Nice Guy Syndrome implications for the Big World

[DanelMadr]

We all agree that seeking for approval, being on good terms with everyone is one of the major flaws of so called Nice Guys.
With this kind of behavior they certainly don't gain respect and even though some people do appreciate their behavior, the majority does not appreciate it or even try to exploit them and the real bad guys will eat them alive.

I recently took notice of this phenomena in Foreign Politics of the west. Trying to be on good terms with everyone and trying to appease even the most vicious regimes under the 'We shouldn't provoke them, they might hate us even more.' thinking. This produces indecision, passivity and brings lost of respect creating even more problems in the end. Exactly as it creates more problems for Nice Guys.

I wonder if it has something to do with so much self-hating, no self esteem Nice Guys present in politics including journalists.
The same trend which produced the Nice Guys in order to suppress the masculinity blamed for WWII horrors. Forgetting that the azzholes of this world can be dealt with only by force. Do you remember what helped A. Hitler and his nazi Germany to grow? Yes, the appeasing Nice Guy attitude of the big players.

There will always be people who will hate the US no matter what they do. Some hate them, because they don't act and others would hate them because they did act. Solve problems on rational bases not for seeking a approval.

Do you agree that problems/character flaws experienced in individuals life correspond to the big politics as well?

 

[Strelok]

Politicians do what they think is their best interest,when the western powers ignored hitler's empowerement they ignored it because they were afraid of the communists on east and hitler seemed a good shield.
They were not nice guys afraid to piss off a dictator.

And about the journalists,most of them are just attention wh0res who don't give a damn about what they report,only want to look like heroes or a martyrs who risked their life to inform us.
Just see what happen when some famous journalist die at 80yrs old in his home,they report his death as a loss to human kind,not even for military chiefs and war heroes there are such attention on the news.

 

[DanelMadr]

Politicians do what they think is their best interest,when the western powers ignored hitler's empowerement they ignored it because they were afraid of the communists on east and hitler seemed a good shield.
They were not nice guys afraid to piss off a dictator.

And about the journalists,most of them are just attention wh0res who don't give a damn about what they report,only want to look like heroes or a martyrs who risked their life to inform us.
Just see what happen when some famous journalist die at 80yrs old in his home,they report his death as a loss to human kind,not even for military chiefs and war heroes there are such attention on the news.

Yeah, that's true. But I'd like to point out, that Nice Guys are not nice because they are nice or whatever but because they try to avoid confrontation. Of course people and therefore politicians do that as well....avoid confrontation how much you can, not to make problems. Only a few politicians, true leaders make action when it is desirable and not absolutely necessary.
The western powers avoided the confrontation with Hitler because they were struggling economically/military and maybe they harbored some thoughts of Hitler as deterrent of Communism but the reality was different....USSR were allies with Nazi Germany. Even Communist in Eastern Europe refused to help the resistance movement until Hitle attacked USSR. And those communists who escaped to USSR where imprisoned and released after Hitler attacked them.

 

[Rogue]

The same trend which produced the Nice Guys in order to suppress the masculinity blamed for WWII horrors. Forgetting that the azzholes of this world can be dealt with only by force.

Only when they attack.

When evolutionary biologists try to explain the development of human altruism, there is a commonly cited metaphor to game theory (particularly the Reiterated Prisoner's Dilemma and Nash Equilibrium). There are also two TED Talks by Robert Wright in which he explains the importance of non-zero sum games, particularly in the context of international trade. The essential point being that cooperation develops between parties who hate each other when a mutually beneficial (non-zero sum game) relationship develops (e.g. trade) and when neither party benefits by unilaterally changing strategies (Nash Equilibrium). There are also various parallels to the 48 Laws of Power when it speaks about aggression as not the best strategy, keeping people dependent on you, and controlling other people's options. In short, persuasion is preferred to coercion and coercion to aggression. Aggression is the last resort. "The perfect courtier thrives in a world where everything revolves around power and political dexterity. He has mastered the art of indirection; he flatters, yields to superiors, and asserts power over others in the most oblique and graceful manner. Learn and apply the laws of courtiership and there will be no limit to how far you can rise in the court."

 

[Atom Smasher]

Being a nice guy is TRANSACTIONAL in nature.

This applies to individuals and to governments.

A "nice guy" is being overly nice specifically because they want something from you, whether acceptance or something more tangible. Women sense this at an instinctual level although few can articulate it.

Being a "nice guy" is using COVERT means and a covert language to get what you want. And women are masters at covert ops.

We are men. When we are direct we are respected. The same goes for governments. The U.S. is constantly trying to save face and appear like "not such a bad guy" to the rest of the world. The fact is that ANY nation who has the biggest guns is going to be feared and despised. But we are despised even more for our tentative, "dip a toe in the water" way of approaching problems and challenges.

