I would suspect sociopaths and psychopaths are more likely to be politically conservative, because conservatism tends to be more about self-interest while liberalism/leftism is concerned with social justice, which very few psychopaths would take interest in unless it was to make themselves look good.
I’d guess that libertarianism and Objectivism are especially popular among sociopaths and psychopaths, since selfishness is viewed as a virtue in these ideologies.
Then again, if an individual psychopath was part of some minority group they might be a liberal because they value their own rights.
I think this kind of mapping of psychopaths onto some part of the political spectrum is always going to be highly misleading. Psychopaths brains function in a qualitatively different way, so they do not map to any part of the spectrum of non-psychopathic human behavior.
You’re arguing that psychopaths are selfish (agreed); and that conservatives care about “self-interest”, so psychopaths are probably conservatives. But (and I say this as a liberal) that’s a gross misrepresentation of what conservatism is about. Intentionally or not, you’re tarring conservatives — if all psychopaths are Republicans, what does that tell us about Republicans? [Answer: nothing at all].
Radicals and extremists of every stripe tend to have psychopathic tendencies. (Often with a healthy dose of narcissism mixed in.) I don’t think you’re going to find any specific idealogical correlation amongst psychopaths other than what would be useful to their own ends at that point in time.
I’d actually say that liberals are more selfish than conservatives; liberals want social welfare, provided by The State, and paid for by other taxpayers. IOW, something-for-nothing.
Plus, liberals are more childish; they see that someone else has more than them (more money, better home, better job) and feel that that “other person” doesn’t deserve their success/hasn’t earned it, and that they (the liberal) deserves some “equality of outcome” guaranteed by The State, and, again, some other tax-paying citizen gets to foot the bill for it.
I’m not sure about that. Most people have some psychopathic tendencies, I view it as a spectrum. Psychopaths are still human, they just represent an extreme. I don’t think anyone is entirely devoid of emotion, unless they were born without a brain.
I admit “conservatism = selfishness” is overly simplistic, and there are plenty of decent human beings who are conservatives, but as a liberal wouldn’t you agree that overall conservative ideology is more selfish? Many conservatives don’t want rights for minorities, they don’t want to protect the poor and disabled, they lack regard for the environment.
Actually one difference between the typical conservative and the typical sociopath is that conservatives tend to be “judgers” and sociopaths are more likely to be “perceivers”. When conservatives hate, it’s often emotionally based (ie, “these people are lazy”, “these people are scum”, etc). I get the idea that sociopaths on the other hand are more indifferent than hateful when they harm others.
Welfare isn’t a drain on the economy though. Food stamps for example create more wealth than they cost to distribute. Ultimately the taxpayers are getting back what they pay. It would be more expensive for people on welfare to be homeless or in prison than it is to give them welfare.
Another point - welfare isn’t just food stamps and disability payments. Public school is welfare. Public roads are welfare. Are you in favor of there only being private schools and turnpikes?
Besides, most conservatives are perfectly fine with spending taxpayer money on war, but balk at the idea of it being used to help people.
You can “say” it all you like, but it’s a lie. A collection of lies, actually.
Or if you want to play the same game the same way on the other side of things, it is equally true that conservatives are even MORE childish, and want even MORE for everyone else to pay for everything for them: they want government protection for every aspect of their businesses, and want to pay NOTHING AT ALL for all that protection.
But again, everything you accused “liberals” of, are lies. Standard Anti-liberal propaganda.
Yeah- my liberal parents who were middle class their whole life wanted to give so that other people could have a safety net. Most liberals end up being the ones who give, not take.
As you continue to ponder this, you might come to another lesson many miss: the difference between a condition, and how a given person chooses to behave because of it.
Well, now we do have more of a GQ question, and I think you’re wrong in this. Psychopaths do not represent an extreme on the spectrum of human behavior. Their brains are qualitatively different. The most striking characteristic of psychopaths is the inability to feel empathy at an emotional level. Empathy is so fundamental to normal human nature (and to our social structures) that it’s grossly inadedquate just to describe this as an extreme in the spectrum of selfishness. Moreover it’s unfair to the many psychopaths who live their lives without harming others. Psychopaths have brains with fundamentally different wiring.
And I’ll reiterate, the problem with the framing of the OP is that their are two entirely separate questions conflated there. One is the interesting GQ-type question about the nature of psychopathy. The other is the inevitable bickering about whether liberals or conservatives are more selfish. And the two questions really have nothing whatsoever to do with one another.
When I call psychopaths “selfish”, I’m not necessarily saying they’re all harmful. I’m just saying that if you don’t care about others, that’s the very definition of selfishness. I highly suspect ethical psychopaths are not full-blown psychopaths though, and on some level do care about others.
I don’t believe anyone is a “complete” sociopath, so in my opinion they are still psychologically human.
As an outsider to US politics, I do worry that the spectrum of conservatism versus liberal is perceived as being a self interest versus social interest viewpoint.
Here in Oz, the maxim for politics has been that people will vote for the party that they perceive will benefit their own hip-pocket the most*. Such a viewpoint is clearly that self interest is always paramount, no matter what your politics. Even this is simplistic. But it underlines the danger in mapping politics to social outlook, especially a pathological social outlook.
A sociopath or psychopath is not usually a fool. You could reasonably expect that a low income earning or wage slave psychopath might vote for the side that supported greater basic income, worker’s rights, or social benefits for them, whilst a rich psychopath would vote for the side that supports tax reductions for them. (Both as a very broad brush view on the self interest topics that might matter.)
It doesn’t always work, but the smart money is on this being the dominant issues at the ballot box. (Like most countries there are anomalous voting patterns, poor people voting ultra-conservative, a core of left leaning rich etc.)
Psychopaths would probably only be interested in politics at all if it was a means for personal aggrandizement. What exact ideology was being touted would be a matter of complete indifference to them - other than its use as a vehicle for getting what they, personally, want.
Political positions of every type are “about” a grand vision of how society out to be ordered in the name of some overall good - that goes for both liberals and conservatives: they obviously disagree on what goods ought to be achieved. In all cases, it requires the person to think about what is “the good” for society as a whole - that is, not just for themselves; and it is exactly that factor - thinking of what is good for others - where psychopaths have a blind spot.
It should be noted that there is no medically sanctioned condition of “psychopath” or “sociopath”. That is to say, no one gets a medical/psychiatric diagnosis of psychopathy in the same sense as someone might get a diagnosis of schizophrenia.
While that’s true, Antisocial Personality Disorder in the DSM is quite close - it overlaps substantially and is is arguably the same thing. The Hare Psychopathy Checklist is widely recognized among psychiatrists, psychologists and criminologists, and psychopathy is a field of active research.
All true, but again, and just to be 100% clear on this, no one gets diagnosed as a psychopath in the sense that John Nash was diagnosed was schizophrenic. That is all.