At my wage slave financial programmer job, the CEO had a meeting where he gave a speech. He spoke for an hour, but actually said nothing.
That's an important parasite skill. Talk without saying anything, while reciting the correct buzzwords and phrases. It's an imitation of the way a real leader would talk.
I once saw Hillary Clinton give a speech. She spoke for an hour, without actually saying anything. If you speak in vague platitudes, then everyone will be happy. If you are specific, then someone might be offended. If you're a high-ranking State parasite, you have to give the illusion that you're a good leader, while saying nothing.
Some people were smiling and nodding as if it were the most brilliant speech they'd ever heard. I felt like punching them. However, they may have been genuinely fooled.
The CEO had a Q&A period afterwards. I considered asking "What are your plans for after the US financial system collapses?" He probably wouldn't have had a sense of humor. He'll be one of the last to know it's over.
A week later, I saw him around. I tried smiling at him. His reaction was telling. His body language said "Why is a peon like you being friendly with me?!" That's a key CEO attitude. Everyone else is inferior. (I'm not a typical slave, but he didn't notice.)
This is the problem with the US economy. The actual leaders are fake leaders. Their power is backed by State violence. The CEO is selected based on his ability to play the psychopath parasite game, and not based on his ability to be a real leader.
Many slaves believe that their leaders are intelligent and honest and have high emotional awareness. If that were true, then psychopaths would be excluded, no matter what system is in place. If you're sane, it's obvious who's a psychopath.
When the leaders are all psychopaths, then intelligent and honest people are excluded. From the psychopath's point of view, an intelligent and honest person is a punk who doesn't know his proper place.
A government violence monopoly maximizes the parasites' theft opportunities. The biggest psychopaths gain control of the State, so their crimes are cloaked under color of law.
A really free market is the best system for minimizing the damage of psychopaths. Intelligent people would form business that are much more efficient than those run by psychopaths. In the present, the State prevents this. If you have a business that challenges psychopaths, then they will lobby the State to crush you. Existing laws will be stricly enforced. They will lobby for new laws. You would be the victim of frivolous criminal charges, convicted in a sham trial.
Unfortunately, psychopaths won't voluntarily relinquish their power. You can't logically convince them, because they're psychopaths. The best solution is agorism, where intelligent and honest workers build a new system as the old one falls apart.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
CEO Attitude
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Your analysis is spot on.
I once met an former banker, although his current job was in effect still working for them.
To him an honest and competent person was a deviant.
As soon as I pointed out what was going wrong, he started a campaign against me on the basis I was insane.
To him being honest is insane.
To him messing things up and ripping off clients was normality. He was either incompetent or had realized the best way to profit is to pretend to be incompetent and make small profits from disaster.
At the time I thought it is only one small step from ripping off clients to ripping off anyone you come into contact with. I was right and he made that step.
steamroller says:
I left a good job at a major oil company. The division manager was a patronizing non-thinker who was a sloganeer and a CYA expert who always denied culpability and blamed subordinates for "...wrong and fatally flawed information supplied to him for decisions." I made the mistake of telling him he had reached the pinnacle of his career by deceit, lies, and ineptitude, and that he was unfit to serve in any position of authority. I further ranted that he was a designer of "obfuscatory obstructionist management." He asked what I meant, and I said his position was only possible by his refusal to delegate anything, and he was there only to make decisions that any discerning employee could make far better than he if not prevented by his ego and his insufferable arrogance of supposed, but illegitimate authority. He informed that his only mistake was hiring me - just prior to my being terminated. Thank Goodness for restraint and Dulcolax!
Post a Comment