creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
David Sirota
David Sirota
25 May 2012
A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Headlines transmit information in its rawest form — and the best of headlines crystallize indelible truths.… Read More.

18 May 2012
Yes, We Can Walk and Chew Gum

One of the most overused metaphors in a writer's arsenal is the one about "walking and chewing gum at … Read More.

11 May 2012
Our Guns and Butter Economy

With the economy still struggling and the debates over how to fix the problem more intense than ever, one … Read More.

Stopping the Insanity

Share Comment

Like most people living through this jarring age of economic turbulence and political dysfunction, you can probably recall a moment in the last few months when you thought to yourself that our lawmakers and corporate leaders are all crazy. And not just run-of-the-mill crazy, a la George Costanza's parents, but the kind of crazy that makes films like "Silence of the Lambs" and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" so frightening.

The good news for you is that you aren't insane for thinking this. The bad news for all of us, though, is that according to two new scientific analyses, you are more correct in your assessment than you may know.

The first revelation came from Dr. Nassir Ghaemi of Tufts University. In his recent book, "A First-Rate Madness," he went beyond merely restating the old adage that anyone crazy enough to run for public office probably shouldn't occupy that office. Instead, the book sheds light on what Ghaemi calls an "inverse law of sanity," whereby tumultuous times like these actually reward and promote political figures who are "mentally abnormal (or) even ill."

Now comes a new study from Switzerland's University of St. Gallen showing that the most successful of the global financial elite probably pose more of a menace to society than known psychopaths.

As the website Newser reported, the researchers "pitted a group of stockbrokers against a group of actual psychopaths in various computer simulations and intelligence tests and found that the money men were significantly more reckless, competitive, and manipulative." Even more striking, the researchers note that achieving overall success was less important to the stock speculators than the sadistic drive "to damage their opponents."

The findings build on similar research in the recent past. In 1996, investigators at Glasgow Caledonian University discovered connections between psychopathy and successful financial speculation, concluding that "with the right parenting, (psychopaths) can become successful stockbrokers instead of serial killers." Likewise, in 2004, researchers at the University of British Columbia reacted to similar findings and created a test to help firms detect "corporate psychopaths" within their ranks.

That same year, the award winning-documentary "The Corporation" used World Health Organization metrics to show that if companies really are "people," as our Supreme Court insists, then many of them are mentally ill.

Obviously, these results reflect the not-so-surprising fact that the extreme nature of the modern political process and of today's casino economy inherently self-select for certain kinds of traits. And no doubt, wholly changing that dynamic may be impossible or undesirable — or both.

However, the findings are a reminder of why now — more than ever — we must refuse to succumb to political apathy and laissez-faire demagoguery. Indeed, it's time to redouble our commitment to strengthening checks on political and corporate power because that power is often being wielded by the most unstable among us.

So what does that mean in practice? It means that when we see a wild-eyed White House ignore the constitution and claim the despotic right to assassinate American citizens without criminal charge, we demand that Congress stop the madness — rather than quietly acquiesce. It means that when we see a spontaneous grassroots movement physically occupy Lower Manhattan and challenge banks' deranged rapaciousness, we applaud the effort as long overdue — rather than scoff at it as unrealistic. It means, in short, that we refuse to stay silent in the face of insanity.

Frankly, if we have scientific proof that the inmates are running the Wall Street and Washington asylums, this is the least we should do — and we really should do a whole lot more.

David Sirota is best-selling author of the new book "Back to Our Future: How the 1980s Explain the World We Live In Now." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado. Email him at ds@davidsirota.com, follow him on Twitter @davidsirota or visit his website at DavidSirota.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

7 Comments | Post Comment
The thing that worries me abiout the Wall Street demonstrators is that they are demanding more regulation, when one of sources of dysfunction is regulation that creates the consequences that we have seen--like the demands for 'affordable" loans that led to the housing collapse. I suspect that there are those behind the protests that are also in bed with those who have entangled Wall Street with the scariest folks in Washington. In other words, it's a Reichtag fire.
Comment: #1
Posted by: partsmom
Fri Oct 7, 2011 10:13 AM
"...we really should do a whole lot more."

Like what, David?

A typical Sirota column is like a nag at the track:
--finding fault? fast out of the gate
--laying blame? strong down the backstretch
--suggesting solutions? pulls up lame, can't finish.
Comment: #2
Posted by: oddsox
Fri Oct 7, 2011 10:42 AM
" It means that when we see a spontaneous grassroots movement physically occupy Lower Manhattan and challenge banks' deranged rapaciousness, we applaud the effort as long overdue"

If the tea party challenges deranged politicians overspending and over-regulating, shouldn't they be applauded? Nah. They are called rascists and insurgents and told to go to hell by Maxine Waters. Can't stop the madness if your too mad to see your own hypocrisy, Sirota.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Tom
Fri Oct 7, 2011 7:20 PM
Brilliant article.......
Comment: #4
Posted by: lia juriansz
Fri Oct 7, 2011 9:51 PM
The problem wasn't demands for affordable loans - requirements for those were only binding on "community banks" - not the kind of mortgage-backed security-trading giants that precipitated the crash. Those loans were largely going to lower-income people to buy houses in the 50K-150K market - not the kind of housing bubble speculation that took houses that were worth $250,000 up to a million or more before the bubble crashed. Most importantly, it was about people borrowing more money than they could afford to pay back, gambling that their house would appreciate 20% within a year or two and they could flip it for a profit instead of getting stuck with an unaffordable mortgage. That was exacerbated by the big mortgage companies (NOT the community banks covered by the CRA) offering ARMs with low teaser rates in the first two years, so they could book more business and hike their bonuses.

What it WASN'T about was moderate-income people scamming the banks to get into a house. They just got doubly caught up in the crash because they (a) had the most to lose with the devaluation of likely the only asset they have, and (b) were more likely to lose their jobs - and thus default on their mortgages - than people with higher-income occupations.
Comment: #5
Posted by: Kevin M
Fri Oct 7, 2011 9:58 PM
Absolutely positively on target. We had all better wake up and start standing up.
Comment: #6
Posted by: Toshia
Fri Oct 7, 2011 10:04 PM
I'll second what Kevin M wrote and go further in saying that the exact opposite of the Republican talking point repeated yet again by "partsmom" is true: it was the LACK of regulation that lead to the GLOBAL collapse of the "too big to fail" banks. Also, the only people at the protests who are in bed with Wall Street and "the scariest folks in Washington" are the right-wing troublemakers like Patrick Howley, an editor at the conservative magazine The American Spectator, and and criminals like James O'Keefe who are trying to insight violence and undermine the protests. In fact, there are some ex-Tea Party members at the protests. The non-racist ones who realized they were being duped by the Republican Elite fat-cats to do their dirty work fighting for the rich. Now the Tea Party - there's your Reichstag fire. Funded and promoted by Wall Street and the 1% that the Other 99% occupying cities all over the country are now protesting! Do your homework people. Don't be suckered. The Corporate Media are lying to you.
Comment: #7
Posted by: A Smith
Tue Oct 11, 2011 10:43 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
David Sirota
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

19 Aug 2011 The Vegetarian's Dilemma

15 Jul 2011 Toward a New Politics of Food

6 Mar 2009 The A Word