Corruptible?

[french frank]

I came across the personality "Dark Triad" (Machiavellianism, narcissism, psycopathy) twice this week. I first met it a few days ago in a Prospect podcast with the political scientist Brian Klaas, and again today in a Guardian article (on maskwearing). The podcast was discussing, "Does power corrupt or do the corrupt choose power?"

Given that those inveterate travellers on the Clapham omnibus, 'most people', are decent and honest, why do our leaders often turn out to be bad/corrupt? Is it just that leadership offers all the opportunities for corruption, or is a particular personality type attracted to leadership and power? And, in a democracy, what safeguards can be put in place to protect that democracy?

Thirty-minute podcast here.

[mikealdren]

It really depends on how you define corruption.

Ultimately, most people act out of self interest and politicians tend to build their personal empires as well as doing their political jobs. If we go back to the pre-labour party days when politicians had to be self-financing, this was obviously expected. The biggest issues nowadays is that MPs are paid relatively well compared with the average wage but poorly compared with their peers (not the Peers!); it's hardly surprising that people of ability try to maximise their earnings.

There is also the issue that an MP's job is not for life and they may have to return to a career outside politics. For those with professions, this probably means they have to 'keep their hand in' while working as MPs.

Of course, some stretch the limits of what is acceptable and in our modern, rule based world, we increasingly legislate about what is and isn't acceptable.

[RichardB]

... and the related question "does being in the police force make people violent racists or are violent racists attracted to joining the police force?"...

I would say that such questions are the wrong ones to ask. A better question might be "why does the system we live in create such a close relationship between power and corruption, whichever way around the influence goes, and what can be done about it?" The competitive politics of modern states rewards the unscrupulous. It depends on the conviction that representative democracy is a fair way to apportion political roles, but it's inherently open to being hijacked by those whose ambition is greater than their sense of public service (as we see every day).

On the other hand, anyone can be called for jury duty at any time, and might then be given responsibility over issues which might have far-reaching consequences not just for the individuals involved in that particular case but perhaps, through precedent, for society more generally. Nobody would claim it would be a fairer system for people to be elected for jury duty by popular vote. So why not allot political functions the same way as jury duty?

[french frank]

... and the related question "does being in the police force make people violent racists or are violent racists attracted to joining the police force?"...

I'd forgotten that one - yes. And in as far as they go I think those questions are valid, even if the fault, dear Brutus, is not in ourselves but in the system.

[Frances_iom]

I came across the personality "Dark Triad" (Machiavellianism, narcissism, psycopathy) twice this week....and again today in a Guardian article (on maskwearing)..

that article says more about a certain smug nature of Grauniad writers - no doubt in past they would have supported burning of witches - the latest (I think) BMJ article http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2729 actually comments that maybe 10% is the effect, just make sure you read past the 53% in the 1st paragraph.

[Serial_Apologist]

In an economic system in which competitiveness and provisionality are markers of "success" it should not surprise that the "trickle down" model of virtuousness should recommend individual advantage over social and environmental needs, and those at the top of the pyramid benefit most. The various religious models characterising human nature as at base selfish don't help, and undoubtedly contributed to the problem in the first place. I've mentioned previously why I think it is that humans fall for such myths.

[RichardB]

In an economic system in which competitiveness and provisionality are markers of "success" it should not surprise that the "trickle down" model of virtuousness should recommend individual advantage over social and environmental needs, and those at the top of the pyramid benefit most. The various religious models characterising human nature as at base selfish don't help, and undoubtedly contributed to the problem in the first place.

Yes. I just finished Graeber and Wengrow's The Dawn of Everything which is essential reading for anyone with an interest in such things. It's in the interest of those at the top of any hierarchical structure to justify it in terms of human nature, whereas in fact human history displays an enormous variety of social systems, some hierarchical and/or authoritarian, some not, and that there's nothing inevitable about a system that rewards the kinds of things that capitalism does.

[Bryn]

that article says more about a certain smug nature of Grauniad writers - no doubt in past they would have supported burning of witches - the latest (I think) BMJ article http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2729 actually comments that maybe 10% is the effect, just make sure you read past the 53% in the 1st paragraph.

The relevant paragraph reads:

"Talic and colleagues’ review includes just one randomised controlled trial that evaluated mask wearing, and it was too small for a reliable estimate of effect (18% reduction in incidence for the wearer, 95% confidence interval −23% to 46%).5 The authors mention, but did not include, a large cluster randomised trial of mask wearing from Bangladesh, currently available as a preprint.6 The trial randomised 600 villages (341 830 adults) to surgical masks, cloth masks, or control and found a 9% (95% confidence interval 0% to 18%) relative reduction in symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection (measured by seroprevalence) in villages randomised to the mask interventions. Combined, these two randomised trials suggest that mask wearing is responsible for a statistically significant relative risk reduction of about 10% in incidence (95% confidence interval 1% to 18%)—important but substantially less than that from observational studies. A third large cluster trial (40 000 participants) from Guinea-Bissau has completed and should report soon.7"

The 10% refers specifically to the efficacy re protecting the wearer, not that relating to others, i.e. the reduction in the level of virus-infused droplets and aerosol emited.

