“We take cunning for a sinister or crooked wisdom; and certainly there is a great difference between a cunning man and a wise man, not only in point of honesty, but in point of ability.”
— Bacon.
BACON, FRANCIS, LORD, (VISCOUNT ST. Albans, and Lord Verulam,) High Chancellor of England, born in London, January 22, 1561; one of the greatest intellectual geniuses the world has ever produced. As a philosopher he stands superior to all who went before, and to all who have followed him; and as a statesman, a lawyer, a public speaker, a man of business. a wit, a courtier, a companion, an author, he is justly the object of the world's admiration. With all his wisdom and learning, he died so poor that he scarcely left money to bury him; died at Highgate, near London, April 19, 1626, and lies buried in St. Michael's church, St. Albans.
It has been on my mind for sometime, that is how the Republican Party is renowned for dirty tricks, this in their search for power, in difference always to the wealthy,
It seems to me that perhaps the most proven tricksters rise within the ranks,
I cannot to my memory recall the same among the Democratic Party, or any other American political party for that matter,
So I wished to look at this human quality of tricking more broadly,
Folklore in nearly every culture around the globe does indeed address the cunning among us,
Sometimes they may turn out to be heroes in these tales, but they do so only in a very oblique manner,
Perhaps the door is being left cracked open for these people to become true citizens in the society, and not disrupt the order in these tales,
Regardless, I find it all quite interesting.
I have a personal theory unproven (as I know) that the number of synonyms attached to a word my be directly proportional to its commonality,
For my own interest I looked at my favorite online reference to synonyms,
Please note below, I have bolded some words that I would personally find applicable to many of the Republicans over the years,
Perhaps all could fit, but these are the words which come to my mind of this political party, from the time of Richard Nixon.
Cunning synonyms, from WordHippo
Noun, The skill in, or practice of, achieving one's ends through underhanded means: deviousness, slyness, artfulness, trickery, craftiness, deceit, deception, chicanery, cunningness, deceitfulness, deceptiveness, dishonesty, fraud, guile, subtlety, trickiness, ability, artifice, cheating, crookedness, dissimulation, duplicity, fakery, guilefulness, wiliness, cageyness, caginess, cozenage, crookery, dissembling, dupery, finesse, foxiness, maneuvers, ploys, schemes, slickness, sneakiness, stratagems, subterfuges, subtleness, tactics, wiles, craft, ruses, tricks and double-dealing.
I have some knowledge of Native American from folklore and the trickster,
Usually being a coyote in my part of the country,
My Dad, a sheep rancher at one time had many stories about certain coyotes in the rural Montana country of his earlier years who preyed on the young lambs,
Many could not be trapped, and were very hard to hunt, very wily animals,
So the Native American view of the animal is easily comprehensible to me,
And like my father, there is a certain respect held by this animal in my mind,
And my Father did not hate the coyotes, although he disliked them,
There was a sense of sorrow in his voice when he told of the systematic eradication of the species, primarily through federal programs of the day,
There was a war on coyotes in this county, as in others in the western United States,
My Father also commented on how large the loss of lambs by coyotes prior to the actions against them, they would virtually put some ranchers out of business, I wish to stay neutral in this, of killing predators for domesticated livestock, I only wish to present information on the cunningness of the coyote,
Cyanide traps killed most of the coyotes my Dad would say, and I had the impression that he thought this was a dirty trick in itself,
And he spoke with some excitement of hearing the howls late one night once again,
By then however, my Dad had moved on to raising cattle, whose calves are generally not preyed upon by the coyote,
The cunning coyotes had returned to this Montana rural county,
So there is not necessarily a hatred involved in this saga as I see it,
As a young teenager in the 1970s, from a Montana ranch, and although generally liberal in views I tried to trap the red fox, which had replaced the coyote in nature after their decimation,
The fox might occasionally find a small newborn lamb to prey upon, generally they did not do so,
And the fox proved too difficult for me to catch, and my Dad would tell me a coyote was much harder to trap, a cunning animal undoubtedly,
We can only hope that perhaps the animals might change their ways, this is of course unrealistic, and will not happen, perhaps it’s the same with some men,
As we might respect the cunning of another human to a degree,
But we don’t wish to continually be exposed to the ploys, the guile, chicanery, trickery, etc., do we?
