Bullying and scam-artistry, is learning to manage these the basis of good leadership in society?

Not strictly an immediate current affair, per se.

But definitely a point of view on a potentially serious and controversial topic, that unquestionably affects current affairs, society, and I believe is responsible for the determination of matters of national policy and police-work/enforcement-of-law.

It may not even compute for how many view things, but I was considering, how you get people to "do" things.

People management, in a sense. Situational management.

When some people speak, you listen, and take orders from them well. In some cases are happy to do so.

Others you may think, "pffff, jog on you incompetent".

Thinking of many male leaders, being assertive is just a given. But it goes beyond being assertive, you have to know there's ramifications if assertions aren't complied with.

......

What it all boils down to is, how we feel, determines how we act or re-act.

That is to say, the emotional affect others have on us, determines how we respond to them (cognitive science 1.0.1., or if anyone has experience with CBT, cognitive behaviour therapy, you'll know first lesson is emotions -> determine actions).

So what I'm saying is, two behavioral characterizations that have the most acute, lasting and potentially devastating emotional affect on others are

1) to bully them

2) to scam them

If you think back to your school days, the "cool" kids, or the kids that others respected/were-afraid-of, did their behavior encapsulate elements of either of these?

Was there a bully side to them, or were they known for scam-artist related behavior, or a mix of both?

This extended into adulthood, what makes a quality leader? Someone who encapsulates elements of these characteristics thus can exhibit powerful influence?

Or someone particularly adept at managing them, developing the character to effortlessly contend with bullying/scam-artistry, whilst exhibiting a more positive and productive outcome?

Think of some of the most heinous autocracy and dictatorships in recent history.

Don't have to look to far.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has been almost universally characterized by democratic leaders as "bullying".

And I think Put-in's behavior before and during his illegal invasion unquestionably presents some nasty elements of scam artistry........ "oh, we're di-Nazi'fying your country...... now excuse us whilst our army plunders and violates your citizens, women and children...... but we're doing it in the name of righteousness...... I swear!"

Idi Amin, the butcher of Uganda. The epitome of a bully.

etc.

corner of hells

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058248605/bullying-and-scam-artistry-is-learning-to-manage-these-the-basis-of-good-leadership-in-society

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151583#Comment_119151583

Why didn't you write one big post of shite instead of two smaller ones ?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151644#Comment_119151644

I figured such an intellectually challenging topic would be more approachable being broken into bite-size pieces.

joeguevara

bullying is calling someone fat or excluding them from lunch.

what is happening in Ukraine is war crimes…with the amount increasing on a daily basis.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-60690688.amp

https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/3498235-ireland-recognizes-russias-crimes-as-genocide-against-ukrainian-people.html

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151655#Comment_119151655

Your op reads like gibberish you'd write if you're stoned

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151706#Comment_119151706

The mechanics of the universe operate on a high level of abstraction relative to the day to day intellectual complexity of the average human thought process.

Civilization (the basis of life quality) is the counter measure to degeneracy.

Those who go through their entire lives using bullying and scam-artistry to profit, are degenerates.

But the reality is, many do it and do quite well.

Basically being maggots off the backs of genuine contributing folk.

.....

So, to manage a bully = one must out bully them.

To manage a scam artist = one must out scam-artist them.

But precluding degeneracy = the means and outcome must ultimately lend itself to productivity/well-being.

......

So riddle me that, my learned "Current Affairs/IMHO" minds!?

kirk.

Look no further than the Tory front bench for scammers and bullies

Not sure I follow your queries probably cos your IQ is so high

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151735#Comment_119151735

Look no further than the Tory front bench for scammers and bullies

Examples? (what behavior do they exhibit that meets such criteria).

Not sure I follow your queries probably cos your IQ is so high

What part are you struggling with specifically?

Ten of Swords

Mod - This is not a CA, moved to AH

joeguevara

What exactly is your point?

just for reference Idi amin’s death toll is estimated between 80,000 and 300,000.

o1s1n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151735#Comment_119151735

You'd need to be on DMT to follow the OPs posts, I wouldn't worry about it ;)

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058248605/bullying-and-scam-artistry-is-learning-to-manage-these-the-basis-of-good-leadership-in-society

The mark of effective manipulation is that the other person is completely unaware that they are being manipulated. Whether it's based on marketing, behavioural science, NLP, social dynamics, sales techniques or whatever.

Your vision is too limited.

Bullying is clumsy and generally creates resistance. That's bad because your ideas aren't being accepted, and without acceptance, you'll never assume any kind of authority in the situation.

Same with scam, because scamming is based on a lie. The whole message/communication is tarnished from the beginning by that lie, and so, your ability to convince others has an expiry date. Especially nowadays that people are more aware of scams, and trickery whether it's the media, the politicians, or mainstream advertising, people are far more aware of emotional manipulation, and the techniques used to anchor emotions to particular actions or verbal cues.

People management is a completely different scenario because ultimately the believe is rooted in improving the capabilities of that other person, and most recipients are aware of that, so there's less resistance to external beliefs. General management is different but operates under many of the same limitations.

Although, I'd recommend that you don't lean so heavily on psychological science to reinforce your beliefs on the topic. Psychology, in spite of it's general acceptance in society, isn't as reliable as people want to make it out to be. It forces categorisation on to others, through the assumption of authority, but it's still somewhat iffy as to the consequences. Many psychologists end up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy when identifying and treating others "problems".

