Showing posts with label Dark Triad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dark Triad. Show all posts

Thursday, 9 June 2016

Machiavellianism Q&A Summary + Download

Three Modern Machiavellians


 


To my magnificent readers! As requested, a condensed version of the Triple Question & Answer Session by IllimitableMan, Illacertus and Modern Machiavelli including a pdf to download. You can download the pdf below:


 


Modern Machiavelli – Triple QA of Power


 


Feel free to share the pdf, the whole article or parts of it, as long as you refrain from editing it. You also are required to link to the following article to avoid confusion: http://modernmachiavelli.com/q-a-power-machiavellianism/


 


Workplace


Question: What is the best & fastest way to get ahead and promoted at work?


Answer (MM): You won’t like this answer but “it depends”. Since you didn’t give us much to work with, here are the basics:


Get accustomed to the specific workspace politics, know what is looked upon with favour or disfavour. Find out who the important people are and learn about their character, strengths, needs and weaknesses.


As soon as you have a basic overview, you want to web a net of allies. Especially but not limited to the bosses. Adhere the law 1 of never outshining your master. It is important to stroke the ego of your boss and present him in a good light. Yes, he is sometimes going to steal your credit, but this must not concern you. You must also make sure that your co-workers are on your side and not actively working against you behind your back. Don’t put too much trust into them though, and try to keep your private and professional life separated. Don’t believe that you are all loyal friends when you are going out, getting drunk and acting out of order.


This especially applies to company parties. Never get too drunk and make a clown out of yourself. Unfortunately many people break this rule.


You need to make sure that your reputation stays untainted from such mistakes. Guard your reputation with your life.


When shooting for the promotion, it is a wise move to conceal your intentions to not arouse envy in your co-workers who might sabotage you. Unless you are certain that they are allies on your side and most likely going to help you. Again keep in mind that it is good to trust people, but not doing so is better.


Lear to keep people depend on you, yes, but do not become the person who does his job so great that he cannot be promoted without a significant hit to the department’s productivity.


A thing I pay attention to is to court attention at all costs. Try to get a desk as near to your boss as possible. Make your name brand itself into the conscious mind and be associated with positive traits.


 


Creativity


Question: How do you put yourself in a good mindset in order to boost your creativity when there is social pressure against it?


 


Answer (MM): Creativity is snake oil and does not exist.


Creativity is a function of knowledge, experience, intelligence, mindset and your current mood.


How do you get comfortable? Stoicism & Confidence


 


Politics


Question: What is the best way to get started in Politics and to gain power, maintain power and survive in this environment?


Answer (IM): Learn Machiavellianism and become likeable, or someone people love to hate due to reprehensible behaviour but find absolutely charming. Charm does a lot to mitigate the adverse effects of dubiousness, and will allow you to get away with murder should you be sufficiently charming. Charm makes you likeable regardless of your ethics, remember this and incorporate it into your persona, it will do much for your personal power.


There are no “wikihow” style bullet points you can rote memorise to get power, if it were that easy, everybody would have power. Power is a cut throat game where only the most cunning thrive. Deciding to study power is taking the first step from pawn to player, but the rest is ultimately up to you. Study, learn charm, fuck up, and learn from your failures. Fuck up some more, then tell everybody about your fucks up one day so your enemies can’t use them against you. Do it with charm, and those who feel betrayed won’t be able to stay mad for long – many will forgive you. “It is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.” The game is a dirty yet beautiful thing, the shades of grey within it surpass more than a mere fifty.


Most of the senior politicians have read Machiavelli, you should too.


Answer (MM): Starting in politics is unbelievably easy. I didn’t start getting (seriously) involved with politics until my mid-twenties and am constantly moving up in the food scale, with the highlight of recently having been promoted to the speaker for something.


You need to be aware of the skillset required to become successful as a politician. Without the following most important skill to possess as a politician, you are lost. No reason to even try. It is:


Be able to drink at least 2 bottles of wine without getting drunk.


You will probably believe that this is a joke. Well, 50/50. I want to stress the importance of networking.


There is not a single skill more important for rising the ranks. Study Social Interactions, know what types ofCharisma exist and which one is best suited for you. Learn to speak well. With authority, demanding respect. Confidence & Narcissism are beneficial and you should try to look your best.


I can not stress the importance of networking enough. Find out what activities your party has planned and do everything. Hand out flyers, sit in the voting booth, attend speeches, help prepare events, etc.


This brings me to another topic. Clothing style. I am in a “worker” party where the grunts dress casually. How do the ministers, parliament members & chancellor dress? They wear suits. Even if I wouldn’t trade in my own mother for Zegna suits, I would still make sure to dress like a king, to be treated like a king.


