Having had some experience with narcissistic people (fortunately only a number small enough to count on one hand - or at least that I had identified as such), these characters strike me as having highly narcissistic tendencies - which if you have ever encountered - are highly damaging to those around them as well as being completely ineffective from a social or organisational point of view (note that I am not making the claim that they are narcissists because I am neither a psychiatrist nor have observed them long or closely enough to make such an assessment, even if I had been - I am merely highlighting the traits they seem to show).
If you are looking at the Trump campaign, for instance, you can see how this kind of dynamic destroys a lot of people (although I am not crying over these as I suspect that many around him are also sociopaths or narcissists - it is just that their egos tend to lead them to believe that they can master the monster).
But, aside from the mental health issues these kind of people engender (and from my experience, they do cause untold damage), they also inflict huge amounts of damage in organisational settings. Perhaps this might be a time to start talking more about possible personality disorders and the damage they can inflict - and get a debate as to how our society is being damaged by certain types of personalities (and this would also potentially bring about a discussion on mental health - given that the previous government seemed to think that it was a huge problem and that people needed a stick to be made to go back to work).
Its well observed in development studies that for primarily static (and often collectively minded) agrarian societies to develop succesful capitalist economies, the cultural attitude to work must change away from an attitude of sufficiency to one of accumulation. This is an ideological change which permits the accumulation of capital and its deployment to further accumulation projects. The term "business" arose from this change in England in which it was observed that such people were always "busy" compared to ordinary people. This schism still exists and it can be said that our whole cultural value system is directed to maintaining it. The vast majority will say that such economic development is a public good. Its hard to argue otherwise pending the environmental consequences playing out. But it has brought with it a negativity towards rest, towards minimalism and towards ease and a cruelty in politics towards the working class which has its own specific characteristics, which is not to say that there not always been cruelty towards the poor of some kind.
Often cited is Carl Jung's account in Memories Dreams and Reflections of a conversation with an indigenous Mexican leader who told him:
"How cruel the whites are: their lips are thin, their noses sharp, their faces furrowed and distorted by holes. Their eyes have a staring expression. They are always seeking something. What are they seeking? The whites always want something, they are always uneasy and restless. We do not know what they want, we do not understand them, we think that they are mad." I asked him why he thought the whites were all mad. "They say they think with their heads", he replied.
"Why, of course. What do you think with?" I asked him in surprise. "We think here", he said, indicating his heart."
This is not a racial issue of course but the point here is an encounter between two fundamentally different approaches to experience. Ian McGilchrist's model of left and right brain modes of attention may go some way to explaining this.
The origin of this cruelty in the modern conservative soul is a deep lack of wisdom about the nature of life. Tories tend to think we are all masters of our own destiny. If we are poor or rich, its because of bad or good personal habits and choices. People are lazy, but we, the successful ones who pushed ourselves, saw the truth of life and are the example to others. Tax is a disincentive to effort, social benefits are a moral hazard.
This ideology of manic busy ness is at the root of capitalism. On another Substack, Poetic Outlaws quoted Alan Watts: "Stop measuring days by degrees of productivity and start measuring them by degree of presence." Presence means you are alive to the full nature of what is around you. Cruelty arises from seeing others only as instruments in your personal ego project.
"This ideology of manic busy ness is at the root of capitalism..."
It isn't.
It's not a characteristic in Capitalist economies like Finland, Norway, and others in mainland Europe. And the idea that "cruelty and condescension", and let's include nepotism, aren't known, say, on the "anti-Capitalist" left of the Political spectrum, seems to be defying reality.
"Animal Farm" is a good read.
The tendency to think "we are all masters of our own destiny" is a characteristic of libertarianism, for sure. But it's a tendency of all authoritarians, irrespective of political ideology or economic model.
It would be interesting to know how many of those accused of bullying went to schools with ‘fag’ systems, where it appears bullying smaller kids is actively encouraged, where the bullies were themselves bullied when they were younger and so potentially setting a pattern for later life.
I doubt if fagging still exists though of course I’m far too old to know. As I think Jonny is referring to the two female candidates I don’t think fagging existed in single sex female schools. Hierarchical structures of any description encourage bullying.
