A political leader such as The President of the United States is a person whose natural executive function is increasingly becoming unclear. This is because the rational, core function of politics which is the science of governing people, is being confused with irrational expectations and needs of a clueless, emotionally sick public.
Examples of rational, core executive functions include safeguarding people’s independence, freedom and responsibility. Examples of irrational, destructive executive functions include catering to the public’s pathological helplessness and dependency needs which,in effect, is a self-serving, “political” tactic. The political left has perfected the art of welfare politics. Having nothing better to offer, the right is quickly learning to playing catch up. The focus of looking for political solutions is the reason that politicians are losing people’s respect.
But politics can never be the answer. Knowledge of people’s underlying socio-political character structure is essential because it helps to distinguish between the primary, rational functions that people can expect from their political leaders versus their own irrational, secondary, destructive drives and need to be taken care of which they project onto them. This crucial distinction is obscured by the endless ideological battles between the political left and the right. This is a manifestation of social armor.
Without making this distinction, politics degenerates into “socio-politics,” a spectacle that we are witnessing in today’s election year. The cluelessness of the politician regarding his natural function as political leader is a symptom of the same cluelessness of the public that elects him.
In selecting a president, the key question becomes: Is there a candidate that protects the functions of independence, freedom, and responsibility of the American people?
5 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Neither Left Nor Right
The Emotional Plague
Charles Konia, M.D. 
Dear Dr. Konia,
Thanks very much for your continuing explanations and clarifications. They are very helpful to me personally and this information is so important to us all. At this point in time the public seems so far astray from what is really needed in a leader that, even if there is a candidate who understands, or comes close to understanding, the science of governing people, I wonder is he is electable. Perhaps for this election, as a practical matter, the question is which candidate comes closest to the key question you state, and, is electable. Again, my thanks to you for your continued posts.
Alexis Packer
Dear Ms. Packer,
The candidate that comes closest is Ben Carson, M.D. He thinks like a physician in that he seems ti want a diagnosis before attempting to address social problems. Unfortunately without the necessary knowledge of social orgonomy he cannot do anything but start an emotional plague reaction against him. The first requirement is that people must recognize the existence of the plague.
Dr Carson was the first to bring the danger of political correctness to the forefront when he spoke at the national prayer breakfast a few years ago. But shortly after that it became obvious that he did not know how to defend himself against the attacks that would surely come. In our current social situation, it is absolutely necessary to have a well conceived strategy to meet the attacks , each and everyone. One must also have an ability to point out the destructive plague behavior behind the attack. Unfortunately this ability is only accessible to someone who clearly understands the emotional plague, emotional plague characters and emotional plague activity.
Many high level Christian writers and other conservatives now refer to PC as a plague. This is a step foreward. Without a functional understanding of human life and behavior, these conventional thinkers fail to see that it is not just the left that has been infected by this manifestation of the plague . The entire social arena is infected. I try to explain the current version of the EP as something similar to an anthrax attack. It is “in the air”. Anyone can catch it and anyone can be infected or affected by it.
This explanation seems to be an iota more palatable to the conventional thinker than the more accurate biological basis of the disease.
One day the biological basis may become socially acceptable.
Thank you for the analogy of anthrax. It is a better way of having contact with our public.
Dr. Konia
Always a pleasure Dr. Konia and glad that you liked the analogy