 1645. The average life-span is 32 years. How long are people living?

2) 100 CEOs are studied. 20% are full-blown sociopaths. What are the other 80%?
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#10 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 12 December 2016 - 11:57 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 12 December 2016 - 11:46 PM, said:

Heh- two questions, just for you:

1) It's 1645. The average life-span is 32 years. How long are people living?

2) 100 CEOs are studied. 20% are full-blown sociopaths. What are the other 80%?

1)  Depends on whether or not they're witches, that's the burning question.

2). Trump Cabinet nominees, waiting to be full-blown, also.

#11 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 02:04 AM

Answer #1: average life-expectancy is something most people, including many experts, get wrong. If the average life-expectancy is 32 years, you have to look at the raw data in order to find out what the statistic "average life-expectancy" means. In most cases the number reflects a high infant-mortality rate. For example, one of my ancestors in Lower Canada had 22 children, only 3 of which survived to become adults. 18 of those children died in infancy. The other three died in their 70's. Let's say the 18 children died at one year of age. That makes 18  x 1 for a total of 18 years. The remaining three lived to be 75, which is 3 x 75 for a total of 225 years. 225  + 18 = 238. 238 years lived by 22 individuals = 10.81 years per individual. So at that time, and in that place, the average life-expectancy was 10.8 years. Most people get it wrong and assume that people were only living 10.8 years. I use this particular example, from a period when infant-mortality was extremely high, to make the answer obvious. Since 10-year-olds can't reproduce, an average of 10.8 obviously doesn't mean that people were only living to be ten years old.

In other words, the average is not a reflection of how old people were living. The problem is, that's how most people interpret the information.

Answer #2: If you're studying psychopathy in CEOs, and 20 out of 100 (aka 1 out of 5) are full-blown psychopaths, this does not mean the remaining 80% are normal.

Out of a normal population sampling, psychopathy runs around 1%, or 1 out of every 100 individuals. The 1% in question are full-blown psychopaths. However, 3% of the population have psychopathic tendencies, which is something else altogether.

In prison populations, as well as CEOs, the number of full-blown psychopaths can run as high as 25%, but let's stick with the earlier figure of 20%. That's 20 for every 100. But if you're looking for psychopathic tendencies, the number is 3x higher, or 60%,  or 60 out of every 100.

Now let's go back and look at that 1 out of 5 number. Seem low? The number reflects the number of full-blown psychopaths. But you first have to remember that this is much higher than the average population, where the number of full-blown psychopaths is one out of every 100. 1 out of 5 is 20%, or 20 out of 100. And psychopathic tendencies? 60 out of every 100.

To put the numbers in perspective, if you have 1000 CEOs, 600 are going to have psychopathic tendencies. 200 are going to be full-blown psychopaths. Even if you base a study on the low number, you're going to have 200 sickos out there doing social and personal damage. The high number suggests a serious social problem.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#12 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 02:43 AM

That's all fine and good. But does not much else than distract from the fact that you stated that it is common knowledge (inferred truth/validity) that CEO's tend to be sociopaths. This is a pretty damning judgment to be asserting as fact. I could as easily assert that it is common knowledge that Canadian men tend to be bicycle seat sniffers. If challenged on this declaration and I produced researched evidence that somewhere between .04 and 20% of Canadian males were deemed and adjudged to be bicycle seat sniffers, would it be fair to reiterate the statement that Canadian men tend to sniff bicycle seats, or would my assertion fall short of adequate proof?

Would my further listing of types of bicycles Canadians favor, sprocket and derailleur gearing design, the juxtaposition of padded mountain bike seats and ultra light racing seats really shed light on the subject or enhance my argument? How about a scholarly treatise on the comparative seat sniffing statistical rates for unicycles and tricycles? Or would the introduction of a bicycle built for two skew the findings? The mind boggles.  ;)

#13 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 02:49 AM

By the way, my argument is concerned only with your choice of wording and expression. As far as I'm concerned fricking CEO's are pretty much pond scum. Psychos or not they can all kiss the part of me that impacts on my bicycle seat.

#14 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 11:08 AM

Pond scum can't turn poor people out of their homes. And you can get rid of pond scum by introducing a population of snails. Psychopaths are much harder to get to, which in itself is testament to the fact that they well know that what they do is reprehensible. The Bunker Mentality speaks volumes in itself.

If you study prison populations and CEOs, you'll find a much-higher-than-average proportion of psychopaths and sociopaths, as well as a spectrum of people harbouring these tendencies.

Depending on the type of study conducted, the average minimum per population (full-blown psychopaths) of the aforementioned is 20%. The average maximum, when accounting for tendencies, is 60%.

That's not all CEOs, certainly. I know a few who are anything but. Jim Pattison (Vancouver) went to school with my dad's brother, and is a genuinely really nice guy, and by all accounts is a great guy to work for. One of my younger sisters is the CEO of an advertising company in Calgary. A nicer person you will not meet.

But if you look at the sheer number of rat-bastards there are out there, and the work-place overall, then it becomes easy to see why the modern workplace is so toxic.

Take Galen Weston for example. I worked for that particular rat-faced weasel for over twenty years (WestFair Foods, Real Canadian Superstore, etc). You see his chirpy little rat-face on television commercials touting President's Choice products as being environmentally friendly, ethically raised, farmers cooperated with, and it's all one big happy family.

The truth is the exact opposite. The atmosphere at any place the guy touches is over-the-top toxic. If employees even suggest they want better wages, the lot of them will be fired and replaced with minimum-wage scabs so fast that it's pretty much over before it's started. The lie he tells the public is that "if wages go up, prices will go up". It's a lie because his family's profit margin says otherwise.