So.. honestly, I'd direct you to the 80s/90s aspects of social programming, marketing theory related to market/behavioural science, and some of the videos by Richard Bandler (not because he's perfect, but because he had some amazing insights into how people interacted with each other, and how a person could step into those interactions). NLP has a lot of flaws, as does all techniques/belief systems, but it's pretty good at identifying behaviours and how to manage them. But as with all such things, it's best to take a little from everything, and not focus on any one methodology.

Because from your post, you seem rather scattered, meshing scenarios together even though what happens and how it happens is unrelated.

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151762#Comment_119151762

If I’m reading the OP correctly his/her’s thesis is that any dictator e.g is a bully or a scam artist whose speeches/policies either bullies their followers into committing heinous acts. The reason for this is either pure bullying (manipulation) or by scamming them with a particular outcome. Not really anything groundbreaking.

take hitter

bin laden

and now putin

But the word bully is a bit of a stretch.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151781#Comment_119151781

Ahh I guess I misunderstood. I though he was referring in his OP to general manipulation/bullying/scamming others, so the effect of emotions on communication.

Hmm. Ah well.

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151787#Comment_119151787

Honestly, my interpretation was trying to give the benefit of the doubt and looking for a reason for the post. But my background is war crimes and law of armed conflict and to classify people like amin, kony and putin as bullies is bizarre to say the least.

One aspect of the corporate ideology that has taken over a lot of the western world the last 20 years is this push towards leadership..

Surely being a leader is the last thing you should be?..When you have foresight, wisdom etc..

What you see now is a load of narcissistic idiots running around going "I'm a leader.."

I dunno is it a way of getting people to push themselves to work more?..(It does seem to have grown out of the corporate world..)

Like, A lot of our current problems are down to being led by midwits..

kirk.

This cult of the leader is a strange one

It's like we need a father figure to tell us how it is

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151852#Comment_119151852

Is it not a bit of a cop out to call support of heinous leader or indeed a regime a cult. Take for example Russia’s support of the current Ukrainian war stands at over 55%. Even worse is a similar amount of US support of Israel in Palestine. Not really a cult where it’s members are completely manipulated in a control setting.

kirk.

Leaders are dangerous anyhow

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151887#Comment_119151887

Leaders are not per se dangerous. Dangerous leaders can be.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151887#Comment_119151887

Not really. It's culture, and the forming of the mob that is dangerous, because then leaders can tap into the emotional current that leads the mob mentality towards certain excessive acts. Emotion over sound logic. Whenever we see dangerous leaders come into power, and exercise that power, it's due to the national culture that enables their position as being unassailable, unquestionable, etc. usually leading to others, the enemy, being classed as inferior or a threat of some manner. Emotion over logic.

Leaders assume power that is given to them by others. So we should be considering the others that enable the dangerous leaders to be dangerous. Without them, the leader becomes just another voice in the background, easily ignored or dismissed.

kirk.

The office of leader is dangerous because of the power it bestows in some cases

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151920#Comment_119151920

And yet, they're necessary because committees without leaders never manage to do anything. Groups and biases form.. usually leading to paralysis. Leaders are a requirement in any system created/maintained by humans, and the abuse of power through that position is inevitable.

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151920#Comment_119151920

But the vast majority of leaders are not dangerous so the office itself is not dangerous. Equally it is clear that a leader is not as powerful as people think.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151931#Comment_119151931

Would you rank the office of prime minister here and president of Russia as equally dangerous

A dangerous man here won't start WW3

joeguevara

But in any case it would be great if we understood exactly what the OP is discussing. There is a huge difference between a leader of a body corporate and war criminals like putin, amin or kony. So to discuss leaders behaviours and actions legitimately it needs to be scoped out what the playing field is.

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151934#Comment_119151934

Well firstly, what do you mean by here? We don’t have a prime minister. But if you mean Taoiseach, then no, he is not as dangerous.

what is your point?

fritzelly

Is there a tl;dr?

kirk.

I've speedread the ops posts a couple of times now not sure I want to read them at slow pace

It's hard to define exactly what's he's on about , something to do with the characteristics of people being led or some other such nonsense

joeguevara

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151963#Comment_119151963

In all fairness at the very crux of their argument it holds merit. Leaders like Stalin, hitler, amin and putin must have bullied or scammed their followers into tacit agreement with their policies and actions.

However the tag of a bully belittles what they were. Also not all leaders are dangerous. Other than that I’m at a loss!

dogbert27

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151811#Comment_119151811

I agree on the narcissistic idiots running around going "I'm a leader..." being fed from the likes of Simon Sinek who started of unsurprisingly in marketing.

He's created this myth and developed a cult like following with his books Leaders eat last and Start with why.

Everybody has to find their why bullsxxt and you don't have to be have a title of leader to be a leader.

Jequ0n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151963#Comment_119151963

Their OPs never make much sense, so this one is no difference.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119151972#Comment_119151972

Why>? Hitler tapped into the bitterness over the Treaty of Versailles and the historical racial superiority common among German people (and to be fair it was a common enough belief in other empires). Sure, he intimidated opponents through the use of the Brownshirts, but he gained enormous support by using conditions already existing and giving people what they wanted. Stalin worked his way up through the ranks of communism, a system that was already brutal and manipulative before he gained power, and then, used the conditioning already present in society (from Tzarist days) to rule over everyone. He could have done it all without his brutal paranoia, as other communist leaders have shown. Putin sold the idea of a powerful and unified Russia to everyone, and the need for reunification of former Soviet territories... which is quite reasonable from a Russian pov. There's always been a vein of superiority when it comes to Russians and he used that.

Oh, Bullying and lying are definitely present in all such leadership styles, but it was the national culture in each instance, along with the general population who allowed them to behave that way.