The main two players in the news recently have been Vince Cable and Julian Assange – and they both appear to be victims of nothing more serious than male vanity which, in both their cases, seems to have tipped over into arrogance.
What is more pleasing to a man of a certain age than two pretty young things giggling at your jokes and engaging in a bit of harmless flirtation. It is no accident that the Daily Telegraph sent a brace of young journettes to pose as Vince’s constituents. Very quickly they appear to have massaged his ego to such an extent that he went all the way in trying to overstate both his importance, his position in the government hierarchy and the length of his political willy.
If the newspaper has sent along two crusty old male journos, there’s no way in a million years that Vince would have succumbed to their charms in the way that he did with the ladies.
His craving for “esteem in the eyes of others” suggests that perhaps he needs a “fix” of what are called “brain needs” possibly because his basic physical and/or psychological needs are not being totally satisfied either at home or the workplace. The sad old duffer obviously needs affirmation. If it is not dished out by his superiors, he will satiate the need as soon as the opportunity presents itself. That is why the honey trap sprung by young Telegraph totty worked so beautifully.
Exaggeration of our own professional importance, our experience and our qualifications, believe it or not, is a normal activity. It starts as early as our first job. When your parents asked you as an 18 year-old what you did at the office. It is never….”Well, I made the tea, received two bollockings and spent the rest of the day staring at my computer screen, did a bit on ebay and then an hour on Facebook….” It would be nearer to: ” The boss asked me for my opinion on X, then I attended a marketing meeting where I made a short presentation etc etc. Yes…it looks really promising…”
It is normal to exaggerate one’s own importance. Vince did not do it for physical or financial need. His need was purely emotional/psychological. It was “ego-food” and it would seem that he ate his fill. In true warrior-hunter-gatherer style, he imagined himself as Rupert Murdoch’s adversary and suggested that he had already won the battle. However, the sad fact is that he doesn’t even belong in the same arena as Murdoch. Cable is a former academic, economist and now, through the accident of a bad (in his opinion) electoral system, Secretary of State.
Meanwhile Murdoch is one of the world’s best businessmen who not-only doesn’t take prisoners, he shoots the wounded. To him, Cable’s status in no more than that of a very minor irritant.
Vince can dream of being a hard-nosed testosterone-fuelled tough guy business-psycho but in reality, he is an academic bean counter who got lucky.
Remember when he was everyone’s favourite political uncle? Remember when he delivered that swingeing put-down to Chairman Brown? You know, the Stalin to Mr Bean joke? Now, Vince looks like a sad old git whose sell-by date has been tattooed on his forehead and who will be given Transport or Culture at the next reshuffle or, he will confirm that there is life after death by accepting a peerage.
One hates to watch a corpse twich but there is no way back.
Now that he has been stripped of the power to rule on Murdoch’s bid for control of BSkyB, Vince is well-and-truly fatally wouded. That makes him a potential danger to the Government and both Cameron and Clegg know it. There have been several coy references to the original quote but the fact is that Cameron would prefer to have Vince inside the tent pissing out rather that outside the tent pissing in.
Cameron’s advisers will probably be spending this coming weekend working out what sort of role Cable would accept without damaging the coalition…and Cable? He will be at home, continuing to cringe and probably still muttering the F-word. Lots.
Assange is also suffering from terminal vanity and you may be surprised to hear that both he and Cable probably share the same psychometric profile. Both are analyticals but whereas Cable is an Analytical-Expressive, Assange seems to be exhibiting all the classic traits of an Analytical-Driver. The starting point for both is a love of facts and figures.
Citizens of Nerdania.
The big difference is that Cable does have the added bonus of emotion whereas Assange is probably a sociopath. READ HERE and see if , from what you have seen and heard of Assange, you can perceive him as behaving according to type.
Assange has probably never been properly emotionally involved and his interests will be sexual rather than emotional. If you listen to his version of the “rapes”, you may notice that he portrays himself as the victim, irrespective of the Swedish technicalities and interpretations of the concept of rape.
The Wikileak disclosures have given him worldwide fame and he will be feeling invincible – even though he may be in for some local trouble in Sweden as a result of those rape allegations. Make no mistake he will welcome the proceedings to extradite him to the States because that will give him even more notoriety and fame and because he knows that the process may take years to complete.
By far the best way to deal with him would be to starve him and his ego of the oxygen of publicity and notoriety.
What Wikileaks is doing is sound but it is unfortunate that it is headed by such an arrogant publicity addict. Regrettably, the media continues to feed his over-active ego.
So we have Cable, the Analytical-Expressive who is mortified and embarrassed by his own clumsiness and on the other hand, we have Assange the Analytical-Driver who does not feel even remotely humiliated by accusations of rape and who continues to wallow in the discomfort of indiscreet politicians.
Within the media, the indiscreet politician Cable has become a figure of fun whereas Assange, in spite of his obvious personal failings is portrayed as a hero of free-speech and non-censorship.
Both are vain men and both have made mistakes. But……………