Dark Triad and Ideology
The Dark Triad or Dark Personality consists of three main traits: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. There is a fourth trait that is sometimes included: sadism. But sadism is not a distinct trait, simply an overlapping quality among the other three. Here is where it gets interesting. What is the ideological tendency of Dark Personalities?
When you look at all the descriptions, everything about the Dark Triad is illiberal and anti-liberal or even anti-leftist. For example, Machiavellianism strongly correlates with social dominance orientation (SDO), which is defined by overt dominance (SDO-D) and anti-egalitarianism (SDO-E). In having challenged corrupt and oppressive power, anti-dominance was the historical starting point of leftism/liberalism (originally not separated into two separate ideologies), and egalitarianism has been the beating heart of leftism/liberalism for centuries.
If the Dark Triad isn’t liberal or leftist, at least on this level, then is it conservative and right-wing? Well, it depends. Research is mixed. Some studies do support such a link by way of Machiavellianism, while others don’t. Maybe the differences are based on populations, cultures, and conditions. Right-wing thought might not be inherently Machiavellian, just not inherently anti-Machiavellian either. You might say that conservatives are Machiavellian bi-curious.
Anyway, rather than having a clear and consistent lean toward conservatism and the right-wing, maybe it’s more that the Dark Triad simply has a clear and consistent lean away from liberalism and the left-wing. That distinction might be important. Whatever it may or may not directly say of the political right, there does seem to be a connection that can be drawn out, albeit possibly by way of a secondary link or shared factor.
Like Dark Personalities, conservatives have higher rates of sadism or at least attraction to sadistic leaders, be it a desirable trait in itself or merely an indicator of the kind of strong leader they want. Interestingly, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) apparently has no direct correlation to sadism, and conservatives might neither. For conservatives and RWAs, maybe it’s that they’re strongly punitive, as research shows; and sadists share this joy of punishment. Going by that, it’s merely the coincidence of sadism and punitiveness, if that is one hell of a coincidence.
On the deepest level of psychology, the motivating cause of sadism or attraction and affinity to it might be different for conservatives. But in everyday politics, social movements, and culture wars, it creates a potential resonance and bond between the them all. Be it punitiveness or whatever else, it gives them a similar moral (or immoral) drive and so creates the groundwork for a common cause, among conservatives, RWAs, SDOs, Double Highs, and Dark Personalities. The combined force is greater than each alone.
It’s similar to the religious right, in one study, measuring low on the Dark Triad while, in other studies, measuring high on group narcissism. The narcissism measure in the Dark Triad, however, is mostly focused on individual narcissism. This is why Machiavellian SDOs like Donald Trump, as an individual narcissist, can have such appeal to evangelicals high on group narcissism. Yes, there is an important difference. But sometimes the a fellow feeling can overcome that.
However they might otherwise diverge, the religious right (conservatives, RWAs) and the right-wing elite (SDOs, Double Highs, Dark Personalities) both agree in their opposition to Jesus’ radical message of egalitarianism, forgiveness, loving-kindness, and compassion. And there is nothing that right-wingers, of all varieties, want more than to co-opt and undermine any threatening ideology. By turning Jesus’ God of Love into a righteous punisher and wrathful destroyer, they’ve defanged what gave the first generation of Christ followers such moral force.
In the real world, these separate ideological mentalities effectively form into the same movements, organizations, and power structures. The leaders of right-wing movements tend to be SDOs and the leaders of far right groups tend to be Double Highs (SDO+RWA). So, though the majority on the right probably aren’t Dark Personalities, the majority of right-wing leaders surely are. And the majority of right-wing followers will submit to those SDOs and Double Highs. Even as these distinctions are useful for intellectual understanding, they’re largely moot for any practical purpose of dealing with how power operates.
There is an even greater complication. Dark Personalities, SDOs, and Double Highs are all drawn to power, specifically with high inequality and hence power disparities. And when they gain position of authority and influence, they’ll seek to increase inequality and inequities even further. Through Machiavellian deviousness, demagoguery, and corruption, they’ll take over entire social, political, and economic systems. As such, it’s not only their psychology but, more worrisome, how that psychology manifests across an entire society.
Even if small in number, they have an outsized influence, precisely because conservatives and RWAs support them. In this alliance, all others are eliminated from any significant participation within the system they control. That is largely what has happened in the United States. If Republicans are far more SDO, particularly in terms of Double High leaders, Democrats have also been taken over by SDOs, albeit Democrats leaning more toward the neoliberalism and capitalist realism of SDO-E than the old school bigotry of SDO-D.
This is how have come to push policies far to the right of . This is why it’s utter bullshit to treat the two parties as proxies for conservatism and liberalism, while ignoring most of the population that is vastly more leftist, liberal, and progressive. That is the mistake so much research has fallen into. Rather, we have a one-party state with two right wings, one that represents hardcore authoritarianism and the other standard conservatism.
In a conventional sense within the mainstream mind of the hegemonic system, one could almost conclude that the Dark Triad has no political tendency. But ultimately, this would be a profound and total failure of understanding. Politics, in the real world, operates in more complex ways. Dark Triad, without a doubt, has its own politics. It’s that of power (i.e., dominance hierarchy). Then the question is: What is the political lean of those who submit to that power or resist? Who do those with this power promote or suppress? Whose interests are upheld or attacked? Who is empowered or disenfranchised?
Alexandra Bartolo & Christopher Powell
“Findings showed no associations between political orientation and psychopathy, narcissism, or Machiavellianism.”
Edward Bell, et al
“Machiavellianism uniquely predicted lower levels of socio-religious conservatism, and both Machiavellianism and narcissism uniquely predicted lower levels of overall conservatism.”
Boris Duspara & Tobias Greitemeyer
“Narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and everyday sadism were associated with right-wing political orientation, whereas narcissism and psychopathy were associated with political extremism. Moreover, the relationships between personality and right-wing political orientation and extremism, respectively, were relatively independent from each other.”
Marcus Arvan
“Our results broadly supported our two hypotheses. We found eleven significant correlations between conservative MIS [Moral Intuition Survey] judgments and the Dark Triad — all at significance level of p < .00001 — but no significant correlations between the Dark Triad and liberal MIS judgments.”
Marcus Arvan
“Twenty-two significant correlations were observed between “conservative” judgments and the Dark Triad (all of which were significant past a Bonferonni-corrected significance threshold of p = .0008), compared to seven significant correlations between Dark Triad and “liberal” judgments (only one of which was significant past p = .0008).”
Jeffrey Scott Sinn
“Results show Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), self-reported conservatism, strong-leader authoritarianism, and (to a lesser degree) Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) predict a preference for low-nurturance (i.e., cold/cruel) leaders.”
