Do Serial killers and politicians share traits?

I always wondered why a person would take on the role of politician or leader, what is in Their mental make up?

Psychopathy is a personality disorder manifested in people who use a mixture of charm, manipulation, intimidation, and occasionally violence to control others, in order to satisfy their own selfish needs.
Interpersonal traits include glibness, superficial charm, a grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, and the manipulation of others. The affective traits include a lack of remorse and/or guilt, shallow affect, a lack of empathy, and failure to accept responsibility. The lifestyle behaviors include stimulation-seeking behavior, impulsivity, irresponsibility, parasitic orientation, and a lack of realistic life goals.

www.examiner.com...

What doesn't go unnoticed is the fact that some of the character traits exhibited by serial killers or criminals may be observed in many within the political arena. While not exhibiting physical violence, many political leaders display varying degrees of anger, feigned outrage and other behaviors. They also lack what most consider a "shame" mechanism. Quite simply, most serial killers and many professional politicians must mimic what they believe, are appropriate responses to situations they face such as sadness, empathy, sympathy, and other human responses to outside stimuli.

"shame" mechanism or acting?

A leader should be a servant, I am sure there are some, aren't there?

I am starting to have my doubts.

I don't know, maybe we should ask Chandra Levy

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
I don't know, maybe we should ask Chandra Levy

Oh wow I had forgotten all about her.

or,

Mary Jo Kopechne

Now that I think about it, yes politicians and world leaders are mass murders at times, silly me.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Erah, yeah I couldn't think of Mary Jo Kopechne, Erah

I would say that absolutely that many of the worlds leaders, in business and politics, could be considered mentally ill by some criteria. I personally tend to prefer to think of them as sociopaths, rather than psychopaths, but in fact the terms are often used interchangeably.

I think it is clear and obvious that many of them display these personality traits. IF they are, is not a question I ask myself any longer. They certainly are.

The more interesting question to me, at this point, is "Why are they in power?"

Is it because we are tricked and fooled by them? (Which I think would be the more hopeful option)

Or is it because we KNOW they are sociopaths/psychopaths, and we want them in charge because it offers us competitive advantage against other groups who also have sociopathic leaders? (Which is what I think the truth is)

In which case, what does that make most of us? If we are willing to deliberately promote sociopaths to leadership, in order to gain an advantage over others in other nations, despite the cost to those people, and some in our nation as well, we are not much better than our leaders, are we?

Not only are we ruthless, self serving individuals that hire sociopaths to do our dirty work so we can keep our hands and consciences clean, but in a twisted way, we are also exploiting our sociopathic leaders as well.

Good thread.


[edit on 11-7-2010 by Illusionsaregrander]

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

Erah, yeah I couldn't think of Mary Jo Kopechne, Erah

Yea, it just popped into my head along with all the wars that have been fought., throughout the history of mankind.

Both serial killers and politicians share the same traits - power and money. And they won't stop to get what they want, even if it means the death of unwitting VICTIMS - by killing their hopes, by fudging the truth, by taking away their freedom, etc.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander



Thank you for the insightful questions, and yes I myself have wondered, "what are the people thinking when the vote?"

The more interesting question to me, at this point, is "Why are they in power?"

Is it because we are tricked and fooled by them? (Which I think would be the more hopeful option)

Or is it because we KNOW they are sociopaths/psychopaths, and we want them in charge because it offers us competitive advantage against other groups who also have sociopathic leaders? (Which is what I think the truth is)

In which case, what does that make most of us? If we are willing to deliberately promote sociopaths to leadership, in order to gain an advantage over others in other nations, despite the cost to those people, and some in our nation as well, we are not much better than our leaders, are we?

Is it because we are tricked and fooled by them?

I think yes, many are.

Politicians are con men.

They make us promises they never keep and still we vote the same ones in office even though we are watching them and catching them in lies and illegal activity.

There's hero worship too,

Then we have to look at the father/god figure angle.

Like S.O. said we need a Savior, I will never forget it, we are so programed.

What do we do, we have to have leaders, don't we?

Originally posted by pikypiky
Both serial killers and politicians share the same traits - power and money. And they won't stop to get what they want, even if it means the death of unwitting VICTIMS - by killing their hopes, by fudging the truth, by taking away their freedom, etc.

Do the majority of people who desire to be leaders have psychological problems?

I don't think we can just limit this to politicians.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

I think yes, many are.

The reason I tend to doubt that we are truly "tricked" by them is that we are all aware that politicians lie. Everyone is. Its hard to make a case for being "tricked" by people who are known, notorious liars. That introduces the probability of some deliberate blindness on our parts.

Another thing that makes me doubt the "tricked" possibility is the fact that very obvious and aggressive sociopaths like Bush and Company, do so well when we feel threatened. I notice a deliberate ebb and flow to the type of sociopaths we hire, that doesnt seem coincidental. We prefer the more obvious and aggressive sort when outside threat is felt, and more moderate ones when there is no outside threat, (or the threat is low). That shows, (me, anyway) a degree of conscious collaboration on our part. We dont mind having sociopathic leaders, but we want them busy with other people. In peace, they tend to turn on us, and so we choose less aggressive sociopaths to limit the amount of damage they do domestically.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Like S.O. said we need a Savior, I will never forget it, we are so programed.