Of the utmost importance is a proper knowledge of the human psyche. 90% of everyone is out to prison rape you, given the chance. Maybe not at first, but the higher you move up, the more political schemes are involved. Master the art of strategic thinking and again, trust nobody.


In every party there are recruitment sections. My party for example has 5 different ones and they are all eagerly looking for fresh blood. Do some research about which party currently is in power and about the expected trends and choose your party based upon it. Or go with your “principles” or whatever that is and choose a bad party that aligns with your interests. Cognitive dissonance is overrated and it is a good exercise defending a point of view that goes against everything you stand for. Write them, phone them or show up at a meeting and introduce yourself to everyone. Remember their names, be likeable, connect with them on facebook and especially important, a mistake that many newcomers make: open your mouth. Too many newbies are too scared to voice their opinions and therefore never stand out. Of course, I know, at first it might be intimidating if some people who have been in the party their whole life speak without points and commas, but you need to give your input and if someone tries to interrupt you, don’t let them.


 


Cooperation


QuestionHow can you convince socially unprotected workers, in the care for the elderly, to cooperate for their own good and work together to fight getting exploited. They are suspicious of each other and their reaction is to defend themselves aggregating according to nationality, family, religion, bit many are isolated and there is an entire culture of acceptance of a miserable life which nourishes sentiments of despair, hatred, depression, self-abuse, victim-like mentality, sometimes delinquent.


Note: there is no money to pay them for it, no promise of power over them, no immediate reward.


Answer (MM + IL): Sounds like you don’t need manipulation, but leadership skills. Obviously, you want them to work together as a team, but they’re unmotivated. Have you tried explaining to them how and why it’s in their own best interest to work together? In other words, do they fully grasp the mission at hand and what lies in it for them? I’m afraid we do need more insight to give more precise answers.


How do you convince people to work together?


Either you create an outside enemy. Tell them that they must work against a common enemy and for a shared goal.


Or you find out what they want and let it dangle in front of them like the carrot on a stick.


You win some; you lose some. People with such a fatalistic attitude are difficult to motivate. Them forming groups is an obvious reaction since this is human behaviour 101.


I would try to create the vision of a beautiful goal in their heads and tell them that to achieve said goal, they will need to work together. Or do the same with negative disaster scenarios. Fear is an excellent motivator.


Then your leadership and mediation come into play. Organize events where you make sure that they come in contact and realise that they share a lot in common.


Over emphasise the commonalities and ignore the differences.


Maybe thinking about what motivates people will lead you to achieve your goal. The biggest factors are:


  • The possibility of benefits & recognition

  • The fear of loss & pain

 


Cult of Personality


Question: How would one go into building a cult of personality?


Answer (IL): Study Apple (the cult) & Steve Jobs (the personality).


Also read;


You’re better off building a “cult-like” following instead of a cult. One is building a personal brand with an audience – the other is creating a new religion. Basically, learn how to build a business.


It’s about entrepreneurship & your best bet is creating something valuable that will add to people’s lives. Be a great leader and people will follow you based on your actions.


Answer (MM):


Step 1) Unde Venis?


Where do you come from? Analyse your strengths and weaknesses. Do an SW Analysis


Step 2) Analyse the Terrain


Do an TO Analysis. Carefully evaluate the threats and opportunities, both on the micro- as also in the macro- environment


Step 3) Quo Vadis?


Where are you going? Decide exactly how you wish to be perceived.


Men in general judge more by the sense of sight than by the sense of touch, because everyone can see, but only a few can test by feeling. Everyone sees what you seem to be, few know what you really are.


Perception is reality


Step 4) Craft your Backstory


It has to be appealing to the public and give them a reason to like you. Terrific examples of background stories (you can combine them) are:


  • Reluctant Hero (Actually you do not want to be famous or have responsibility, but it was forced upon you nevertheless. You reluctantly agreed to accept the call of duty)

  • The Underdog (Everyone hates you, nobody gave you a chance)

  • Us vs. Them Dynamic (You have a mutual enemy and only you can save them)

Step 5) Spread your Message


Start the engine of the propaganda machine and spread your message via Marketing & PR channels and techniques.


Step 6) Evoke Emotions


  • Social Proof – Show that other people love you. Especially influential people

  • Trust – Bond and connect with others

  • Credibility & Expertise – If you don’t have it, borrow it from others

  • Repetition – Repeat that you are the greatest and soon both you and others will believe it. Repeat it often enough and you will be the double greatest

 


Evoke Fear


Question: One of the important points of Law 24 (Play the perfect courtier) is to make others fear your power. How do you make others fear your power while maintaining a friendly vibe with others?



Answer (MM):Always be nice, until it is time to stop being nice. I am certain that you are aware of the old saying “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” and I guess you agree with it?


