Understanding the political megalomaniac and their supporters

Philosophy Forums Psychology and Mind
1

How can a megalomaniac be good for a democracy?

What can be said of those who choose to elect and support a megalomaniac for public office?

Following is Google AI on those who use political office to name things after themselves.

Focus: Obsession with absolute power and greatness

Goal: To control large populations and be feared.

View of others: Believes they have a “destiny” to rule others

Delusions of Grandeur: Megalomaniacs believe they are more important, powerful, or “special” than they truly are. Naming a public asset after oneself during their own tenure suggests a belief that their individual identity is synonymous with the state or the institution.

Need for Immortality: Experts note that such behavior often stems from a desire to secure a “lasting legacy” and a sense of being “immortal”.

Authoritarian Style: Historically, this behavior is most closely associated with autocrats and strongmen (such as Roman emperors or modern dictators) rather than leaders in representative democracies. In democratic systems, landmarks are traditionally named by others after a leader has left office or passed away.

Fragile Self-Esteem: Psychologically, these grandiose displays are often a defense mechanism to mask deep-seated insecurities or a fear of being perceived as "unworthy

Using public office for self-naming aligns with several core characteristics of megalomania and “toponymic narcissism” (an obsession with naming places after oneself).

A person who uses political office to name infrastructure, institutions, or landmarks after themselves fits the clinical and historical definitions of a megalomaniac quite closely.

1 Like
2

I think you are referring to the current political situation in USA, however I believe the issue is bigger and spans all western countries.

Due to the economic challenges and rapid social changes (mainly due to a) the fast growth of technology and the development of internet and social media, b) large migration waves), the last decades people have the tendency to vote “antisystemic” choices. Sometimes the choices can range from megalomaniac to comedic or utterly clueless potential leaders. As long as they present themselves as “politicians against the current system”, they become beloved by a significant portion of the voters.

I have no idea how such tendency can be reversed. Everyone can read anything stupid that circulates the internet and consider it real, especially if it presents a conspiracy theory in “logical way”. Now with AI things got worse.

Is there a risk for the democracy overall? Yes, in my opinion there is. Many people today mock the democratic systems because of the prolonged economic crises and the rapid social changes. The historical memory has faded drastically and we do not study what was like when monarchies or dictatorships were in power.

3

“those who choose to elect and support a megalomaniac for public office?”

But you have no other option. For anyone to willingly participate as a politician in any of the current systems operating on erf, they have to be either a sociopath or an imbecile (an even well-intentioned one).

A proper politician in today’s world would be a politician just long enough to do the resignation paperwork and not a second longer.

That being said, it’s difficult to know which ones are the sociopaths and which ones the imbeciles… and it’s even possible to be both at the same time… which means it’s possible for a moron to be granted so much power that he can be a sociopath. The Don is an example. He’s an imbecile because he couldn’t keep a job at Taco Bell if he tried, much less become a millionaire… but through the artificial advantage given to him (from other bourgeoisie and the capital from his wage-slave exploits) he is able to be a massively powerful imbecilic sociopath.

And to the extent that you actually vote you’re either more or less of an impotent imbecile depending on which fraud you vote for.

4

See below for what Google AI says about another megalomaniac in relatively recent history. The parallels are striking.

There are other parallels as well. As an example for all intents and purposes, the underlying concepts of “Make Germany great again” and “Germany for Germans” were foundational to Nazi Germany. Through propaganda and disinformation issues with immigrants were greatly exaggerated. This is far from coincidence. It’s the same playbook.

Again, what can be said of those who choose to elect and support a megalomaniac for public office?

From Google AI:
Adolf Hitler is widely characterized by historians, psychologists, and contemporary accounts as a megalomaniac due to his delusional fantasies of power, omnipotence, and an inflated sense of self-importance.

Retrospective psychological assessments often link Hitler’s behavior to several severe pathologies:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder: His extreme grandiosity, lack of empathy, and pathological need for recognition are central to modern analyses.

Schizophrenic Traits: Some experts, such as Henry Murray, noted classic symptoms including paranoia, omnipotence fantasies, and grandiose delusions.

Borderline and Paranoid Personality: He has been described as a “borderline paranoid schizophrenic” and a “paranoid, manic-depressive megalomaniac”.

Evidence of Megalomania in Action

Architectural Grandeur: Hitler planned massive, “megalomaniac structures” for Berlin and Munich, such as a gigantic boulevard and the “Führer’s Building,” intended to reflect the eternal power of the Third Reich.

Military Overreach: His refusal to listen to military experts and his belief in his own infallible strategic genius led to catastrophic decisions, such as the invasion of the Soviet Union and declaring war on the United States.

Messiah Complex: Especially after surviving a mustard gas attack in 1918, Hitler viewed himself as a savior chosen by destiny for a “national rebirth”.

5

You can call them any name you like: stupid, misguided, fascists etc. It perhaps makes you feel better, but what usually happens is that these people will react with more support to that politician.

The point is to convince the voters to stop voting those megalomaniacs. Name-calling the megalomaniacs or his/her voters leads to nowhere. That is the usual mistake of the political opponents. The latter need to concentrate on fixing wrong policies that drive voters away.

6

There is a wide gulf between a megalomaniac and someone who is merely “clueless”. Doesnt make logical sense to lump them together.

Demagoguery targets those having self-centered and/or simplistic views. Typically the two go hand-in-hand. They are emotionally and/or mentally immature. By and large, they are the only ones that “can read anything stupid that circulates the internet and consider it real”. They are also prone to xenophobia, racism, homophobia, following fundamentalist religions, etc. This is not true of those who have matured.

See the above.

7

Actually it isn’t. See my response to @ghatzige above.

Neither are fit for public office.

8

The majority of the voters choose according to their pockets. When your ability to have affordable life drops every year, you do not continue to vote those that do nothing to improve the economy. Making a political campaign with principal target to discuss how bad the opponent is does not bring votes.

Hitler was the “best” ruler from 33 to 39, because the German economy rised quickly. People closed their eyes on the social policies and enjoyed the economic blooming, plus the first victories which made them feeling proud.

9

Have a clueless person in a position of power, where lives or economies are at stake and you will understand the dangers.

10

and toss in the narcissism. Man, he was high functioning if these were the case. Narcissistic people can be pretty high functioning, but there is a huge burden of pain and the denial of that pain. Add in these other diagnoses and you’ve got someone who could not possibly have become the leader of a country. They’d have trouble getting out of bed, staying out of prison, taking care of hygiene and stringing together speeches or plans or anything at all.

11

People get the government they deserve. That is democracy. Hence why western governments today are complete tyrannical corrupt shit. Because that is what they people deserve. They bought into it, they keep voting for it, they do nothing to change it or makes things better, they do not demand or work for a better world. So this is exactly what they ought to be getting, and are getting it. Trump for example, is the perfect example of democracy functioning exactly as it is supposed to function.

12

Actually it is a perfect example of the glaring deficiencies of democracy, as it was with Hitler.

13

How so?

From what I can see, this is exactly what the people deserve. They are mostly lazy, selfish and do not care about the world beyond their own narrow self-interest. They are consumers and addicted to entertainment, and all the political effort they put in is to vote for the same system that keeps raping the planet, lying to them and tyrannizing the entire world.

How exactly should we expect democracy to function differently than to give such a people anything other than the worst possible kind of government and leaders?