I tend to look on it less kindly than you. I dont blame it on "programming" which would imply we were the victims here, I blame it on self interest. It serves us well to have others do the nasty dirty work. Many of us like to think of ourselves as spiritual beings, and we worry about our souls, and if not that, than at least our reputation among others. Its very convenient to have a "savior" or a "devil" to project all of our darkest and most basic survival urges onto, so that we can maintain a delusion of "Goodness" about ourselves.

We often scapegoat them, and disassociate ourselves from our sociopathic leaders if they fail to gain us advantage with their brutality. (Hitler) But when they succeed, they are Gods. The savior and the devil, are, in fact, the same thing, only one succeeds and the other fails to grab us advantage at any cost.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
What do we do, we have to have leaders, don't we?

What I think we should do is become more aware of the fact that we do benefit from, or at least TRY to benefit from the actions of these sociopaths/psychopaths, and become conscious of our competitive survival urges and then make conscious decisions about how low we really want to go, and for what. In short, we need to take responsibility for the sociopath within in order to have an opportunity to gain control of the sociopaths we hire to act out those tendencies for us.

We need representative leaders, and perhaps sociopaths ARE representative leaders. But IMHO, awareness of our own anti-social tendencies would allow us to choose alternate means, or, failing that, at least to take responsibility for the world we live in, rather than pretending endlessly that we have no idea why these bad things keep happening when we are SUCH good people.

reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
Oh before Chandra Levy there was another one of Gary Condit's victims, an asian woman who had Chandra Levy's type of job, I can't find her name- who had the misfortune of getting involved with Gary Condit.

I don't believe in psychology. I know that's a bold statement to make but it's true. I don't feel like explaining the details of why, but I'll just say that I think Anthropology can replace Psychology completely. Different cultures view "psychological disorders" differently, and no one is more correct than another, because psychology is just the Western way of looking that the same problems of individuals.

But to compare a serial killer with a politician might be a good comparison. They both tend to leave their emotions from their actions, unless it helps them with their cause. I would also say that the opposite would be even more dangerous. What if a politician ONLY used his/her emotions and not their logical & rational thought? The outcome would be even worse.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by pikypiky
Both serial killers and politicians share the same traits - power and money. And they won't stop to get what they want, even if it means the death of unwitting VICTIMS - by killing their hopes, by fudging the truth, by taking away their freedom, etc.

Do the majority of people who desire to be leaders have psychological problems?

I don't think we can just limit this to politicians.

Ah, correct! Leaders are intelligent, creatively so, and with genius comes the bane of nutballs, who in their own minds think they are right most of the time. I know a few who just don't get it, truly and refuse to take responsibility for their actions. Plus, they are pathological liars and refuse to offer apologies when caught in their misdeeds, too. They will continue their path because it's an addiction of theirs -- lust for more power and money. The destructive cycle of their own demise.

[edit on 2010-7-11 by pikypiky]

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Politicians are con men.

Yep! And they are wealthy, too! Sadly, these political CON MEN want to survive in the illusion they all have created of being on top of everyone below them and at the expense of unwitting VICTIMS and stupid voters.

And disgustingly, yes, government authorities and law enforcement agencies are in cahoots with those who hold the wads of cold hard CASH.

[edit on 2010-7-11 by pikypiky]

Cmon man, we already know politicians are psycho.


Isnt that kind of the point of this websight? to point out that they are frickin crazy??

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

The reason I tend to doubt that we are truly "tricked" by them is that we are all aware that politicians lie. Everyone is. Its hard to make a case for being "tricked" by people who are known, notorious liars. That introduces the probability of some deliberate blindness on our parts.

Yea, what is that?

Deliberate blindness, or denial?

What about the people who vote for the lessor of two evils?

reply to post by pikypiky



Lust for power as an addiction, that makes sense, I never quite thought of it in those terms.

reply to post by bettermakings


I understand your take on psychology,

What if a politician ONLY used his/her emotions and not their logical & rational thought?

I see them using emotion more the rational thought actually.

What they are doing seems irrational to me most the time.

Originally posted by star in a jar
reply to post by SUICIDEHK45
Oh before Chandra Levy there was another one of Gary Condit's victims, an asian woman who had Chandra Levy's type of job, I can't find her name- who had the misfortune of getting involved with Gary Condit.

really, I don't recall.

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Yea, what is that?

Deliberate blindness, or denial?

What about the people who vote for the lessor of two evils?

If they are voting for "the lesser of two evils" they are still, willfully, deliberately and consciously, voting for "evil."

We have many more options in this country than two, and we choose to ignore those other options. You can choose to vote for something you consider a "good" as well, if you are willing to accept the fact that you may not "win" by doing so. All the people who have been voting third party are bravely trying to change the dynamic. The vast majority of the populace continues to vote for "greater" or "lessor" evil, but refuses to vote against it altogether.

Denial IS deliberate blindness. It is different than "being programmed" which suggests passivity. Those in denial are programming themselves so that they dont have to look at their own proclivities, or take responsibility for them. It is painful to have to recognize your own selfishness, self interestedness, etc., but it is our only hope for breaking out of this cycle. But most "in denial" tend to deliberately avoid looking at information that would bring to consciousness that which they seek to avoid recognizing. There is intent there, no matter how subtle.