I don’t. If someone takes my eye, it take both of his. Always be friendly and easy going, praise, approach people in a sycophant way, be suave, be the perfect gentleman and courtier but hone the reputation of being a fear-inducing enemy.


Be aggressive, even if you fake it. Studies have shown that even if you fake being angry & aggressive and people are aware that you fake it, they will still get scared.


If someone cuts you off, cut his tongue off. Never allow yourself to be interrupted by equals and inferiors (please don’t use these techniques with your superiors, unless they are lying on the ground).


If someone starts an ad hominem attack against you, stare into his eyes. Open your eyes as wide as possible, don’t blink and never for one second look away. Here is an example of a perfect stare and keep in mind… the Duce is happy in this picture. Imagine the soul draining stare he gave his enemies. Also make sure that you are facing him in a straight line and not from an angle.


Also, use sugar bread and whip. Reward and punishment. Condition people like Pavlov conditioned his dog. Related Law: http://modernmachiavelli.com/law-12-use-selective-honesty-and-generosity-to-disarm-your-victim/


 



Question: What if you want to take both the eyes of your enemy but your enemy is not trying to take yours?


Answer (MM): Convince yourself and the public that he is secretly planning to take your eye. -> Take his eyes.


 


Reading People


Question: If you’re just starting out. What training system for learning to read people, channel emotion, become more mindful and present. Do you recommend?


Answer (IL): Study people in real life like you would observing a lab rat. Micromovements in the face, body posture and tone give away everything. I believe most of it is in the eyes, no matter what circumstance a person is in. You could read What everyBODY is saying, but there’s plenty of other good books on the subject. Tbh, I haven’t learnt any of this through books, rather through silent observation.


For full control of your emotions & for mindfulness read & practice stoic philosophy. For presence meditate & read Eckhart Tolle. I’d apologize for a short answer, but I do think it’s that simple.


Still, let me add to your question on emotions. Emotions can be so powerful that we just can’t suppress them at times. You can use this to your advantage and add it to the list of things that make people easily readable. At the same time, you want to practice your poker face. When you play a prank on someone and can’t keep yourself from laughing you’re fairly bad at it. The victim of the prank will sense that something’s up since you’re acting weird. It does not matter what you’re feeling on the inside, a good poker face handles all emotions.


I used to get angry a lot at my old job, sometimes to the point where I could feel my temperature going up to fiever-like symptoms, where I feared my head would look pepper-red on the outside. I also learnt to avoid making fists & have my hands open instead. I could’ve blown up and it would’ve felt good at that moment, but you remind yourself that the temporary satisfaction you get from releasing that tension would have consequences. If someone fucks you over, calm yourself down with the thought of taking revenge or sort things out in the future on your own terms. Same thing with emails. Never write them in anger or atleast save them as a draft in order to review them at a later date. Most often you will find that you were too emotional and thankful you didn’t click send.


I once reached a moment where I was ready to quit my job right then and there. I decided to give my decision another three days & things turned around. My problem was solved for me and I had nothing to do with it.


Answer (MM): I highly recommend you to read this book. It gives you an excellent overview of the body language signals and non-verbal communication. While humorously written it is a science based, no bullshit approach to the topic, backed by many examples and pictures to properly understand the dynamics behind body movements. We learn how to detect our own body language missteps and also why Churchill liked to cover his crown jewels with his hat, as well as cultural differences.


The Full Facts of Cold Reading is another great book, unfortunately I don’t have it listed in the books Machiavelli would read, so I can’t provide you with a link.


 


Charme


Question: What is charm, and how can you develop it? Any good resources?


Answer (MM): Charme and Charisma are closely tied together but there still are a few differences, though so minor that we are going to ignore them for the sake of this post.


Charme is important to charm your opposite, be it male or female, into agreeing with you. One could say that charme makes people say yes. Even if you didn’t ask a question.


There are a few things that play together:


  • Your attractiveness level, including grooming, odor, clothing.

  • Your power & status, but also knowledge and expertise fall under this category.

  • Authority & calmness

  • Your body language & confidence.

  • Your humour.

  • Empathy & your presence in the here and now. Ergo listening without becoming distracted.

  • Your agreeability and likableness.

There is no denying that a powerful person always has more charme than his inferiors. There have been studies where actors assumed the same body language and were equally attractive, were paired up against a powerful person. The effects of charme and humour were measured and it turned out that the powerful person scored much better.


Now how can you learn to be more charming? My book recommendations that cover every important aspect would be:


This covers everything except for humour but I fear I can not help you with that. In my opinion, you either have humour, or you don’t but many people claim that humour is a learnable skill. Anyway, it was never of interest to me but I am sure that you will find some sources teaching the art of humour.


 


Question: What is a good resource for learning the different types of charisma?