Having had some experience with narcissistic people (fortunately only a number small enough to count on one hand - or at least that I had identified as such), these characters strike me as having highly narcissistic tendencies - which if you have ever encountered - are highly damaging to those around them as well as being completely ineffective from a social or organisational point of view (note that I am not making the claim that they are narcissists because I am neither a psychiatrist nor have observed them long or closely enough to make such an assessment, even if I had been - I am merely highlighting the traits they seem to show).
If you are looking at the Trump campaign, for instance, you can see how this kind of dynamic destroys a lot of people (although I am not crying over these as I suspect that many around him are also sociopaths or narcissists - it is just that their egos tend to lead them to believe that they can master the monster).
But, aside from the mental health issues these kind of people engender (and from my experience, they do cause untold damage), they also inflict huge amounts of damage in organisational settings. Perhaps this might be a time to start talking more about possible personality disorders and the damage they can inflict - and get a debate as to how our society is being damaged by certain types of personalities (and this would also potentially bring about a discussion on mental health - given that the previous government seemed to think that it was a huge problem and that people needed a stick to be made to go back to work).
Its well observed in development studies that for primarily static (and often collectively minded) agrarian societies to develop succesful capitalist economies, the cultural attitude to work must change away from an attitude of sufficiency to one of accumulation. This is an ideological change which permits the accumulation of capital and its deployment to further accumulation projects. The term "business" arose from this change in England in which it was observed that such people were always "busy" compared to ordinary people. This schism still exists and it can be said that our whole cultural value system is directed to maintaining it. The vast majority will say that such economic development is a public good. Its hard to argue otherwise pending the environmental consequences playing out. But it has brought with it a negativity towards rest, towards minimalism and towards ease and a cruelty in politics towards the working class which has its own specific characteristics, which is not to say that there not always been cruelty towards the poor of some kind.
Often cited is Carl Jung's account in Memories Dreams and Reflections of a conversation with an indigenous Mexican leader who told him:
"How cruel the whites are: their lips are thin, their noses sharp, their faces furrowed and distorted by holes. Their eyes have a staring expression. They are always seeking something. What are they seeking? The whites always want something, they are always uneasy and restless. We do not know what they want, we do not understand them, we think that they are mad." I asked him why he thought the whites were all mad. "They say they think with their heads", he replied.
"Why, of course. What do you think with?" I asked him in surprise. "We think here", he said, indicating his heart."
This is not a racial issue of course but the point here is an encounter between two fundamentally different approaches to experience. Ian McGilchrist's model of left and right brain modes of attention may go some way to explaining this.
The origin of this cruelty in the modern conservative soul is a deep lack of wisdom about the nature of life. Tories tend to think we are all masters of our own destiny. If we are poor or rich, its because of bad or good personal habits and choices. People are lazy, but we, the successful ones who pushed ourselves, saw the truth of life and are the example to others. Tax is a disincentive to effort, social benefits are a moral hazard.
This ideology of manic busy ness is at the root of capitalism. On another Substack, Poetic Outlaws quoted Alan Watts: "Stop measuring days by degrees of productivity and start measuring them by degree of presence." Presence means you are alive to the full nature of what is around you. Cruelty arises from seeing others only as instruments in your personal ego project.
"This ideology of manic busy ness is at the root of capitalism..."
It isn't.
It's not a characteristic in Capitalist economies like Finland, Norway, and others in mainland Europe. And the idea that "cruelty and condescension", and let's include nepotism, aren't known, say, on the "anti-Capitalist" left of the Political spectrum, seems to be defying reality.
"Animal Farm" is a good read.
The tendency to think "we are all masters of our own destiny" is a characteristic of libertarianism, for sure. But it's a tendency of all authoritarians, irrespective of political ideology or economic model.
It would be interesting to know how many of those accused of bullying went to schools with ‘fag’ systems, where it appears bullying smaller kids is actively encouraged, where the bullies were themselves bullied when they were younger and so potentially setting a pattern for later life.
I doubt if fagging still exists though of course I’m far too old to know. As I think Jonny is referring to the two female candidates I don’t think fagging existed in single sex female schools. Hierarchical structures of any description encourage bullying.