re: Apparatchiks’ willingness to degrade themselves will hurt their reputation with other people. But for exactly that reason, it serves as proof of loyalty to the one man who counts
I think this is only partially, and sometimes the reason. I could introduce you to some dangerous violent gang leaders from our jails for whom this is exactly the state of affairs. And they are also the ones who believe the nonsense that their subordinates flatter them with. You can find corporate business leaders who share the same deluded self-conceptions and who are flattered precisely this way. But the rest of the business leaders, depots, and gang leaders aren't fooled. They know that they are being lied to, and this is often seen as a terrible problem for them. You need accurate information to run most enterprises, and various leaders are constantly complaining about the yes-men who surround them, and how they isolate them from information they badly want and need to hear.
So why do we still get such competition in outrageous flattery? I think that the target of such speeches and flattery is not the leader at the top, but rather the other members of his (or her, and it is very often her) clique. Many, many women's groups are held together by insincere flattering compliments (lies) told by various members about each other. The willingness to tell lies is a form of reputation management, and if unchecked turns into purity spirals where everybody is competing to be the most toadiest. People who aren't sufficiently toady are ostracised, not by the great leader, but by the other members of their social group who badly want to stab people in the back but need to know who is a legitimate target.
See: Dan Williams latest which discusses this (and does a better job of explaining it than I do.)
A minor point, but these Love Shack Cabinet meetings were a regular feature of Trump 1.0. Really, the only change with 2.0 is the replacement of "adults in the room" with "lunatics who want to watch the world burn". Trump has always been Trump. Perhaps there is a lesson for adults in the value of encouraging this sort of fanfic.
The National Shakespeare Theatre did a version of King Lear in which Lear was just this kind of personality cult dictator. And suddenly Regan and Goneril's fawning made perfect sense, and Cordelia's refusal became not just true filial loyalty but knowing and courageous - and much-needed - resistance.
I don't like to be rude, but I don't fully understand the point of this post. It may be that we are all slaves of some defunct political economist - though "Marquez" and "flattery inflation" are hardly trade secrets - but the concept has nevertheless long since entered the vernacular. We all say "Stalin shot the first one to stop clapping" etc.
The sharp question isn't "why, in the context of a violent and capricious absolute despot, would you abase yourself in hopes of saving your skin?", it's "why would you rather be a fearful toady in hell than a comfortable and prosperous bureaucrat in heaven"? Trump's dictatorship is far from firmly established and it has no future unless it is pushed along by fellow travelers. Sure, Trump is no spring chicken and somebody has to succeed him but it would also be nice to win the lottery. There aren't just enough seats on the bus for every grifter to come out of this a winner and they are changing the rules so that the loser gets a bullet in the neck and a shallow grave.
Trump holds these meetings as a dominance display. Just like your neighbor's dog humping your leg is telling you he is on top. It would be interesting to hear the pillow talk when the cabinet members are in a safe place. I wish I could live long enough to read or view the mea culpa mea culpa's.
Today I learned a new word - catchfart.
re: Apparatchiks’ willingness to degrade themselves will hurt their reputation with other people. But for exactly that reason, it serves as proof of loyalty to the one man who counts
I think this is only partially, and sometimes the reason. I could introduce you to some dangerous violent gang leaders from our jails for whom this is exactly the state of affairs. And they are also the ones who believe the nonsense that their subordinates flatter them with. You can find corporate business leaders who share the same deluded self-conceptions and who are flattered precisely this way. But the rest of the business leaders, depots, and gang leaders aren't fooled. They know that they are being lied to, and this is often seen as a terrible problem for them. You need accurate information to run most enterprises, and various leaders are constantly complaining about the yes-men who surround them, and how they isolate them from information they badly want and need to hear.
So why do we still get such competition in outrageous flattery? I think that the target of such speeches and flattery is not the leader at the top, but rather the other members of his (or her, and it is very often her) clique. Many, many women's groups are held together by insincere flattering compliments (lies) told by various members about each other. The willingness to tell lies is a form of reputation management, and if unchecked turns into purity spirals where everybody is competing to be the most toadiest. People who aren't sufficiently toady are ostracised, not by the great leader, but by the other members of their social group who badly want to stab people in the back but need to know who is a legitimate target.
See: Dan Williams latest which discusses this (and does a better job of explaining it than I do.)
https://www.conspicuouscognition.com/p/domination-and-reputation-management
A minor point, but these Love Shack Cabinet meetings were a regular feature of Trump 1.0. Really, the only change with 2.0 is the replacement of "adults in the room" with "lunatics who want to watch the world burn". Trump has always been Trump. Perhaps there is a lesson for adults in the value of encouraging this sort of fanfic.
The very first Trump 1.0 cabinet meeting consisted almost entirely of the so-called “adults” catchfarting.
yes indeed, only 7 months in....
The National Shakespeare Theatre did a version of King Lear in which Lear was just this kind of personality cult dictator. And suddenly Regan and Goneril's fawning made perfect sense, and Cordelia's refusal became not just true filial loyalty but knowing and courageous - and much-needed - resistance.
Catchfarts & teleportation nearly caused face crackage from delighted grinning.
Unfortunately, he's merely reflecting Trump's own opinion of himself. What other figure has stopped/prevented 6 or 7 or 10 wars in eight months?
And now wants to rename the DoD to The War Department.
I don't like to be rude, but I don't fully understand the point of this post. It may be that we are all slaves of some defunct political economist - though "Marquez" and "flattery inflation" are hardly trade secrets - but the concept has nevertheless long since entered the vernacular. We all say "Stalin shot the first one to stop clapping" etc.
The sharp question isn't "why, in the context of a violent and capricious absolute despot, would you abase yourself in hopes of saving your skin?", it's "why would you rather be a fearful toady in hell than a comfortable and prosperous bureaucrat in heaven"? Trump's dictatorship is far from firmly established and it has no future unless it is pushed along by fellow travelers. Sure, Trump is no spring chicken and somebody has to succeed him but it would also be nice to win the lottery. There aren't just enough seats on the bus for every grifter to come out of this a winner and they are changing the rules so that the loser gets a bullet in the neck and a shallow grave.
This has been part of the broader culture of US Republicans for a long time. I described in terms of shibboleths like birtherism
https://crookedtimber.org/2011/02/17/shibboleths/
I had the overoptimistic view that lots of Republicans would eventually reject this. Sadly, no.
Trump holds these meetings as a dominance display. Just like your neighbor's dog humping your leg is telling you he is on top. It would be interesting to hear the pillow talk when the cabinet members are in a safe place. I wish I could live long enough to read or view the mea culpa mea culpa's.
As for the pillow talk, I imagine Iannucci’s "The Death of Stalin“ will give you the picture.
"The more appalling the self-abasement, the more effectively it will serve this purpose".
😂😂😂Holy s**t. I know it's not actually funny, but this really cracked me up.
Not sure why your first link (Xavier Marquez) doesn't work, but here is what I think you meant:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3650704