Answer (MM): They are all explained in The Charisma Myth. I didn’t get a lot out of reading it and in my opinion, it is a little hyped, but still makes for a good read since there are few reliable sources (not talking about 7 step self-help hippie bullshit gurus) about Charisma.


 


Books about Manipulation


Question: What books about Power & Manipulation can you recommend?


Answer (IM): The Craft of Power, The Prince & 33 Strategies of War are great texts for this purpose. Also, check out my reading list and Illimitable’s to find an abundance of suggestions.


Answer (IL): I’d add to IllimitableMan’s great picks;


 


Game Theory


Question: How do you decide when your attempts at attacking/ defending someone should stop? 


Answer (MM): Base your calculations on experience and possible outcomes. Assess the risk and decide.


Read up on Game Theory and visit /r/gametheory/ as well as /r/gamesandtheory and of course master strategy while reading http://reddit.com/r/the48lawsofpower


Also follow /u/ridik_ulass who is an excellent game theorist and strategist as well as a mod for multiple useful subreddits.


 


The 48 Laws of Power


Question: What so you think is the motive for law # 1 in Greene’s book to be Don’t outshine the master?


When he wrote the book he surely didn’t let some random function dictate the order of the laws. They say the first and the last elements of a list are those that are more remembered.


Answer (IL): As you rightfully point out the author starts and ends his book with much thought. Law #1 is the first law almost everyone seems to break. We get into the business world with much euphoria and the attitude that we’re going to prove ourselves one of the best employees available on the market. We’re going to rise up the ranks fast and have a career our parents can be proud of. We’re naive and to a certain extent arrogant.


We don’t realize that many authorities rise to their ranks for the thrill of control, which they falsely belive is power. They’re managers, they’re not leaders. Either way, they have fragile egos, lots of insecurities, failed dreams and here you come – the greenhorn. The young adult who always has a positive attitude, who outworks everyone and learns fast. You’re a threat and you will be dealt with. It’s our ignorance and belief in the lies we’ve been fed that makes most of us walk right into outshining our masters, may that be superiors or merely colleagues. You’ll face resentment without understanding it. It’s pathetic.


Greene finished with Law 48 Assume Formlessness, which basically lets you understand not everything is set in stone and you have to know when to adapt to change and go with the tide, reforming instead of letting your rigidity be your downfall as we’ve seen with the Spartans. Simply put, you’re almost done reading the book and Greene tells you they’re different strategic moves on the chessboard. The experienced chess player will know the right move to make at the right time against the right opponent and alter his playstyle when necessary. You develop that ability through mastery.


Difference between Leader & Manager: One difference that will make you fill in the blanks would be that a manager will order a job to be done and the employee will obey, because he has to, out of fear and anxiety, always relying on his next paycheck. The leader inspires his followership to do something, because they want to do it. He does not micromanage, but lets them free under his guidance. They pursue goals based on their own will to do it. One forces you, the other does not decide for you and offers a take it or leave it approach. Leadership in the office is difficult to pull off, because of the structure one is in. You’re surrounded by people who don’t like their job, but depend on it. It does not matter what way you’d try to frame it. They can tell the difference between honey and salt.


The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.


If you can pull off to demonstrate to your victim that he in fact is delusional, then that would work. Normally they’re so deep into their own reality that one cannot reach them. Imagine telling Kanye West he’s an idiot by showcasing his failures to him. He wouldn’t fall out of the clouds, because of that.


 


QuestionHow have you applied these laws to your personal life?


Answer (IL): I’m careful not to step on anyone’s ego, be that a colleague or especially someone with authority, who prides himself with his status/position. I stopped trusting most people. I talk less & let akward silences sit without feeling the need to fill it with unmeaning words. I’m not as kind anymore. Many see it as a weakness. You basically invite them to believe you’re a “nice guy” they can step on. I stopped talking about future plans or things I haven’t done yet. It eliminates the possibility of sabotage. Once they notice your actions / accomplishments, e.g. that you’ve successfully outworked them / gone about improving yourself beyond their skills, they’re powerless, no matter how much insecurities you stepped on.


I mingle with others more instead of seeking isolation. You’re better off at the front, building and guarding your reputation. I try to avoid attention, but shine in a positive light, when it is forced on me. I avoid parasitical losers. I’ve tried to help them in the past only to find myself affected negatively by their misery. I avoid gossiping / taking sides at all times. I refuse to take a side and always stay neutral. The effect is that everyone feels like they can come and talk to you, open up and within record time you accumulate so much dirt on everyone around you, you’re the most informed and up to date person at your workplace / class / group.


