How sociopathic/psychopathic are politicians?
There’s a lot of talk these days about politicians and other public figures who have been described as “sociopathic” or “psychopathic”. Is either label appropriate?
I well remember giving evidence at a parole hearing some years ago [NB: parole in the UK is normally available only to life sentence prisoners]. Because it was popular with the Parole Board, I had carried out an assessment of the applicant using the Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R). This is a widely used instrument which claims to measure psychopathic traits on a 40-point scale. A score of 30 or more is said to be evidence of psychopathy. The prisoner in this case had scored just 9 points, which would be scored by many people in the general population. The psychiatrist on the parole panel observed that this wasn’t a very high score. He went on: “it’s hardly high enough to be a politician, is it?”
Depending on how cynical we are feeling at the time, there is a tendency to suggest that politicians are all “in it for themselves”. Anyone who has been helped or supported by their elected representative is likely to dispute that. However, it has also been suggested that anyone who seeks high office demonstrates thereby that they are unfit to occupy it. And there is always Lord Acton’s famous dictum: “all power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely”. In other words, anyone who remains in high office for long is likely to end up with a highly undesirable character, even if they didn’t have it to begin with.
So, what do the terms “sociopath” and “psychopath” even mean? There has been a tendency to use them interchangeably, not only in the media, but also in professional circles. For this reason, I’m not sure there is much distinction between them. However, the term “sociopath” is often used as an alternative for “antisocial personality disorder”, which is widely used by professionals, and is a category in the two main classification schedules of psychiatric disorders used by them (the DSM and the ICD-10). It refers to a personality characterised by impulsiveness, lack of consideration for others, offending, and violence. The whole subject is not helped by the fact that some psychiatrists refuse to recognise the existence of personality disorders at all. However, those who do use the term are inclined to suggest that the term “psychopath” refers to a subcategory of those with antisocial personality disorder. In addition to the other characteristics, psychopaths are said to be very narcissistic with an inflated sense of their own worth, very manipulative, often good at bilking and defrauding others, and profoundly lacking in empathy. It is fair to say that not everyone recognises the concept of psychopathy, and that not everyone would use the PCL-R to assess it. It has, however, become so popular that the PCL-R is often treated as if it were the very definition of psychopathy. I’ve gone into this subject in my book Bad Psychology. Whatever the technical definitions, there is wide agreement that those people who attract the label of “psychopath” are manipulative, dishonest, and lacking in empathy. Even in their personal lives, they demonstrate a lack of emotional commitment to relationships, a willingness to use them for personal gain, and to terminate them without warning if they feel like it. As a result of their personality characteristics they often come into conflict with the law, though they rarely accept responsibility for their offences.
As well as writing a non-fiction book on the subject, I have written a fictional account of someone who has been classified as a psychopath, The Psychopath’s Checklist. It concerns a criminal who doesn’t think he deserves the label of “psychopath”, and disputes his PCL-R rating, though he certainly behaves badly until one day his circumstances change dramatically. But a career in crime is not necessarily a characteristic of psychopaths. Indeed, the developer of the PCL-R, Dr Robert Hare, co-wrote a book about noncriminal psychopaths called Snakes in Suits. So, what about politicians? Are they some of the snakes in suits that Doctor Hare was referring to? I think the first thing to say is that most politicians, like most people in general, are unlikely to be particularly psychopathic. They are often well educated people, with a good track record in professional or business life, and without a criminal record. Psychopathic individuals rarely have a record of educational or business success, because they are not generally prepared to put in the work necessary to achieve these things. On the other hand, they often have a criminal record.
Nonetheless, I would like to conduct a PCL-R assessment on certain politicians. Characteristics I would look for would include:
exaggerated statements about one’s achievements and abilities
proclaiming great plans that are not followed by great results
a tendency to seek office, but not the work that it entails
blaming others for the results of one’s own poor decisions
frequent falling out with former political allies
using one’s office for financial gain
claiming great successes when in fact the results of one’s policies have been mediocre
frequent lying and denial that one said or did various unfortunate things
In private life, one might expect evidence of:
frequent relationship failures, and marital offences like infidelity or abuse
business failures such as bankruptcies and/or being dismissed for misconduct
dubious business practices, which could in some cases be criminal
and again, blaming others for one’s own deficiencies
Neither of these lists is necessarily exhaustive, but they are the main things I would expect to see in someone with high levels of psychopathic characteristics, who had nevertheless managed to stay out of prison and get into office. I honestly don’t think that most politicians would fit this pattern at all, at least not in a democracy. I might feel differently about some political systems, especially those in which people have seized office, rather than being elected through a genuine and transparent democratic vote.
But I would hazard a guess that most of us can think of some politicians, including some in high office, who do display the characteristics listed above. I name no names, but leave that up to you…..