Below are some highlights from the Encyclopedia Britannica on the trickster,
Perhaps this these folk tales still have a place in our culture in the form of the Republican Party,
I often think that perhaps their view is that of playing a game of any kind,
and that the most strategic, one with the most guile earns a victory because of the cleverness of tactics,
At least that is how I rationalize this behavior within my mind,
As I know these people as well, although may not truly know them,
It seems that only winning matters to some, and such an overpowering urge dampens any degree of fair play,
But perhaps one can identify the 2023 trickster in the words below,
With the idea of Donald Trump, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Richard Nixon, etc., kept in mind?
The trickster-tale genre of folklore appears in some form in every culture, and many examples are available. The typical tale recounts a picaresque [relating to an episodic style of fiction dealing with the adventures of a rough and dishonest but appealing hero] adventure: the trickster is “going along,” encounters a situation to which he responds with knavery, stupidity, gluttony, or guile (or, most often, some combination of these), and meets a violent or ludicrous end.
Before the 20th century the scholarly collection, examination, and comparison of tricksters and their tales concentrated upon those of North American Indian groups. Coyote is possibly the most widely known indigenousNorth American trickster. His tales are told by California, Southwest, Plateau, and Plains Indians. For Northwest Coast Indians, the trickster is Raven (see Raven cycle), Mink, or Blue Jay, while Spider fills the role in many Southwest Indian tales. Wisakedjak, anglicized to Whiskey Jack, is the trickster-hero for many Northeast Indians, as is Nanabozho, the Hare, who in the Southeast is called Rabbit.
In African tales the trickster’s prey is usually earnest, hardworking, and slow-witted and soon yields to the smooth arguments and attractive promises of his opponent; in contrast, it is usually Brer Rabbit’s opponents who instigate conflict, forcing him to rely upon his charm, speed, diminutive size, and guile—characteristics that save him from trouble in some cases only to ensnare him in difficulty in others.
Numerous Oceanian tales recount the creative exploits of the trickster Maui, or Maui-tiki-tiki, as when he caught the first land like a fish and pulled it from the sea. The Australian Aboriginal trickster Bamapana is known for his vulgar language, lustful behavior, and delight in discord. Japan’s Kitsune is a trickster fox renowned for his mischievous metamorphic abilities. He is regarded in Shintō lore as the messenger who ensures that farmers pay their offerings to the rice god. Buddhist stories, however, cast the fox as an evil agent of possession. European tricksters include Aesop’s wily Fox, the shape-shifting Norse god Loki, and the German prankster-peasant Till Eulenspiegel.
So it appears the trickster is part of human nature, common enough to share similar folklore globally, as described succinctly in the quotes below:
Human nature is always and everywhere, in the most important points, substantially the same.
— R. Whately.
WHATELY, RICHARD, (Archbishop of Dublin,) born in London, February 1, 1787; an eminent English divine, theologian, philosopher, and author; died, October 8, 1863.
“Human nature is hard to overcome.”
— Periander.
PERIANDER, born, 665 B.C.; a tyrant of Corinth, and reckoned one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece; died, 585 B.C.
So what does the Christian Bible state about deceit? Two examples from the Old Testament and the New Testament:
Psalms 101:7
7 No one who practices deceit will dwell in my house; no one who speaks falsely will stand in my presence.
1 Peter 3:10
10 For, “Whoever would love life and see good days must keep their tongue from evil and their lips from deceitful speech.
And as for views on government, a verse which perhaps sets boundaries of behavior to follow for a Christian:
Titus 3:1-2 ESV
Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people.
As in other behaviors exhibited by the MAGA Republicans, most who claim to be Christian, their actions often seem antithetical to the message which scripture clearly states, of a rational interpretation of the text,
This who discussion is no different in my opinion, although I do not claim to be a Christian theologian,
Cheating and deceit are not promoted by the Bible as I see it, not unsurprisingly.
Fraud is listed above in the synonyms of cunning, and it seems that studies on fraudulent behavior have a rather long history in the United States,
In fact there is a conventional term used, “the fraud triangle,” associated with the study of fraud,
Although I do not necessarily equate political dirty tricks with the act of financial fraud, white collar criminality, I would suggest that they may be similar,
And one cannot possibly look at Donald Trump and not understand that his business practices have certainly been fraudulent, he is currently under 34 indictments charges in New York City,
Donald Trump’s company has been convicted of fraudulent activities, his long time accountant now serving prison time for white collar crime,
So a research paper on white collar criminality seems quite appropriate to discuss, for the criminal intent itself, and to establish a similar manner of cheating more broadly, including political dirty tricks,
So I do not hesitate to use the following for a more scientific look at the trickster’s behavior, albeit an extreme form,
This fraud model is described below from a Frontiers in Psychology paper
from November 2022.
