Dominant Leaders: What They Are Like And How They Gain Power
Donald Trump was named president of the United States of America on January 20, 2017. This event came as a great surprise to many, who expected that his ideology, his controversial and worrying statements and policies, and the aggressiveness he displayed during the electoral campaign, together with his background as a business magnate (with no experience in politics) meant a clear victory for the other presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton. However, despite everything it was Trump who won. One of the reasons for this was his highly dominant personality.
It is not the only case: multiple dominant leaders have made their way to power throughout history, sometimes being elected by the population. Because? In this article we are going to talk about the characteristics of dominant people and the reason why they are sometimes chosen.
Dominance is not a negative attribute in and of itself The ability to dominate has a utility: it helps the subject achieve their purposes, focus on them and even use the available resources to achieve them. To a greater or lesser extent, we all have some degree of it and we are situated at some point on a continuum between dominance and submission.
Someone who is dominant will tend to have great self-confidence, be stubborn, and have a preference for being in control. They do not usually settle for what is offered, they tend to have little appreciation for conventions and to be independent and focused on themselves and their needs.
In cases where dominance is extremely high, people with a higher level of dominance They tend to show higher levels of arrogance and a sense of superiority They also tend to be utilitarian, more irascible and apparently manifest a greater capacity for decision-making by not taking into account that other perspectives of reality besides their own may be as correct or more correct than the one they defend.
They tend to have more dichotomous thinking and seek fame, prestige and power more. In fact, it is common for them to present the so-called dark triad: narcissism, Machiavellianism/manipulation and psychopathy.
Narcissism and psychopathy
When it comes to narcissism, it is usually people in great need of care, who demand recognition of their merits and who tend to show behavior in which they tend to value themselves in an exaggeratedly positive way. They consider themselves first, valuing others second.
Psychopathy manifests itself as a high lack of empathy, acting based on the achievement of one’s own objectives without taking into account the effects that one’s behavior may have on other people and showing little depth in one’s emotional reactions. Furthermore, they usually show a high level of charm and seduction capacity, something that facilitates a positive predisposition towards them when they are treated superficially.
Finally, Machiavellianism refers to the ability to manipulate : make others think, believe or do what the person themselves want, taking advantage of them to achieve their own objectives.
They tend to seek to stand out and it is common for them to marginalize or harm those subjects who have greater skills than them, establishing strict surveillance of what is done. Generally, dominant leaders are more in demand when it comes to dealing with specific, highly defined tasks or at times when a quick and sure response is required.
Why are they chosen?
Taking into account that an excess of dominance often borders on totalitarianism and the search for the submission of the rest to the opinion of the dominant person or entity, it is worth asking why many people come to approach and elect dominant leaders at one point.
Numerous experiments have been carried out in this regard to try to find a clear cause for this trend, and the most plausible answer is something that we have actually been able to see over and over again throughout history and that we can observe if we analyze how different dominant leaders have come to power (through elections, not dictatorially): intolerance of uncertainty.
Many leaders with dominant characteristics have emerged in periods of great uncertainty and suffering. In these situations, there is a great feeling of insecurity in a large part of the population, and in the face of this insecurity, many look for a firm point from which to act. We are looking for someone in whom we can identify strength and a clear vision of things , someone with a great level of confidence in himself and his vision of things. These are characteristics that someone dominant, although their opinions may not be shared, possesses or appears to possess.
Thus, what causes dominant leaders to reach positions of power is usually the perception of lack of power and control over situations on the part of the subject who elects them, seeking to improve the situation of insecurity and discomfort associated with it through compensation. .
Why not other types of leaders?
In the situations mentioned above, it has been observed not only that the preference for dominant leaders increases, but also that the preference for less authoritarian and more prestige-based leaders decreases.
The reason for this is that a leader who achieves power based on prestige usually manifests a higher level of awareness, empathy and humility (although he can also express pride), being more pleasant to the majority and more considerate of different points of view. But In crisis situations, some people see these qualities as hindering them from making difficult decisions and a slow and deliberate way of acting.
Many people in a crisis situation see these qualities, generally considered positive, as a sign of weakness: altruism and flexibility are seen as a threat to integrity and an element that generates insecurity, which does not provide sufficient protection to the group to which they belong.
Evolution over time
However, this leadership style is only sustainable when quick action is required in a stressful situation. That is, it is a type of power that is effective in the short term or while the problem or situation remains and has not been previously resolved by other means. In the medium or long term, however, It is no longer valued positively and tends to disappear in pursuit of other types of leadership more flexible and considerate of all elements of society.
However, once in power the dominant person tends to secure his position by carrying out different processes and mechanisms. It is one of the reasons why many dominant leaders who initially came to power through elections end up becoming dictators. Even It is likely that the dominant leader can cause a greater imbalance than the one that led to his rise which on the other hand can make their dominance something more attractive that facilitates their permanence.
