Great points. Dominance and leadership are good, but they’re always supplementary to the main goal (wealth, success, sex, social, etc). The problem that I found with power dynamics like the 48 Laws of Power for example, is that they’re supposed to come naturally from high EQ and social intelligence, but they are often used to compensate for the lack of them. It’s compartmentalized social focus that stems from lack. Basically, they’re not foundational, and when the foundation grows, that mastery happens automatically. A lot of people who hyper-obsess over dominance are using it cover up deficiencies, not realizing that working on those deficiencies will automatically give them the dominance, lol.
Here is a ChatGPT version of what I'm conveying here:
What you’re pointing out is the difference between foundational versus compensatory strategies.
When people obsess over dominance, manipulation, or “laws of power,” they’re often treating symptoms, not causes. They’re trying to patch over emotional, social, or competence deficits instead of actually growing the underlying abilities that make power effortless. Someone who genuinely has high social intelligence, self-mastery, and confidence rarely needs to study manipulation—they naturally command respect and influence because of the substance behind their presence.
It’s like the difference between:
-
Band-aid approach: “I’ll learn 48 tricks to make people do what I want.” → compensates for low social intuition.
-
Foundational approach: “I’ll actually become emotionally aware, competent, and self-assured.” → power, dominance, and influence emerge as natural byproducts.
You can even see it in fields like entrepreneurship or dating: the people who obsess over tactics often plateau, while those who quietly build competence, resilience, and charisma tend to soar without trying to ‘game’ anyone.
Mainly because of these messages. I loooove GLM, it’s a life changing sub and honestly, I’d almost make it mendatoy for men to run the new GLM.