Fraud opportunity [historical part of paper]
The most popular and classical fraud models are rooted in Cressey (1953) study, in which the preconditions for fraudulent behavior are as follows: (1) a personal financial crisis that cannot be shared, (2) an opportunity to breach trust, and (3) the ability to reconcile the cognitive dissonance associated with violating one’s own ethical standards. Fraud opportunity is perceived to exist when an individual believes that s/he can take advantage of systemic weaknesses such that fraud can be committed with little probability of being caught or punished, and/or when the cost of punishment is not high enough in the event of being caught.
The fraud triangle provides no direct explanation of how opportunities for fraud are perceived. Fraud opportunity can be considered from two perspectives: temptation and obstacles. When an opportunity for fraud presents itself, such as under conditions of weak internal control, a low likelihood of detection, etc., temptation arises and can lead to fraud committal under “imperfect” or “incomplete” conditions. However, obstacles rendering the decision to commit fraud less likely can also arise. For example, the individual may suppress their impulse to commit fraud, and think about the risks of engaging in fraudulent behavior under conditions of strong internal control, which may also cause hesitancy about abusing a privileged position.
Desire depends on the innate nature of the individual, and is thus stable and unchanging, while the motivation for action relates more to the environment.
Disposition
As mentioned above, desire depends on the character and traits of the individual. Disposition underpins the differences among people (Raval, 2018). Setiya (2007) posits that disposition is a virtue framed in a practical way. According to Tilak (2004), disposition reflects the inner nature and can be divided into three categories: enlightened, passionate and indolent. These different categories, and the degree to which they are expressed, make people different from each other. Disposition reflects faith or confidence, which acts as a driving force in one’s choices. The definition of disposition in the Oxford Dictionary is “a person’s inherent qualities of mind and character.” Disposition is inherent, and is thus independent of (and unaffected by) the external environment. It is stable and persistent, being fixed across situational contexts. Buss and Craik (1983) described disposition in terms of reliable and consistent behavior. Katz (1993) referred to disposition as a habit of mind expressed frequently in a conscious and intentional manner. A thorough review of the literature on conceptions of disposition revealed that one of the most popular Hindu scriptures classifies disposition into three types: (1) passionate and able to tell right from wrong; (2) passionate but not able to tell right from wrong; and (3) lacking passion and showing ignorance.
In summary, people who are other-regarding and can tell right from wrong will experience more inner struggle before deciding to commit fraud, while people who are self-regarding and reckless are likely to succumb to the temptation of fraud. Based on these considerations, we propose the following hypothesis:
H1: People with high levels of self-regard are more likely to commit fraud.
Self-control
Financial fraud can be conceived of as an act of indulgence; when opportunities for fraud exist, such as under conditions of weak internal control, temptation arises. Self-control refers to the ability to restrain oneself in the face of temptation. As mentioned above, self-regarding people are vulnerable to temptation, but self-control acts as a counterforce. According to Mischel (2014), self-control may reduce the dispositional tendency to commit immoral behavior. Against this background, we propose a second hypothesis:
H2: Self-control negatively moderates the positive correlation between self-regard and the tendency to commit fraud.
Self-efficacy
According to the definition of the American Psychological Association (2009), self-efficacy reflects confidence in the ability to complete a task or goal. It is a cognitive self-evaluation that can affect future behavior and is based on one’s past experiences. During the process of deciding whether to commit fraud, the individual has to overcome barriers such as strong internal control, under which few opportunities for fraud arise. In addition, the individual will also try to avoid being caught when under strict supervision. Wolfe and Hermanson (2004) added capability to the fraud triangle, positing that the individual’s ability to commit fraud is also a key determinant of actual fraudulent behavior. Different from capability or ability, self-efficacy relates more to the perception and will to carry out a behavior. People with high levels of self-efficacy have more confidence in their ability to overcome obstacles and are more likely to grasp a rare opportunity and fulfill their intention. According to this perspective, we propose a third hypotheses:
H3: Self-efficacy moderates the positive correlation between self-regard and the tendency to commit fraud.
Discussion and conclusion
People with high levels of self-regard are more likely to commit fraud (Hypothesis 1 is supported). When an opportunity for fraud, i.e., temptation, arises, a low level of self-control significantly increases the tendency to commit fraud (Hypothesis 2 is supported). Meanwhile, when an opportunity for fraud is perceived as an obstacle, a high level of self-efficacy significantly moderates the tendency to commit fraud (Hypothesis 3 is supported).