I hate my own country's "nice guy" facade. It is a paralyzing force and makes us a mockery to the rest of the world.

 

[FairShake]

The U.S. is constantly trying to save face and appear like "not such a bad guy" to the rest of the world.

I hate my own country's "nice guy" facade. It is a paralyzing force and makes us a mockery to the rest of the world.

Haha. The United States government has never really tried to be the "nice guy" in foreign relations. That's absurd. The United States has pretty much pursued it's own interests since it began especially since the end of WW2 to the tune of hundreds of thousands dead.

The "rest of the world" does not mock the United States for being nice. They hate the American government for funding the killing of their friends and family.

 

[AAAgent]

I actually don't give a sh1t what anyone thinks of me. I ignore a lot of people that try to talk to me because they think i'm cool, hot, etc. To me i considered them fake and i've been doing it my entire life. Unless you are genuinely friendly which you can tell, i try not to let people in my life with a somewhat dramafull agenda.

I start sh1t with people and generally don't get along with a lot of guys that throw their temper around.

I'm not exactly you're nice guy but i do have respect and courtesy.

I help the elderly or people that are in need or ask to be helped. I never smoke or do bad things in front of my nieces or my younger brother. I own up to my mistakes, hold doors open, etc.

I also accustomed to chivalry which includes paying for bills when i ask a girl out. It just feel weird to have a GIRL pay for ME. I used to do everything i thought prince charming would do, not so much anymore.

If i'm going out to lunch with a girl, i'll wait the normal amount of time normally a few seconds 5-10. If she doesn't start walking i generally just start walking. They always catch up. But the thing is, if i'm with a girl i like, i'll wait for her. gotta change that.

 

[Atom Smasher]

Haha. The United States government has never really tried to be the "nice guy" in foreign relations. That's absurd. The United States has pretty much pursued it's own interests since it began especially since the end of WW2 to the tune of hundreds of thousands dead.

The "rest of the world" does not mock the United States for being nice. They hate the American government for funding the killing of their friends and family.

FairShake,

Look up the word, "facade".

 

[DanelMadr]

Only when they attack.

When evolutionary biologists try to explain the development of human altruism, there is a commonly cited metaphor to game theory (particularly the Reiterated Prisoner's Dilemma and Nash Equilibrium). There are also two TED Talks by Robert Wright in which he explains the importance of non-zero sum games, particularly in the context of international trade. The essential point being that cooperation develops between parties who hate each other when a mutually beneficial (non-zero sum game) relationship develops (e.g. trade) and when neither party benefits by unilaterally changing strategies (Nash Equilibrium). There are also various parallels to the 48 Laws of Power when it speaks about aggression as not the best strategy, keeping people dependent on you, and controlling other people's options. In short, persuasion is preferred to coercion and coercion to aggression. Aggression is the last resort. "The perfect courtier thrives in a world where everything revolves around power and political dexterity. He has mastered the art of indirection; he flatters, yields to superiors, and asserts power over others in the most oblique and graceful manner. Learn and apply the laws of courtiership and there will be no limit to how far you can rise in the court."

Thanks for your input. You explained that very well.

However I do not agree with you. With azzholes/extremists this does not work. They react only to the force or to your absolute willingness to use it. History is my witness.

 

[Strelok]

However I do not agree with you. With azzholes/extremists this does not work. They react only to the force or to your absolute willingness to use it. History is my witness.

Agree on here,I can confirm absolutly,some people understand other people problems or accept a deal only when kicked or threated from somebody who could.

 

[ArcBound]

Thanks for your input. You explained that very well.

However I do not agree with you. With azzholes/extremists this does not work. They react only to the force or to your absolute willingness to use it. History is my witness.

While you are right about this, we cannot go after every single a$$hole and extremist in the world. We're already at war with two third world countries which helped balloon the budget deficit. If we tried to directly go after every "bad" country like we did with Iraq and Afghanistan we'd be too overstretched, too much in debt (as if we aren't already?) and the world would completely hate us. So Rogue's model of politics is pretty close to what we must achieve in order to survive.

 

[StateOfMind]

Not sure about politics but from a social viewpoint, being nice to everyone is smart. To be successful you have to learn to get along with anyone your with. You can't be confrontational even in the most heated situations, learn to please others and you will get what you want.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

I think OP is referencing the political correctness virus in his mention of "nice guy syndrome" on a geopolitical scale.

And the political correctness facade is what must be ended before it destroys the world. The proliferation of modern liberalism has brought this upon us. Sooner or later, we will realize that it is not a sin to act in rational self-interest, because a man or a nation can only ever be liable for itself.

