Experts are starting to believe that the people who pursue power are not random, but rather genetically influenced to either seek authority directly, or exhibit the traits that make leadership more likely.
Well, there we go, our leaders are genetically ordained. Might as well lie back and enjoy it, eh?
You mean to say that it’s those who want power, and a few who are acclaimed from below? Knock me down with a feather.
Authority and leadership are not the same thing. I wouldn’t follow Boris down the pub. His entire manner, facial expressions and body language scream “I’m lying!” To be a successful politician you must be a complete cunt, the kind of person who pockets the silverware and gropes your daughter the moment you leave the room. The kind of person the Spartans would have tossed off a cliff and considered it a public service. Biden is a politician, Trump is a leader.
But, but, but…..Tabula Rasa and all that.
It’s true it’s genetically influenced. Psychopaths are well known to be leaders. They know how to manipulate and aren’t bothered by the emotional issues as a result of their actions.
Genetic factors gave us leaders. Environmental factors gave us pitch forks and guillotines.
Experts believe? Experts are expert only in their personal record of things they have done. About the future or on any new issue they are as wrong as the rest of us.
I’m struggling with the concept of Jug Ears being born to lead.
JK277
April 14, 2022 at 8:08 am
Ah, so that’s why our born-to-rule lords and masters hate technological development?
Mmmmm. Finally justification for gene modification. 🙂
How many generations does that last for if not continually selected for? Current monarchs aren’t waging bloody court intrigues or civil war against upstart barons to keep their butt on the throne. Haven’t had to for years. And they aren’t marrying out based on which eligible candidate shows the deepest power lust. Mostly, anyway. So I wouldn’t be convinced modern royals share the same genetic predisposition for power as modern politicians do.
“Experts are starting to believe that the people who pursue power are not random” How can anyone type such a sentence without guffawing?
Experts are starting to believe that the people who pursue sporting success are not random. Experts are starting to believe that the people who pursue musical success are not random. There’s no end to the expertise of experts.
Isn’t this an argument for monarchy and/or rule by aristocracy in preference to democracy? In a democracy one selects from the entire population for those who want to be rulers, and therefore one gets an entirely psychopathic (and stupid) political class, because the population contains far more nutters than is necessary to fill all the positions of power. Whereas while Lord Sidcup might well be a psycho there’s no guarantee that his son will also be one. So if one choses ones rulers from the aristocracy alone, there won’t be enough psychos in it to fill the entire ruling class, so one ends up with some sane people in positions of power. You might even end up with a PM who isn’t a bona fide narcissistic power mad nutter.
And if you reduce your ruling class to one family (ie absolute monarchy) then the chances of getting a complete psycho at the top reduces again. Yes you’ll get one every now and again, but we get them 100% of the time in a democracy……
@Jim
As a counterpoint I give you the Royal Family following your current Queen. Would you really be happy with Prince Charles ascending to the throne with absolute power?
“As a counterpoint I give you the Royal Family following your current Queen. Would you really be happy with Prince Charles ascending to the throne with absolute power?”
Would Charles as Absolute Monarch be any worse than what we have now? A permanent class of rulers with one mind that we cannot dispose of ever? At least Charles will die, and being only one man that event could be brought forward if he behaved too egregiously. A monarch must always consider the masses, he can only push them so far. A self sustaining political elite on the other hand…….
And is there any evidence that Charles is a psychopath? A bit odd for sure, got plenty of stupid ideas, but no great narcissistic tendencies. He’s no Blair anyway.