In typical psychopath fashion, all levels of management are played off on one another. You should hear the despicable way he talks about his employees and the customers. Everyone is a "worthless piece of *bleep*".

The only reason I worked there until the Western Grocers warehouse finally packed up and moved is because I had many friends there. People who had worked there 30 years and more were screwed out of their pensions. The move was a "cost-cutting" measure. Screwing people out of their pensions is known as "cost cutting", or "trimming the fat", in certain circles.

In other words, the lives of tens of thousands of people are collateral damage because of one psychopath. Add restaurant chains and other businesses across North America, and you have many millions of people affected.

Psychopaths aside, the business = profit model is itself toxic, aka "I'm in business to make money". If you're in business purely to make money, that in itself is going to generate a toxic work-environment.

This mentality has a hugely corrupting effect on cities. I can't count how many cites were great places to live back in the 50's, that experience real-estate booms in the 1960's, where this toxic mentality ruined old neighbourhoods, tore down heritage buildings, priced the original occupants out of the market, gentrified lower-income areas and displacing entire original populations, stacked city counsels with rat-faced weasel developers and millionaires, and the hits just keep on coming.

Further, if you look only at the wheelers and dealers involved, in just one city, it's the psychopaths and sociopaths who have the loudest feet on the dance floor. They tend to be (not always, certainly) the loudest, the most visible, the most flamboyant, the ones that try hardest to hog the limelight. Right where they can have the greatest influence, and by doing so, exacting the greatest collateral damage.

And now one of those wretched things is the PODUNK-elect, and it's surrounding itself with people it intends to play off on one another. That's something psychopath CEOs are most known for, and Hamster-Head is no exception. Who else was famous for that? Hitler. Mussolini. Mini-Poo in North Korea. And the like.

That's why I've stocked up on popcorn. This is going to be an entertaining four years.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#15 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 04:46 PM

I completely forgot what this thread was supposed to be about . . .

It's all your fault, yadda.

From the driver's seat, deep inside the sociopath's bunker, the view is lensed, and therefore distorted. A similar thing occurs if you take to a stage. Your reality goes from being a thing to becoming an event. The event itself, if viewed from the outside, bears a startling resemblance to the Human brain.

Think of yourself sitting in the audience-section of a darkened theatre, to one side so that you have a good view of both stage and audience. A lone person takes the stage, standing in the glaring spotlights, facing the audience seated in darkness.

The Human brain is like this, with the illuminated stage being the conscious mind, the audience being the individual brain cells.

The person on the stage, although being physical and Human, is a matter of perception to the audience. If the person on stage was the person who used to put on an act called Elvis Presley, that is what the audience would see. But if that same person were to recreate a part from a movie he starred in, Elvis Presley would vanish, and the character from the movie would take his place.

This is something people fail to understand about "celebrities". A "celebrity" is a media creation, an act. A "celebrity" exists only in the mind of the public. The flesh and blood person in question is just a very ordinary person, one the general public doesn't know, but thinks they do.

Now, the person on stage, or seated in the One Seat, is in a unique situation, wherein he can manipulate the audience. That is, after all, why the audience is there in the first place- to willingly be manipulated by the person occupying the stage.

Certain things normally go through a person's mind when they're on a stage. The audience responds to whatever you do, but it responds best to raw emotion. It will respond to reason, yes, but that takes a lot more work. If you appeal to the audience's raw emotion, the audience will respond with various types of noises- hooting and hollering, hand-banging, the rhythmic contraction of the diaphragm as it pushes air in bursts through the glottis, thigh-slapping . . . it's a limited gamut.

It's a fun game, but it's even more fun when the audience is held captive via something called wages. When you control their livelihood, things become far more personal, more direct, more interesting.

Now, a sociopath or a psychopath will do stuff to the people in question, simply because they can. Having little or no empathy, they'll view the people as automatons, or meat-machines, and control over their behaviour will cause that sociopath or psychopath to revel in his own arrogance. Manipulating people, for such a person, is more addictive than heroin or crack.

So how do you go about dislodging such a person from such a position? No mechanism yet exists for that purpose, but for the good of everyone else, it damned-well should.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#16 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 04:47 PM

Looky what I stumbled upon, from 2005. Funny how this has come around again:

http://www.exisle.ne...cism-in-the-us/
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#17 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 13 December 2016 - 10:28 PM

Been on the road to Vegas all day. Just got the wi-fi set up. Maybe I'll reply later after I win a couple thousand.   :)

#18 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 01:54 AM

View Postgsmonks, on 13 December 2016 - 04:47 PM, said:

Looky what I stumbled upon, from 2005. Funny how this has come around again:

http://www.exisle.ne...cism-in-the-us/

Wow, what a gem of a discussion about fascism. A real blast from the past.

#19 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 14 December 2016 - 11:05 AM

Anyway, the whole point of this thread was supposed to be about the view from the One Seat, and how a lesser person acts when seated in it.

An evolved person doesn't see the One Seat at all. They see responsibility, the job, all the people connected to it to whom responsibility is delegated, that kind of stuff.

All a lesser person tends to see is the One Seat and Himself, as though the One Seat were an extension of himself, the way tools are extensions of the Human body.

Joined at the hip is that person's sense of purpose. Whatsit going to do, my precious, me love? Is it going to take and take and take? Is it going to want money? Gollum! Gollum! Gollum!
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#20 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,095 posts

Posted 21 December 2016 - 11:16 PM

Great minds think alike.

Attached Files


Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: the one ring, the one seat, fascism, authoritarianism

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users