Through my naive, innocent behaviour when first getting into the office I nailed that. You want to have people underestimate you. I’ll have my superiors take the credit for my work. They love you for it, become dependant on you & when push comes to shove, you already know exactly how to do certain parts of your boss’s job, since there’s nothing they love more, than delegate to someone who will deliver good quality work. I try to learn as much as possible from the managers & managers’ managers higher up in the hierarchy. Most of them are vain. Appeal to their self-interest, make them feel important. Don’t mistake this for arselicking. One is pathetic and will get you enemies among your coworkers, the other is subtle and best done when grabbing lunch together. You ask them, the last thing they’ll do is ask a lower employee for lunch without a reason. I control my emotions in public settings.


Can’t allow yourself to put your guard down. When people don’t appreciate you and you’re the one running shit, demonstrate that by taking a vacation leave. It has worked perfectly for me, when I had to deal with a parasitical coworker who tried to manipulate & cross me. I was very aware of what she was doing. She underestimated me. I dealt with her as subtly as possible. Some people, like her, dig their own graves and all you have to do is wait wth a smile on your face, when everybody hates working with them. It’s not a rarity. I want people to think I’m the innocent, young, naive, uninformed, little intern. They never suspect you could be a threat & as mentioned earlier, realize you’re outdoing them by miles, when it’s too late.


Be careful with appearances. People love to pretend they’re someone they’re not. Most people’s word doesn’t mean shit. They’re thinking something completely different. Also, I don’t answer honestly to personal questiosn like “What’s your plan for the future? Are you going to study?” I used to talk openly about my dreams, only to find out, I’d get resentment for not being the average joe who gets wasted every weekend. So, now I’m the average joe & repeat average joe shit to them, because I have to. I might be a bit of a romantic & think long-term relationships are possible, but the word “commitment” ends there. There’s no way I’ll let myself be trapped & just hand over all of my power to the naturally Machiavellian sex. See, there’s plenty of historical events where men used physical strength to fight with swords, but women, out of necessity, practiced the art of persuasion. There’s a power imbalance between the genders when it comes to sex. Commit & you’ve lost.


I always liked the idea of being royal in your own fashion. When I was an intern I gave no weight to my title. You don’t need a crown or a “senior” on your business card so people see who’s killing it. People choose a leader based on their actions. Your superiors might be managers, but that is not synonymous with leading. They have paid workers, not passionate followers. When something is for “free” I don’t want it. Even when you don’t pay with money, you will be expected to pay in another way. Most often that turns out to be a bigger struggle than the price you would’ve paid for it. Work on your connections. The more people like you the better off you are, always. Don’t build a fortress & lose sense of what’s going on around you. Be adaptable. Something doesn’t work out the way I planned, accept it, come to grips with it right then and there, then move on & work it out.


 


Morals


Question: Do you have any morals you live by?


Answer (IL): Indeed, if we weren’t we wouldn’t be holding this AMA or doing the work that we do, that is beneficial to many. If it were all just about money, I would be doing something else. I began to educate people on these topics like a Kung Fu master trains his students in the hopes they would use it to protect themselves better. Maybe one of 50 will learn only to bully others, but if that means the other 49 can defend themselves I’m happy. Also, if someone needs precise instructions in order to be dangerous, they’re not a real threat to begin with.


One thing I know the three of us share is loyalty. Quite contradictory to Machiavellian beliefs, but what is a man worth, when he speaks unmeaning words even to his own brethren?


Answer (MM):


Politics have no relations to morals


  • Niccolò Machiavelli

Question: How would you describe how your perspective on life in general differs from what most other people believe?


Answer (IL): I’m quick to sense when someone’s trying to manipulate me, even when it isn’t obvious. It’s essential to one’s success in the office, where the other is always trying to advance and thus sees you as a viable threat, when you’re doing a good job. Although I’m able to read people’s actions, I’m fully aware of the fact that I can fall victim to manipulation any day.


A narcissist might at some point believe that they’re invincible and immune to the deception of others. That very sentiment blinds them & makes them so much easier to manipulate, since they don’t believe it could happen to them. We’re very fallible & biassed. There’s this great quote by Shakespeare, who himself practised Machiavellian tactics.


“The fool doth thinketh he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.” I don’t think I’m that intelligent. However, when I take a good look around me I believe I’m a genius waiting to be discovered. I think it is a fact we’re surrounded by people who couldn’t be more incompetent and unqualified to do their jobs, many of them in authoritative positions. Plenty of them mistakenly assess their skill level to be much higher than reality suggests. The Dunning-Kruger effect is at full play. A common mistake I see people making is operating on the assumption that the first-in, last-out the office worker bee always gets their deserved promotion based on merit. It’s primarily about popularity.


Answer (MM): Realism.


Take the refugee crisis for example. Of course, I feel like that most of them are poor souls that really require help. But some of them are bringing rape, criminality and terrorism into the heart of my country and this can’t happen. If you give me a bowl of smarties and tell me that 5% are poisoned, even if I would love smarties, how many do you think I am going to eat?


