Knowledge of Psychology: the Antidote to the Manipulative Wizards of Politics
In our previous post, we highlighted how pathological individuals take control over our politics, much to our detriment. This has been called a “pathocracy” and indeed we see it playing out all over the world.
In order to avoid this situation where mentally-ill individuals lead nations to destruction, we have to begin elsewhere: in our very outlooks on the world that support pathology, and that are needed for a healthier politics. To understand this better, we can turn to the groundbreaking work of scholar and scientist Iain McGilchrist.
Dr. McGilchrist has explained how the two hemispheres of the brain have distinctly different functions. The left hemisphere has a narrow beam focus and is aimed at grasping and manipulating the world. This function is useful for gathering food and building shelter. Its narrow self-contained focus means it ignores what it deems extraneous to its targeted mission. The left hemisphere is dogmatic about what it sees. Because it is trying to control and use the world, it is preoccupied with power over its objects of attention.
The bicameral mind exists throughout the animal kingdom, but, in human beings, the left hemisphere is also involved in creating re-presentations or theories of the world: mental maps – another way of managing and manipulating. The result is a shift away from the full splendour of reality towards categorization and generalization.
The right hemisphere could not be more different. It is ‘broad-minded’, looking out onto the larger context. From a biological and evolutionary angle, its purpose is to make sure that while seeking that tasty morsel, we can still spot the prey that is about to pounce on us. It scans and perceives larger patterns and nuance. It interacts more directly with the detail and particularities of the world than the narrow and categorical left hemisphere. In human beings, it is also metaphorical, and thus the font of poetry, music and other modes of understanding and expression that are portals into deeper levels of reality.
Both hemispheres are necessary and work together, but because the right hemisphere sees the larger context, it can contain the left’s outlook, whereas the reverse is not true. Therefore, for healthy mental functioning, as McGilchrist puts it, it is the right hemisphere that should be the master and the left its emissary: the latter should not insist on continuing to grab food when a bird of prey is indeed sweeping down.
It is clear from the descriptions above that politics are very much the terrain of the left hemisphere. They are about control, manipulation, and grabbing. They are often dogmatic and involve black-and-white thinking, and are therefore divisive. In one word, they are about power.
The pathological beings who sometimes rule us are both the best at attaining power and are the most extreme expression of its ways: ruthless, manipulative and wilfully ignorant of anything standing in their way. They are those who dominate and come out on top in the logic of the left brained world.
If we are to have a healthier politics, we will need to examine our attraction to power, and the assumptions behind it, and entertain a political system based on a more balanced brain function. Such a system would consider more variables and nuance on any issue, including unpleasant and unexpected findings, before taking a decision. It would also need to be more deliberative before acting, or maybe even before speaking or forming opinions.
We have traditionally managed left-brain excess through checks and balances, the rule of law as well as elections – all ways to ensure that no person, institution or party can run away with the show. This is a clunky and mechanical way of managing that worked in the past but today seems to be waning as pathological demagogues capture democratic systems, or as societal polarization erodes the time-honoured values that the checks and balances are predicated on.
Ironically, there is a new threat that is an overshoot of the rule of law: the blanket use of the twinned power of regulation and digital technology to limit human agency. This is the greatest manifestation of the left hemisphere, leaving the innate needs of citizens behind in the dirt. The other way we have managed is through the occasional politician who has arisen with strong capacities and a motivation to act out of service to a greater good. However, the arrival of a good public servant is a random and unreliable event.
Effective leaders bring together a successful blend of mental flexibility, strength of character, and strong interpersonal skills. However, these qualities are moot if the individual is pathological and the talent is used in the pursuit of selfish rather than societal objectives. Indeed, a leader’s capacity to move us in a direction also means that he or she can manipulate us into terrain where we don’t necessarily wish to tread. Pathological leaders can be wizards of manipulation and magicians of words and emotions, and we are mostly untrained to withstand their tricks.
If we don’t want to be at the behest of pathological leaders, and seek to avoid world wars, cycles of maniacal spending and debt, and colossal social failures (such as China’s Cultural Revolution, or possibly a future where technology controls every aspect of our lives) we will need to take a step up the ladder. We will need a citizen that has more knowledge of psychology: of both his or her own, and that of their leaders. That, in part, requires a better understanding of the outlooks above, and other paradigms, in order to be more immune to manipulation.
This knowledge will improve the chances of spotting a pathological leader or malevolent policy, especially and possibly earlier on in their career trajectory when more might be done to keep them from reaching the top echelons. It will vasty help us to avoid politics aimed at our own destruction.
Simply put: imagine a leader who does not promise you heaven, nor indulge your fears of hell or your false pride, and we will all be looking in the right direction.
As the late Afghan scholar and writer Idries Shah put it, “If the ‘ordinary folk’ would make themselves worthwhile, then they would be able to guide affairs, not just form the cannon-fodder.”
Related Stories