 

[Jitterbug]

Only Americans think their government is too nice.

 

[FairShake]

FairShake,

Look up the word, "facade".

I did. And it said "They hate us for our freedom."

 

[DanelMadr]

While you are right about this, we cannot go after every single a$$hole and extremist in the world. We're already at war with two third world countries which helped balloon the budget deficit. If we tried to directly go after every "bad" country like we did with Iraq and Afghanistan we'd be too overstretched, too much in debt (as if we aren't already?) and the world would completely hate us. So Rogue's model of politics is pretty close to what we must achieve in order to survive.

I understand that. However when you are ready for war, most of the times it is sufficient for your adversaries to give up or at least play good for a while.

Take the present situation. Should we or should we not help the Libyan rebellion? 'We don't have money, we like our peace, another conflict is too much, what will come from that, they won't appreciate it.....' I understand these concerns but....

See, typical indecisive Nice guy. We know what is the right action and we should act upon it. And maybe we will find better ways to help than full blown invasion. But this waiting is helping nobody except that pr1ck.

I'm just trying to say that we should research our motives. Is it laziness/fear/approval seeking or rational pro-acting ?

 

[DanelMadr]

Thanks for the input guys.

 

[ArcBound]

I understand that. However when you are ready for war, most of the times it is sufficient for your adversaries to give up or at least play good for a while.

Like North Korea who plays good but tries to act out every couple of months

Take the present situation. Should we or should we not help the Libyan rebellion? 'We don't have money, we like our peace, another conflict is too much, what will come from that, they won't appreciate it.....' I understand these concerns but....

See, typical indecisive Nice guy. We know what is the right action and we should act upon it. And maybe we will find better ways to help than full blown invasion. But this waiting is helping nobody except that pr1ck.

What IS the right action? Bomb them and ruin our world image? Place an embargo like we do on Iran and still have it not work? Provide military "advisors". Supply them arms like we did in Afghanistan decades ago? Try to assassinate the Libyan dictator like we tried to do to Fidel Castro many times? We did all of these and all of them have backfired or failed.

I'm just trying to say that we should research our motives. Is it laziness/fear/approval seeking or rational pro-acting ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts

That's only the list of ongoing military conflicts not even factoring in major political conflicts. It is quite literally physically and economically impossible for America to be involved in each one or even a quarter of the conflicts. So no, I don't think its laziness/fear/approval. People should stop looking to America to be the police of the world.

 

[DanelMadr]

Like North Korea who plays good but tries to act out every couple of months

Exactly. We should be harder on that Kim Dong Ill. If we would step down, he will attack the South or Japan or put even more people in labor camps or starve them to death. You know what I mean. So what do you want? On one hand you want him out and on another you don't want to pay the price for taking him out. I understand the price can be high so I don't blame anyone for not acting harder.

What IS the right action? Bomb them and ruin our world image?

Nope.

Place an embargo like we do on Iran and still have it not work?

Nope.

Provide military "advisors". Supply them arms like we did in Afghanistan decades ago?

Yep. There is a chance that the guns eventually end up in the hands of extremists in the end. At least we tried. North Africa is more enlightened than Afganistan and the culture is different, so there is smaller chance of that.
If we did nothing in Afghanistan, Russians would fvck up Pakistan, India as they did in Africa in Angola etc. And the Russians were not interested in human rights not a zinch.

Try to assassinate the Libyan dictator like we tried to do to Fidel Castro many times? We did all of these and all of them have backfired or failed.

Clearly because it was done like half azz way. Assassinating a dictator is never easy and is more for political gain, because the vacuum gets filled quickly if you don't follow with other means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_military_conflicts

That's only the list of ongoing military conflicts not even factoring in major political conflicts. It is quite literally physically and economically impossible for America to be involved in each one or even a quarter of the conflicts. So no, I don't think its laziness/fear/approval. People should stop looking to America to be the police of the world.

I absolutely agree with that. Europeans should put their shyt together. It is on their turf after all. But it is laziness....you have to work harder to compensate the costs or cut on luxury like welfare etc. And it is fear of disapproval for obvious reasons.
China and Russia should realize that they should cooperate and stop that hating. Oh, they can't. They have their own agenda...'We against them' so our slaves won't hang us on a tree.

Great debate. Do you enjoy it like I do?

 

[DanelMadr]

Not sure about politics but from a social viewpoint, being nice to everyone is smart. To be successful you have to learn to get along with anyone your with. You can't be confrontational even in the most heated situations, learn to please others and you will get what you want.

Oh shyt.
First you will go very frustrated over time.
Second some people don't play this fair play game...you end up murdered or enslaved.