There is the common misconception that Machiavellians are worse than Hitler. They are not. Sometimes maybe…


I will share a great quote of my father with you: “Life is not about whether you drink a 2€ wine or a 100€ wine, it is about having the power to change things.”


And this is not a statement made by an unsuccessful bum trying to justify his failure in life, pretending that he has achieved the enlightenment because he does good deeds while living in a 1 room toilet-in-the-bathroom flat.


Power is sexy, it feels amazing and, just like the horny college student chases hot college tail, I chase power.


I am always looking out for my friends and family. Loyalty is my honour. This doesn’t mean that I am not prepared to cut off dead bodies dragging me down.


Some people are to be used as fuel in the furnace of power. That’s the way of life and having regrets or second thoughts only holds you back. You need to be realistic and pragmatic, no matter who you are or what you points of view are.


 


Self-Improvement


Question: How does one get their mind in shape. Controlling their emotions, becoming mindful, mentally acute and self-disciplined. How do you control your facial expressions, body language and talkativeness.


Answer (user Seducer4Real):


Here are 3 things I do to achieve the above:


  1. Read books everyday. I do about 20-30 minutes daily. Sometimes more on other days. The key here is to keep it consistent. Even if you do 10 minutes a day, keep it consistent. Don’t try to start reading 1 book a day/week. Build it up.

  2. Work out. If your body is in shape, your mind will benefit from it as well. I recommend you workout at least 3 times a week. If you’re not the type that wants to build muscle, then look into doing other sports such as boxing/martial arts that will also keep you in shape.

  3. This is a tip I learned from one of the greatest copywriters and business strategist – Gary Halbert. Essentially, you walk 1 hour a day at least 5 days a week. First few weeks will be hard but once you are used to it you will crave it like a cigarette, and unlike a cigarette, it is healthy for you.

You should get started with the above 3 for now to achieve mental clarity. Once you have those 3 in place, you will come up with your own techniques. Also, don’t replace working out with walking or vice versa, you do BOTH. 1 Hour walking per day plus working out 3-5 times a week.


Facial Expressions: Look at yourself in the mirror. Have an imaginary conversation and see what facial expressions you produce. You’ll learn a lot this way.


Body language: Don’t fidget when talking to someone. When talking use your hands to emphasise what you are saying. This makes you look more attractive and can create more trust between you and the other person. Make eye contact when talking. Try not to touch your neck/face/hair as it makes you look nervous. Don’t be reaching to your phone/pockets every few seconds.


Talkativeness: Don’t overdo it and don’t underdo it. Realise when it is a good time to speak, when to stfu & listen and when to give short replies. Most people are not interested in hearing your voice so you should be asking specific questions to get them talking. In other words, be a good listener and use wha they tell you to create conversation. Don’t always make them the centre of the conversation, instead relate your own knowledge/stories of that topic to them. If you’re with a few people you’ll have to judge when it is a good time to interject. Pro Tip: Don’t be quiet when you are in a group of people, you’ll just look weird/antisocial.

Friday, 27 May 2016

Dangers of Academic Papers - Machiavellianism in Politics - a Review

Academic Research Machiavellianism Power in Politics


 


As you know I am an advocate of academic research papers about the Dark Triad, Power, Machiavellianism & Psychology, and in this article I outline the dangers of said academic papers.


WARNING! This is very dry (I am talking Sahara-I-want-to-drink-my-own-piss-Bear-Grylls-style-dry) and if you are looking for hands-on information, applicable to real life situations, I recommend you check out my 48 laws of power summaries.


This article was written to highlight the dangers of academic research and why you need to be skeptical even when reading high quality research papers by people who dedicated their whole lives researching the topic at hand.


 


Analysis of the following academic research paper:


http://wikileakssudbury.org/WKL/E-December-14.pdf


found via the reputable academic database “Refseek.com” found within my resource list.



Title:


Politician personality, Machiavellianism, and political skill as predictors of performance ratings in political roles


 


Authors:


Jo Silvester (1), Madeline Wyatt (2), and Ray Randall (3)

(1) Cass Business School, City University London UK,

(2) Kent Business School UK, University of Kent, UK

(3) School of Business & Economics, University of Loughborough, UK


 


A few searches via a web search engine revealed that all three of the authors are not students but actual experts or at least self-proclaimed experts on the field, having dedicated parts of their research effort in their academic careers to the research of the topic at hand (Machiavellianism). Not a huge one though but enough to take their study into consideration and not dismiss it without a second thought. What might be a mistake, if you read my conclusion.


