Scientists say they were amazed by the results of their own research, but is there truly a reason to wonder? A large, awesome survey of the processes of getting children into adulthood has shown that people who behave aggressively and intimidate others at school are more likely to win in working life, get better jobs and gain more. The link between promotion to higher positions and intimidation and dominant behaviour can undoubtedly be worrying.
That doesn't mean that everyone who has a good occupation or runs organizations is aggressors. Definitely not. It is easy to remember many good people working in advanced places. This in turn means that we do not request aggressive people to organize our lives. Neither good leadership, nor organizational successes, nor innovation, nor reflective and forward-looking reasoning require a state of head guided by the desire to dominate. In fact, it could be a hindrance to all of them.
Whether in game theory, or in investigation on another species, it rapidly turns out how much the dominant attitude of fewer individuals can harm the full community. For example, in a survey on Three-colored mouthpiece It was found that the dominant males of these fish exhibit a ‘lower signal-to-noise ratio’, thus causing confusion in the interacting group. Sound familiar?
Winning aggressive units means losing to everyone else – their success is simply a zero-sum game. Even the negative one: the survey mentioned earlier found that the same people who abuse the weaker in school, who later abuse alcohol, smoke, break the law and are more frequently affected by intellectual problems.
However, the triumph of the backyard tyrants is besides the consequence of the dominant communicative in our times – for the last 45 years neoliberalism has described human life as a conflict that individual must win and individual to lose. Of which Poor Calvinism Only by competing can 1 know who deserves to win and who doesn't. And competition, of course, is never fair. Neoliberalism is simply a justification for an unequal and forced society – 1 in which aggressors rule.
The ellipse closes – neoliberalism creates inequality, and inequality – as shown by other studies – are powerfully associated with aggression at school. As income differences and social position widen, stress levels increase, competition increases and the desire to dominate. Pathology is simply a food for itself.
The squad that conducted the first of these studies, having discovered that aggressors were doing well, suggests that We should "to aid children channel this feature more positively". I think that's a incorrect conclusion. Rather, we should build societies where aggression and dominance are not rewarded. Schools better focus on mitigation and guidance.
Yet at all phase of our lives we are forced to destruct rivalry. For competitions to sow grain from chaff, not only children, but full schools are pushed away. In England, for example, SAT exams and the brutal requirements of the Education Standards Office are damaging both childrenand teachers. As usual, competition is set to guarantee triumph for the powerful and influential. However, as Charles Spencer explains in his own memories from boarding school, winning is besides a defeat – parents sending their children to private schools pay for creating a dominant external person, but a kid locked inside may be inside ♪ Cough ♪ Fear, anger, and the desire to escape.
This de/education at later stages of life is reinforced by a 1000 self-therapeutic books, websites and films. For example, a popular website and program The Power Moves, led by social sciences specialist Lucio Buffalmano, teaches "ten ways to better mark its dominance". Among them were social pressures, occupying territory, the "drive in, impose and punish" method, and... slapping.
You can besides learn there eight ways of gaining dominance over women, which is simply a key skill, as it is said that "women sleep with men who will force them to surrender". The techniques promoted by Buffalmano include: ‘if she does not want to kiss you, hold her by the face’, ‘brightly push her to a lying position’, ‘brought her to the bed’ and ‘enter her head with the dominance of ‘daddy’’.
Buffalo He says he wants to "allowing humanity to advancement by empowering good men to act, lead and win." However, his methods most likely contribute to expanding the pot of cold bastards. Rather, we should learn to be attentive, pro-social and kind – to defy dominance, no substance who imposes it on us.
Obvious bullying in the workplace is no longer mostly accepted. However, I fishy that in many cases this apparent advancement is due to the fact that aggressors have learned to mask their impulses, but they proceed to control and manipulate, but not to sanction HR departments.
However, public aggression has reappeared in politics. TrumpPutin, Netanjahu, Orbán, Milei And others don't hide from the impotent behaviors to give them dominance. Seeing Trump lurking behind Hilary Clinton's back during the presidential debate be disgraceful mocking of disability 1 of the journalists, we could see what kind of kid he was – and what kind of kid he is still. Our political systems – centralised, hierarchical – are asking for aggressors to usage them. Just like in the backyard, so now the worst ones lead the way.
The same dynamics works on a global level. Governments assure people that participate in the “global race”If we stay behind, any another country will outrun us. This is the communicative of a zero-sum rivalry that justifies all abuse and all exploitation. This is what European states utilized to justify the construction of empires and selective wars. Immediately afterwards, she was joined by a self-proclaimed myth: that the race for dominance can only win a "dominating race". How Charles Darwin put it: "civilized human races will exterminate chaotic races to take their place in the world" [Karol Darwin, About the Origin of Man, in: Selected worksVol. IV, crowd. S. Panek, Warsaw 1959, pp. 155–156]. A small more subtle to justify, rich states inactive play the same game – their wealth remained mostly torn from another countries.
However, while this unilateral race of countries continues, we are all heading for races towards the abyss of the breakdown of ecosystems. People never needed cooperation and cooperation like today. And yet we inactive have a rivalry in which we are all meant to fail.
In short, we must halt celebrating behaviour based on coercion and control. At all phase of education and career, as well as in politics, the economy and global relations, we should strive to replace the ethos of competition with the ethos of cooperation.
This is the unusualness of human beings compared to specified a three-colour mouth: it does not should be as it is. We can control our own behaviour as well as imagine and build better forms of organisation. Through debate-based participatory democracy, both in politics and in the workplace, we can make systems that will benefit everyone. No law of nature provides that backyard tyrants throughout their lives can force something on us.
**
George Monbiot – writer and environmental activist. He publishes in the Guardian. Last year his book was published by the Publishing home of Political Critics Regenesis. How to feed the planet without devouring the planet.
Article published on blog author. From English she translated Catherine the Formers.
