Chapter 13 – Dominance in Politics

Individuals who enter political office in any country are among the world's most dominant individuals in our society in terms of the influence that they have on making the rules we follow, and therefore, they are in a position to greatly influence the populace and the world around them. These are generally individuals who, in a democratic society, we choose as our political leaders, based on their platform and reputation of former policies prior to their election to higher offices of leadership. Unfortunately, while the direction in government that a political dominant takes may initially appear to be related to a desire to improve how people are governed and the rights of the populace, it all-too-often becomes a personal endeavor by the individual to improve their own status and immediate environment, sometimes at the expense of the people being governed by them. After all, we have become familiar with the personalities of dominant people and know that they are dominant because they seek the benefits of being dominant, for example, status, power, recognition, choice of their surroundings, wealth, and material resources. While many laws have been passed to protect the environment, the environment is most often not a prime issue when we select a leader. Many laws about the environment are passed by pressure from ecologically minded individuals who are more attuned to the importance of environment and leaning on political figures to work it all out. Otherwise, most politicians do not usually understand the importance of environmental issues and do not seek changes without outside pressure, although they may profess to take an interest in it. Thus it is as much the fault of the people who choose a leader who does not hold the environment in the number one position of importance as it is the fault of the leader. Most people make their political decisions on what they understand, and most people do not understand or care about environmental degradation if it does not apply directly to what they see as their well-being. In addition, knowing human behavior as we do, we may not actually have the ability to choose a leader who has a good moral character. Politicians train themselves in speaking, creating an environment in which they dominate, and say the things their electors want to hear. As humans, we generally want to employ trust in our decisions to choose a leader, but when we apply what we know about the various personalities found in human populations, their dominant and subordinate traits and their potential for following a moral code, we begin to realize that what we hear and what is on the mind of a dominant (and/or the party to which they belong) may not be the same. Personality type is a perplexing feature of humans, and those individuals who have serious personality disorders are capable of covering up what they do not want others to see. Leadership is characterized by a clear line of authority that gives a leader the power of delegation to control a subordinate's level of participation in the decision-making process. Thus, a dominant personality is associated with the most predominant forms of leadership in our societies. We choose dominant people for political office. Dominance is demonstrated in ways that show up in expressions of personality. The concept of trait dominance deals with a person's characteristic feelings of control and influence over everyday situations, events, and relationships, versus feelings of being controlled and influenced by circumstances, for example, changes in life and work situations. Based on studies of assertive, forceful, and self-assured behavior, it has been found that individuals higher in personality trait dominance tend to attain more influence in face-to-face groups than others. They speak more, gain more control over group processes, and hold disproportionate sway over group decisions. The fate of people, destinies of nations, and history itself are determined to a substantial extent by the strategies of political leaders. When electing a politician, voters frequently base their decisions on the image created by mass media and professional image makers. These, in turn, are based on the appearance of dominance portrayed by their selection of a leader, as discussed earlier. Voters also tend to take into account only current events and tasks. However, this method, along with a poor understanding of the politician's true personality, can result in bringing to power a politician who eventually damages the country's position or even causes national or international cataclysms. The performance of a political government can be measured by the increase of the quality of life in the respective country during the time of ruling. Personality traits of many political leaders of different countries in various historical periods were analyzed and juxtaposed with the performance of their governments ( Cowley, 1931; Derue et al., 2011). The world has had its share of overly dominant (despotic) and toxic leaders, many of them with extremely serious personality disorders ( Ceumern-Lindenstjerna et al., 2002). Political leaders are like other alpha individuals who may each demonstrate a level of dominance that suits their position in life. Once in power, some utilize their position to obtain their personal goals, sometimes at a catastrophic disadvantage to their citizens. There are other factors to consider in determining their degree of dominance. Whether they become despots, for instance, depends not only on their behavior but also on the type of government they head. The most psychotic and intolerant individuals have been associated with governments that condone absolute rule. While other world leaders are all dominant individuals, they demonstrate a wide array of degrees of tolerance and moral obligation, sometimes even assisting their societies to live a relatively happy, rewarding life ( Piot et al., 2007). However, even in these circumstances, the motives for carrying out a particular movement are unclear and often relate to benefits that can be reaped by those in a dominant position. As in any population, dominant status and intraspecific tolerance by leading personalities appears to hold the key to keeping the human population under control but relatively happy. On the other hand, despotic dominance and intolerance leads to a psychopathic condition in which the populace of home and foreign countries suffer from their leader's amoral personality.