Jo Silvester is a female chartered psychologist who attained three titles in her field (PhD; MSc; BSc), specialised in the assessment and development of leadership. Since 2002 she is a professor of Occupational Psychology. Her studies led her to develop a unique competence based personality for both the conservative party (2001-2002) and the liberal party (2009). Also a strong background of research on the valuable topic of diversity.


Dr. Madeline Wyatt is another Occupational Psychologist currently lecturing in the HR-management sector. She too is a woman with a psychology degree and an interest and background in the research of diversity.


Dr. Ray Randall, another academic who did his duty in the research of occupational psychology and helped develop various tests related to occupations in both private economy as well as politics. Unlike the other authors he never was involved with “diversity” but solely focused on skills & competence in various sectors, judging all genders equally.


The aim of the study was to make the performance of politicians tangible and quantifiable. The second objective was finding out a relation between the performance and the level of extroversion, neuroticism, conscientiousness, Machiavellianism & political skills, both self-reported of 231 politicians (n=231), 185 of them were also judged by their colleagues (n=729) and officers (n=729), of said politicians.


During the course of the study five latent factors emerged: Resilience (to be referred to as RS), Politicking, Relating to Others, Analytical Skills (AS), Representing People.


The following assumptions were made, based on the frequently explored question of the relationship between personality & politics in the field of political psychology ((Jost & Sidanius, 2004): Personality influences Political Performance (cf. Dietrich, Lasley, Mondak, Remmel, & Turner, 2012; Mondak, Hibbing, Canache, Seligson, & Anderson, 2010; Simonton, 1998; Winter, 1998).

It is a pretty good bet to assume that personality does in fact influence, well, anything, but the authors made the discovery that there has not been done any research regarding the correlation between self-rated personality traits and performance. This posed the first question to be answered by the study.


To answer this question, the authors looked towards the comprehensive studies having been done in the field of occupational psychology and employee performance from industrial-organization (I/O) (e .g., Barrick & Mount, 1991; Schmidt & Hunter, 2004).


Of interest to the academics was whether politicians, from the United Kingdom, with a certain degree of performance shared a similar mental model. The second question to be answered by this study was (as mentioned above) whether self-rated personality traits may be used as a basis to predict the politician’s behaviour.


The study was done as a reaction to the request (e.g., Best, 2011; Dietrich et al., 2012; Simonton, 1998) for studies in the field of occupational psychology combined with political behaviour containing a large n-sample.


Studies about political performance ultimately lead to the problematic question of: What the actual fuck is political performance and how do you measure it? What constitutes bad performance and what good performance?

Can the poll and election results be used as a proper indicator of performance? According to a study (Lodge, Steenbergen & Braus, 1995) they can’t because they will be influenced by the performance of the party they are running for with a certainty matching irrefutable laws of physics.

This leads us to a benefit of being a politician. Unlike a manager you are not rated based on data and hard facts, (Armey & Murphy, 1998) but have the freedom to define the pillars of the performance you are measured and judged on upon yourself (March & Olsen, 1999; Morrell & Hartley, 2006; Sylvester, 2012).


Conscientiousness is said to be the most consistent factor influencing performance (Barrack & Mount, 1991; Salgado, 1997). The more conscientious a person is, the more likely he is going to be goal oriented, reliable able to wither the storm of failure. Navigating in complex ambiguous environments such as the political landscape requires self-motivation and persistence. (Morrell & Hartley, 2006; Simpson, 2008).


Extroverted individuals are more outgoing that introverts ((Costa & McCrae, 2006) what has a positive impact on the likelihood of campaigning, signing petitions and attending rallies (Anderson, 2009; Monday et al., 2010; Vecchione & Caprara, 2009)


Neuroticism is a negative trait for a politician to possess because being anxious is detrimental for political performance.


Political Skill is of importance for charming & manipulating people, webbing networks and is an important factor influencing political and managerial performance. (Andrews, Kalmar, & Harris, 2009; Gentry, Gilmore, Shuffler, & Leslie, 2012; Todd, Harris, Harris, & Wheeler, 2009)


Machiavellianism, a skill needing no further introduction but still receiving one, is the likelihood of a person to attempt to manipulate other people for his own gain (Christie & Gees, 1970, Biberman, 1985; Drory & Gluskinos, 1980; Grams & Rogers, 1990). Machiavellianism according to the definition of the word, influence political performance positively. This is not necessarily the case (Deluga, 1998; Pillai, Williams, Lowe, & Jung, 2003) for electorial results, because voters prefer a candidate who comes across as trustworthy. Hence the modern prince must at least give the impression of being honest, while concealing his true intentions (Me, 2016). A hypothesis of this study was, that Machiavellianism would most likely have a negative influence on political performance.


 


To summarize the method and research question:


1) Competency analysis of how behaviour and personality traits are affecting political performance.

2) Testing the connection between various performances constructs that politicians with a certain skill degree share.

