Contemporary Machiavellianism

Last week, I attended the quarterly homeowners meeting for the community in which I live. A hot topic on the table was security. For the past four months, cars were broken into and various items were stolen. One thief even stole a back seat of a Toyota Prius.

Petty crime has increased over the past several months as a further backlash of the current recession. Not only are people shopping less, but the few items they have are being purloined by people who have nothing to lose.

Earlier, I accompanied a friend to the police station to report a stolen wallet and there must have been about a dozen people in line to report similar incidents. The police officers were non sympathetic and almost hostile in their approach, as if the people reporting the crimes were the criminals themselves. One officer even lambasted a woman by saying,

“Why did you carry all of your credit cards in your wallet in the first place?”

Many people are already on edge and their stress levels are off the charts. Not realizing the severity of it until I attended the meeting, I was aghast to witness the behavior known as Machiavellianism - a concept named after Renaissance political philosopher, Niccolò Machiavelli, who in 1513 wrote Il Principe (The Prince.) It is utilized by some social and personality psychologists to describe a person's tendency to deceive and manipulate others for personal gain.

The meeting was divided into two camps - those who wanted security cameras and those who wanted to employ other methods for security.

Those who wanted security cameras were brash, aggressive, loud and card carrying members of Machiavellianism. They had an agenda and they did not want to listen to any alternatives - it was their way or no way. Their leader - a doctor - had a bad case of Machiavellianism with a twist of megalomania.

The other group were level headed, open to new ideas, analytical and concerned about the good of the whole as opposed to satisfying a few voices in a group of many.

When the second group spoke, the leader of the first group quickly shot down any ideas, other than the first group’s choice. This went on all night in a battle of might and mouse.

The first group are labeled High Machs and the second group Low Machs. The High Machs are bloodthirsty people who want to win no matter what. They will jump through hoops, run through fire and do everything to get ahead, even if they have to stab a few backs and slit some throats. Manipulation is their middle name, but they don’t like being manipulated.

The Low Machs are more concerned with what is best for all. They are not fueled by the same beast as the High Macs. They are ruled by common sense and pride in making informed decisions. They don’t believe in burning their bridges.

After the High Macs and Low Machs didn’t come to a feasible solution, the leader of the High Macs turned everything around and blamed the board for not “doing something.”

He lined every board member up in his scope and blasted them for doing a terrible job. Since he didn’t get his way, he made his own payoff by blaming people for something in which they had no control.

He rallied his group and got them into the attack mode. These are not children on the playground. They are adults with jobs - doctors - lawyers - accountants - corporate heads - respectable in their professions, yet thuggish in their behavior.

It was a fascinating observation of human behavior. In the end nothing was resolved and everyone walked away angry.

Have you seen Machiavellianism in action? What happened?
What do you think causes Machiavellianism? Clashing of desires versus egos? Can we overcome it, or does it just get bigger and more vicious?

Have your say.