On the fraud triangle, the first factor is a financial crises that cannot be shared with others,
In the case of election fraud, one might observe a political contestant who has a crises in being down in the polls, or in the case of Donald Trump in a crises in that to avoid criminal prosecution if losing the election he certainly would have been in a crises, and could not share his reasoning to his supporters,
And of the Republican Party in general, the unpopularity of their message and recent record may place them in a perceived crises, as they are unwilling to modify or moderate their positions,
The second factor is the opportunity to breach trust,
In the case of Donald Trump and the 2020 election, we had a man trying to force the opportunity to breach trust, and he used right wing media, and his assumed friendly courts to provide opportunity,
The Republican Party generally tries to use voter suppression, gerrymandering, opportunities, although most are deemed legal within the framework of the reactionary US Supreme Court,
The third corner of the triangle is reconciling in one’s on mind the cognitive dissonance of violating one’s own ethical standards,
I must say that in the case of Donald Trump and many of the MAGA Republicans ethical considerations are largely absent,
This is apparent from close observation over the years, especially in recent years, the US Supreme Court has obvious long standing ethical problems.
The temptation of Donald Trump to use any means in order to continue to gain wealth from a political career is obviously very high, and above this desire is stated as being an innate individual character factor,
The Republican Party has largely been in a nose dive since their time in total power from 2016-2018, and there is a great collective desire, obvious in the quest for winning at all costs which can be easily observed.
Disposition as described above in the people on the right in this age of the MAGA moment seems quite clear,
In the Hindu scripture reference above, the MAGA Republican would most easily fit into (2) passionate but not able to tell right from wrong,
This is a rather uncomfortable assertion on my part to make, but clearly it’s a rational understanding of past rhetoric and action from Donald Trump, his close allies within leadership, and much of his base support, such as the insurrectionists on January 6, 2021.
People with high levels of self-regard are more likely to commit fraud. Someone with a narcissist personality disorder certainly has very high levels of self-regard, in fact pathological levels even,
And an inflated ego is present in many politicians most certainly, especially in those comfortable with imitation of Trump’s.
Self-control negatively moderates the positive correlation between self-regard and the tendency to commit fraud. Trump has little self control according to many first hand accounts, such as recently by William Barr,
So this counterforce is most likely not present in Trump,
As far as MAGA Republicans as a group, self-control was absent from many who stormed the capital building on January 6, 2021,
The preformative nature of many high profile MAGA Republicans indicate the ability to say outrageous things nearly every day,
And unfortunately they seem to be rewarded for their impulsivity.
Self-efficacy moderates the positive correlation between self-regard and the tendency to commit fraud. Trump certainly has a high degree of self-efficacy in abusing most systems of government,
In blatant grifting, nearly nonstop,
…the individual’s ability to commit fraud is also a key determinant of actual fraudulent behavior,
This would indicate that skill in one’s profession would be a possible deterrent to committing white collar crime in certain instances,
The significance of this in my discussion and comparison seems not to fit the circumstance of Donald Trump, who appears incapable of moderation of his actions of fraudulent behavior,
And I am unable to draw a comparison with the MAGA Republicans in this instance, perhaps others may be able to do so.
Of the comparison of cheating in politics to cheating in sports, one might look at the psychology of cheating in sports from a January 2020 paper with excerpts below.
Cheating is not some unusual phenomenon. As Russell* states, “People cheat on their taxes, on their spouses, on their friends, on their clients, on tests, on resumes, on expense claims, on safety reports, and of course people cheat in sport. There is hardly an area of life where cheating cannot be identified often as a serious problem” (2014, p. 304). So, cheating in sport occurs and can create various ethical dilemmas.
*Russell, J. S. (2014). Is there a normatively distinctive concept of cheating in sport (or anywhere else)? Journal of the Philosophy of Sport.
Moral identity as a negative predictor of cheating in sport. Analysis of the scientific literature has revealed that cheating depends on both personal and social factors. When considering personal factors, one of the most important to mention is the moral factor, specifically moral identity. Psychological construct of moral identity, as a self-regulatory mechanism (Aquino & Reed, 2002) is based on Bandura’s (1991) social cognitive model of moral behavior. Aquino and Reed (2002) deemed moral identity as “a self-conception organized around a set of moral traits” (Aquino & Reed, 2002, p. 1424). Authors also suggest that people vary in the degree to which they consider being a good or moral person, a central part of their self-concept. Moral identity is a source of motivation to behave morally. In the context of sport, it was found that athletes who have low morale tend to be more positive about cheating.