[french frank]

It really depends on how you define corruption.

Yes, in this context it mainly concerns public service. Being an MP, for example, is supposed to a (more than) fulltime job. If anyone is earning very large sums from doing other work, it's fair to ask in what way that impacts on a fulltime job? Does it eat into the hours or does someone expect some advantage from it? If not, why do they pay you so much?

Ultimately, most people act out of self interest and politicians tend to build their personal empires as well as doing their political jobs.

That may be a generalisation! Some people are dedicated to public service, and that will certainly apply to some MPs.

MPs are paid relatively well compared with the average wage but poorly compared with their peers (not the Peers!); it's hardly surprising that people of ability try to maximise their earnings.

I can't be alone in finding the ideal of 'maximising' their earnings as distasteful. That spells greed.

Of course, some stretch the limits of what is acceptable and in our modern, rule based world, we increasingly legislate about what is and isn't acceptable.

Necessarily in some cases. Mumbling about voters being able to get rid of their MPs if they're not satisfied comes from the defenders of corruption - in the form of the current voting system.

A feature that interests me because it seems to become stronger and stronger is 'tribalism': something which predates capitalism. It's about forming groups and adopting methods which ensure the survival of the in-group, if necessary at the expense pf the out-group.

[Frances_iom]

....

The 10% refers specifically to the efficacy re protecting the wearer, not that relating to others, i.e. the reduction in the level of virus-infused droplets and aerosol emited.

no they are looking at overall control - my opinion is that face masks were designed for bacterial control (and if you look at the published specifications they only quote for much larger entities than a virus even a virus associated with a tiny aerosol) - they are undoubtedly correct in saying a modest effect but one gained by a raft of methods of which IMO social distance is the only effective one - most mask wearing IMO, is more of a symbolic than practical measure .

[mikealdren]

Yes, I agree about tribalism, sadly the downside of that is seen at football matches and in racism.

[Bryn]

no they are looking at overall control - my opinion is that face masks were designed for bacterial control (and if you look at the published specifications they only quote for much larger entities than a virus even a virus associated with a tiny aerosol) - they are undoubtedly correct in saying a modest effect but one gained by a raft of methods of which IMO social distance is the only effective one - most mask wearing IMO, is more of a symbolic than practical measure .

" . . . reduction in incidence for the wearer . . . " regarding the first survey, no clear repudiation of that limitation in the second. Are you suggesting, perhaps, that the two surveys are statistically incompatible?

[french frank]

Yes, I agree about tribalism, sadly the downside of that is seen at football matches and in racism.

More widely than that: people seem to more readily identify with those who think alike: Remainers/Leavers, maskers/anti-maskers, Unionists/nationalists, vaxxers/anti vaxxers, Tory-govt/anti-Tory, anti-government. Racism, yes. It's almost as if people are looking out for the markers to decide which side they're on. Differences of opinion are one thing; hostility and aggression towards people who think differently is a whole different matter.

Leaders like Trump and Johnson are 'corrupt' in flouting or manipulating democratically settled laws and procedures to benefit themselves and their friends.

[Frances_iom]

" . . . reduction in incidence for the wearer . . . " regarding the first survey, no clear repudiation of that limitation in the second. Are you suggesting, perhaps, that the two surveys are statistically incompatible?

basically they could not separate out the components - enthusiastic handwashers were also enthusiastic mask wearers and kept social distance, without looking up the reference I suggest they were based on social questionnaires - such enthusiasts can be recognised even today wearing a mask in an empty street etc - at least M&S now no longer to wipe down each self service machine after use but judging from comments here and on other forums there are still some who quarantine incoming mail for a day and it seems throw detol or similar around like holy water.
That said only a self contained air supply could protect one in a pre-covid-like rush hour on the northern line tho must admit having to cross London around 8.30am on the tube is now almost pleasant.

[Cockney Sparrow]

I found myself wearing my mask on the High St as its a faff stowing my spectales (I can see, just not make out smaller type; but I can't see through misted lenses) and stowing the mask between shops.

On the basis that I've no idea what people have been doing, I spray basket handles with rubbing alcohol, and do the same to my finger / knuckle after using self service machine screens or pin pads.

I take the point that its an airborne virus on very small particles, but I think the above is basic caution and might avert flu or some other infection as well. Its a small concession to wear a mask and a courtesy to others, in my view - in particular the shop workers or workers in other settings who are inside for hours at a stretch.