The candidate’s questions were all politicians and employed officers in local authorities.



Results:


Politicians share similar ideas about what constitutes political performance.

Their general hypothesis was true and personality traits as well as character did indeed influence perceived performance.

The hypothesis that conscientiousness influences political performance was partly true.

Extroversion, just like Narcissism, led the politician to estimate their performance level much higher than it actually was perceived.

A correlation between Machiavellianism and self perceived PK has been proven, as well as a negative effect on self-rated RS, RP, and RO.

Agreeableness has been shown to be beneficial for Representing people, but negative for Politicking (PK).

Openness has no influence on anything. But another result of the study “determined” the following, a little contradictory statement:

Apparently Politicking (secrecy, dishonesty and a lust for political blood sport) is a negative trait for politicians. Yeah, you absolutely should tell politicians, that they need to stop concealing their intentions and say more than necessary. That they need to avoid competition in the form of political maneuvering, acquiring and maintaining power, as well as dishonesty…


Neuroticism, conscientiousness, and political skill correlated significantly with politician RS and AS. There also seems to be a correlation between conscientiousness, agreeableness, Machiavellianism, and PK, though not significant.

RO wasn’t influenced by any personality trait.

Extroversion did not significantly correlate with political performance (tell that to all the introverts running the country. What? Can’t find any? Tough luck… While I do agree that introversion does have various benefits regarding skills like forging alliances and projecting calmness, they are not unique to introverts and can be seen with many introverts. But hey, I do not have 3 titles in valuable fields like occupational psychology or diversity, so what do I know?)

Politicians who are deemed good performers have the following traits: More resilient (no research was done on the question if they are merely resilient or anti-fragile but it would not come as a surprise to me if the researchers are not familiar with Nazism Nicholas Taleb), able to represent others and a highly developed Analytical Skill.

The results, while superficially insightful, lead me to my criticism of this study.


Criticism:


Despite this being one of the most comprehensive studies, the sample was relatively small and one must not draw an eager conclusion based upon this study, presenting it as a fact. While the method used seems accurate, there is no guarantee that 1) the politicians answered and assessed themselves accurately and 2) that the observers who judged the politicians were able to give an accurate judgment.


Regarding the notion that extroversion doesn’t have a positive effect on political performance: You should totally tell that to all the introverts running the country. What? Can’t find any? Tough luck… While I do agree that introversion does have various benefits regarding skills like forging alliances and projecting calmness, they are not unique to introverts and can be seen with many introverts. But hey, I do not have 3 titles in valuable fields like occupational psychology or diversity, so what do I know? Do you know if the people who proclaimed themselves to be extroverts have been judged by others to be introverts because they appear calm and quiet? I can only recommend the authors to read up on stoicism. Mediations by Marcus Aurelius would be an excellent start.


What about different countries? Different social background? Parties they belong to? Other personality traits like being proactive or the IQ? These questions have not been answered but in my opinion are a huge indicator for political effectiveness.

Ergo one can conclude that this study offers valuable insight into a small, specialized segment of British politicians that may or may not be applied to other slightly different environments. Further research is required and this study is unable to give a definite answer to the questions asked by the occupational psychology & diversity researchers.

So can we conclude that this study was a failure? Yes and no. Yes for mankind, no for the researches since in the last paragraph before the acknowledgments they give the real reason for their study. The aim was not necessarily to answer the call for bigger, more expression ate studies in this sector it actually was, and I quote the researchers:

“to increase awareness of the importance of political work. Classical political theorists and historians, such as Aristotle, Plato, and Machiavelli, devoted considerable attention to what constitutes good democratic leadership and how it might be achieved (Glad, 2002). By continuing this work and studying politicians as political workers, we argue that I/O psychologists could bring a unique perspective to one of the most important questions for the 21st century, namely how can elected representatives deliver good government?”


What does this tell us, what can we take away from this study? It is not a study one can look towards hoping his questions to be answered in a satisfactory way but we can draw an irrefutable connection between this study and the work – of Florentine strategist and father of political science as well as Realpolitik- The Prince. Its main purpose is a job application.

Now some individuals may argue that despite this commonality there also are a lot of differences, one being that The Prince already prepares the magnificent Lorenzo Di Medici that The Prince must not only to be seen as a manual for a ruler who wants to both acquire and maintain power, but also a job application. This study doesn’t reveal its real purpose, the attempt to increase the value of their current jobs, until the very last page.

Now this obvious fact doesn’t make the results of the study untrue, though the criticism I gave does devalue it and the study must be read while taking into account all of my posed questions.


 


Congratulations, you now know why to not trust everything someone with a couple of fancy titles says and you really belong to the elite inner circle of Machiavellians, since digging through such an article demands dedication and highlights your interest for the art of power.