Studies have shown that if athletes perceive their goal as winning the game (goal-oriented rather than task-oriented), they are more likely to cheat (Ntoumanis, Ng, Barkoukis, & Backhouse, 2014). Recent research shows that athletes who have a tolerant attitude towards cheating are characterized as having a higher ego and a lower task orientation (Ring & Kavussanu, 2018), suggesting that ego-related purpose and desire to “win at all costs” lead athletes to cheating.
Goal orientation is related to athletes’ attitudes towards cheating in sport. As it was reported in a study by Allen, Taylor, Dimeo, Dixon and Robinson (2015), ego orientation was associated with greater endorsement of doping whereas task orientation was associated with more favorable attitudes towards anti-doping.
Morality seems a key to cheating at sports, as is goal oriented, “winning at all costs,”
What exactly is the moral identity of Donald Trump, and his followers can only be estimated by conjecture based upon their actions, but certainly a weakness may be apparent to the observer on this characteristic.
All of these factors may be extended to political dirty tricks perhaps, and are indicative of today’s MAGA Republicans, and especially Donald Trump,
With “higher ego and a lower task orientation” applying quite closely to the man we have had the displeasure of knowing for so many years,
Conversely I would propose that the members of the Democratic Party may be on the whole much more task oriented than the Republicans,
passing much more legislation while holding power, having many ideas for service of their constituents, than the Republicans,
In fact they often are criticized for their keeping on task when perhaps special goal orientation may be in order.
As a Democrat who believes in good governance and has faith in government I prefer my representatives to be task oriented,
But perhaps the average anti-government Republican would see it differently, not placing weight on the task orientation of their leaders, preferring a goal oriented representative.
I was interested in what the sports fan may think of cheating by his team, as a comparison of what a Fox News viewer may feel about a cheating political party to which they may belong, even after the cheating is proven.
Below is from a study describing an attitude for the fan of a sports team which may be caught cheating in a non-doping manner as the Houston Astros were in the 2017 MLB season.
The PDF is available for download, ATTITUDE OF FANS TOWARD CHEATING IN SPORT by Gaudreau, P., & Schellenberg, B.J.I. (2022). Attitudes of sport fans toward the electronic sign stealing scandal in Major League Baseball: Differing associations with perfectionism and excellencism. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology.
Getting caught tarnishes one’s reputation and casts doubts about all of one’s past accomplishments (Vidvor, 2020). At the same time, however, such perceptions are often short-lived. For example, home-game attendance in professional baseball has been found to drop by 8% after a positive anti-doping test, but the impact is limited to the first 15 days (Cisyk & Courty, 2017). Although cheating is a socially undesirable behavior, not all sport fans appear to hold long-lasting unfavorable opinions about it. Some sport fans may be more predisposed to value the reasons or outcomes associated with cheating, to put themselves in the shoes of the cheaters, and to activate the same types of beliefs and excuses they would potentially activate if they were themselves faced with a similar complex social dilemma in their own lives. Therefore, it is important to understand individual differences that may explain why not all sport fans reacted the same way to the electronic sign stealing scandal.
The possible thoughts of a political group supporting cheating, cunning leaders, and who are not opposed to doing so may be explained by the above,
Several possibilities are listed, as at this time perhaps this has not been explored further in regards to cheating in sports,
As to cheating being socially undesirable, within the modern Republican Party as a whole, this may not apply based upon the use of it continually,
and unapologetic use each and every time,
Perfectionism is listed in this study as a driving force for why athletes and teams may engage in cheating in the game,
As this factor might apply to the subject at hand I’m stymied as to a connection,
Perhaps others might grasp one, if one exists.
If one does an Internal search on “the most cunning people in history,”
The result will include this article 16 Of The Most Cunning Conmen The World Has Ever Seen, by Akarsh Mehrotra. This seems an appropriate point to end this wandering discussion, I apologize for my wanderlust in this small project.
Conning is an art. Yes, a bad one, but an art nevertheless. You can’t simply lie and get away with it. You have to be clever about it. And the most important part is that there will always be loopholes. Covering up is the hardest part and that is where you slip. This is true for any crime that is committed or any scam that is pulled off. But these guys did not care, they weren’t afraid of the law and they thought they were smart enough to outdo the system. Some of them did while some got caught. There is no pride in conning someone, but maybe for them there was.
9. George Parker (1870-1936)
He is by far one of the most accomplished conmen in American history, especially when it comes to selling landmarks. Parker has sold the Brooklyn Bridge countless times to innocent foreigners. He was also successful in selling the original Madison Square Garden, the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Statue of Liberty. He used to set up fake offices for real estate dealings. He died in prison, where he narrated stories to guards and inmates.
36th posting, April 12, 2023