Was this an essay about psychopathology or just an excuse for a psychoanalytic beat-up of left-of-centre politics? With the exception of Peter Slipper (a Liberal defector), all the examples offered are Labor or Democrat. Are we to assume conservative politics doesn't attract psychopaths?

More importantly, for an essay on 'corporate' psychopaths, why didn't the author include any? There are plenty of howling corporate examples on offer, many of whom are household names and control much of our society and our lives. Yet, unlike psychopathic politicians, we don't have the luxury of being able to vote them out of their jobs.

Considering it's the conservative side of politics that promotes, worships and facilitates the corporate privatisation of just about every aspect of existence, it's somewhat surprising that the author appears to be blind to any psychopathological connection between the two.

Dr Gary Kohls gives us an even greater insight into this dark side of human nature. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-us-corporation-as-psychopath/5345811

Many people argue about the degree or the % that exists in our society but given enough power this evil side of humanity surfaces way too often.

Interesting that all three cases are on the so called "left" of politics. Hmmm! But now corporate sponsored Tony (with his Tax Office logo) is in charge we wont even know if there are any on his side of the table. Plenty of head kickers there though.

I agree with the point that's been made already that the article does itself no favours by citing only the left of politics and Slipper who moved sided with the left. It always tends to raise my suspicions when articles, public notices and the like appear to be pushing a secondary message. I don't think that either the left or right of politics hold a monopoly on wrongdoing.

A couple of other points pop out for me.
- I have the impression that many who would fit the criteria listed early in the article manage to operate mostly within the law or limit their law breaking to a level which is unlikely to bring major consequences. Many may be very skilled at using weakness in the law to harm others. At what point would such individuals ever be professionally diagnosed as a psychopath? How many functional psychopaths would permit themselves to be in a position where that diagnosis could be completed by a professional?
- In a similar vein I'm wondering how a professional dealing with an individual who may be getting some mental health treatment would gain access to the necessary information to be able to make the diagnosis except in the most extreme cases. An individual I'm thinking of has routinely dealt with mental health professionals over the years but I'm wondering how those professionals would get the background to identify a number of those behaviours. When they start asking the hard questions how do they keep the patient long enough to get to a diagnosis without the patient moving onto someone they are more comfortable with?

R0bert

@ Rhrosty I would put the percentage of those people with high Hustler component as around 15%. The majority of these people would have above average Normal. So the Hustler acts as a positive force.

@ the rest of the comments

The key sentence in this article is "There is support in psychology for psychopathy as a dimensional continuum of personality. In this way, we can better understand that certain personality traits, as extreme manifestations, might be understood as clinical disorders, but in other cases, and in the absence of all the traits, may well be identified with organisational leadership qualities."

There are two factors here. One is the position on the Psychopathic or Hustler Dimension the other is on the Normal or level of self control.

Take for example Andrew Peacock. He definitely has some Hustler in him but also a pretty high level of Normal or Self Control.

May I also note Slipper was only an independent in the final year of his Parliamentary career. For the period to 1984 to 2010 he was either a National or Liberal.

If you are going have three political examples and any more would be otiose, you would have a 2:1 split in one direction or the other. Also I would suggest that neither Howard nor Costello had much Hustler in their personality.

http://psychology.about.com/library/quiz/bl_psychologist_quiz.htm

http://psychology.about.com/od/historyofpsychology/tp/ten-influential-psychologists.htm

http://psychology.about.com/od/womeninpsychology/Women_in_Psychology.htm

Try link 1......Human nature really is a odd thought considering we are analysing ourselves in the past tense.( punt intended ) While outside the box thinking is not everyone's cup of tea, the future of ourselves may not be such comforting horizons.

An experiment was done, with putting two rats in an equal dimensional box and the other with ten rats.......lets call them politicians for now:) and the problems not for-seen, can be greatly related to their currant situation.

Planet3