Despite the appalling atrocities committed by merciless leaders throughout history, today, a disturbingly significant number of politicians display a concerted lack of empathy and yet remain in office. Political scientist Brian Klaas has written extensively about how individuals who consider themselves entitled to power and justified in maintaining it at any cost are particularly drawn to political positions that offer them the opportunity to acquire power, control, and a prestigious reputation. Andrew Lobaczewski, a Polish psychiatrist who spent the early years of his life fighting against the Nazi occupation of Poland, coined the term “pathocracy” to describe a government in which a minority of pathological individuals exerts control over the majority. The British Psychological Society published an article in September 2021 describing the development of a pathocracy: 

“[A psychopathic leader’s] impulsiveness is mistaken for decisiveness; his narcissism for confidence; his recklessness for fearlessness. Soon, other people with psychopathic traits emerge and attach themselves to the pathocracy, sensing the opportunity to gain power and influence. At the same time, responsible and moral people gradually leave the government, either resigning or being ruthlessly ejected. In an inevitable process, soon the entire government is filled with people with a pathological lack of empathy and conscience.”

Research published by the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative finds that authoritarian leaders generally display traits indicating a maladaptive personality disorder, such as narcissistic personality disorder or antisocial personality disorder. Frederick M. Burkle, author of the Harvard study, links the personality of autocrats to developmental deficiencies resulting from psychologically deleterious events during adolescence. As Burkle states, “Childhood is where narcissism should stay.” Because of childhood developmental arrests, however, ruthless leaders age primarily — or entirely — devoid of empathy. Individuals with these personality disorders typically possess a cognitive capacity that is generally limited to simplistic, black-and-white thinking. Their ability to consider the implications of their actions or to feel basic emotions such as remorse, compassion, guilt, or anxiety is highly impaired.

Furthermore, other research finds that individuals high in psychopathy — a personality disorder characterized by outward projections of charm, grandiosity, and manipulativeness, which mask callousness, and a lack of empathy and conscience — are four times more prevalent in leadership positions than in the general population: 3.9 percent compared to 0.6 percent. Klass has even claimed that “some of the best studies” find that the number of psychopaths in power is closer to 25 times greater than the number of psychopaths found in the general public. In short, if you want to find a psychopath or a narcissist, one of the first places you must search, other than a mental institution, would be the halls of parliaments or boardrooms of wealthy businesses.

Currently, no country requires political candidates for high office to undergo stringent psychological evaluations as a prerequisite for holding office. Officially, under the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Goldwater Rule, an APA member-psychiatrist is not permitted to make a formal diagnosis of “an individual who is in the light of public attention or who has disclosed information about himself/herself through public media.” However, if governments barred psychopaths from holding power, the citizens of nations would be safer. Considering the laundry list of ethically and morally reprehensible actions that dangerous leaders have undertaken throughout history, it is fascinating that evaluating a leader’s mental well-being is regarded as a morally unsound practice.

To reduce the prevalence of psychopathic leaders, the U.S. government must establish an independent agency comprised of trained psychologists and psychiatrists whose job it is to evaluate candidates running for high-end political positions meticulously. Members of this agency will specifically look for traits of psychopathy and narcissism. If a candidate is deemed a clinical narcissist or psychopath, they can forget about becoming a politician. Government leaders must also pass a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the agencies’ protection. Politicians must have the ability to care about others; otherwise, why would they genuinely help anyone, save as a way to improve their own public image? To help people, a politician must first be able to care about them. Either governments begin psychologically evaluating political candidates, risking some invasion of privacy, or allow dangerous leaders to commit crimes against humanity. The rise of the Trump regime in America has made clear that no nation, no matter how committed to freedom and democracy its people and leaders appear to be, is entirely safe from callous authoritarianism and psychopaths bereft of empathy. To avoid the heinous, deplorable crimes committed by tyrants and despots, psychiatrists must evaluate candidates for personality disorders clinically.

Acknowledgment: The ideas expressed in this article are those of the individual author.