|Home||Switchboard||Unix Administration||Red Hat||TCP/IP Networks||Neoliberalism||Toxic Managers|
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Skepticism and critical thinking is not panacea, but can help to understand the world better
If you wish to see the narcissist in their natural habitat, the chat boards and comment sections of some blogs are where the marginally successful dwell, often dominating the conversation with their self-obsessed arrogance. Sometimes in periods of unusual circumstances they can even rise to positions of power. They are attracted to corporate structures, and financial and political positions.
Jesse's Café Américain
"Narcissism falls along the axis of what psychologists call personality disorders, one of a group that includes antisocial, dependent, histrionic, avoidant and borderline personalities.
But by most measures, narcissism is one of the worst, if only because the narcissists themselves are so clueless."
-- Jeffrey Kluger
"Hate is the complement of fear and narcissists like being feared. It imbues them with an intoxicating sensation of omnipotence...
The sadistic narcissist perceives himself as godlike, ruthless and devoid of scruples, capricious and unfathomable, emotion-less and non-sexual, omniscient, omnipotent and omni-present, a plague, a devastation, an inescapable verdict."
-- Sam Vaknin
They have no humility, no doubts, and no empathy. Whatever life or luck or others may have helped them to achieve, they feel that they deserve it all, and more. They have worked for everything they have, whereas others who have suffered setbacks and misfortune simply have made bad choices or been lazy. And if others have been cheated and abused, then they deserve it for being stupid.
They are often judgmental and racist, and brimming over with hateful scorn for others, unless they can be co-opted into their sphere of influence and behave according to the narcissist's world and rules.
As Thomas Aquinas said, 'well-ordered self-love is right and natural.' It is when this natural behaviour becomes excessive and twisted that it becomes a pathology, a disorder of the personality.
Often narcissists have exaggerated ideas about their own talents and worth and work. Sometimes they
are compensating for the neglect and disregard, or even abuse, of one or both parents who failed to
see and appreciate how special they are. At other times they are the product of an environment in which
they have been raised to believe that they are special, and deserve special treatment and consideration.
Since obviously not all children of privilege or abuse become narcissists, it might have its genesis
in an untreated form of depression or genetic predisposition.
"The classic narcissist is overly self-confident and sees themselves as superior than other people. Think of a child who has always been told by mom and dad that they would be great, and then that child takes and internally distorts that message into superiority.If this affliction is accompanied by other problems such as sadism or malignant mania, they may become a destructive element for all who encounter them. Their illness affects others more than themselves, so they may often not seek treatment, and excuse the damage they inflict with the 'weakness' of others.
The compensatory narcissist covers up with their grandiose behavior, a deep-seated deficit in self-esteem. Think of a child who felt devalued but instead of giving up on life, resorts to fantasies of grandeur and greatness. This person will either live in that fantasy world or decide to create that fantasy world in real life."
They seek to fill the great empty holes of self-loathing with the lives and possessions of others, all the while proudly wreathing their actions with self serving rationalization.
They are more to be pitied than scorned, as they are living in a small part the hell which they are making for themselves. But we must guard ourselves against their powerful certainty in an age of uncertainty. Their certainty is a madness which serves none but itself.
"Narcissism is a psychological condition defined as an obsession with the self. While not all forms of self-love or self-interest are destructive, extreme cases can be very damaging and may be diagnosed as narcissistic personality disorder (NPD).
In these instances, the disorder is characterized by a lack of empathy for others, sadistic or destructive tendencies, and a compulsion to satisfy personal needs above all other goals.
People suffering from NPD tend to have difficulty establishing or maintaining friendships, close family relationships, and even careers. About 1% of people have this condition, and up to 3/4 of those diagnosed with it are men.
The signs of narcissism often revolve around a person's perception of himself in comparison to other people.
Those with severe cases often believe they are naturally superior to others or that they possess extraordinary capabilities. They may have extreme difficulty acknowledging personal weaknesses, yet also have fragile self-esteem.
Narcissistic people also frequently believe that they are not truly appreciated, and can be prone to outbursts of anger, jealousy, and self-loathing when they do not get what they feel they deserve."
Hallmarks of Narcissism
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
•Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
•Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
•Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
•Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
•Is often envious of others or believes others are envious of him or her
•Requires excessive admiration
•Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
•Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
•Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
"A rogue does not laugh in the same way that an honest man does; a hypocrite does not shed the tears of a man of good faith. All falsehood is a mask; and however well made the mask may be, with a little attention we may always succeed in distinguishing it from the true face."
Could that amazing new person you or a loved one is dating actually be a sociopath? It's not as far-fetched as you might imagine. Roughly one in 25 Americans is a sociopath, according to Harvard psychologist Dr. Martha Stout, author of The Sociopath Next Door.
Of course, not all sociopaths are dangerous criminals. But they certainly can make life difficult, given that the defining characteristic of sociopathy is antisocial behavior.
Here are 11 RED FLAGS to look out for:
- RED FLAG #1. Having an oversized ego.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) notes that sociopaths have an inflated sense of self. They are narcissists to the extreme, with a huge sense of entitlement, Dr. Seth Meyers, a clinical psychologist with the L.A. County Department of Mental Health, wrote for Psychology Today. They tend to blame others for their own failures. narcissist
- RED FLAG #2. Lying and exhibiting manipulative behavior.
Sociopaths use deceit and manipulation on a regular basis. Why? "Lying for the sake of lying. Lying just to see whether you can trick people. And sometimes telling larger lies to get larger effects," Dr. Stout told Interview Magazine.
- RED FLAG #3. Exhibiting a lack of empathy.
"They don't really have the meaningful emotional inner worlds that most people have and perhaps because of that they can't really imagine or feel the emotional worlds of other people," M. E. Thomas, a diagnosed sociopath and author of Confessions Of A Sociopath, told NPR. "It's very foreign to them." 135511334
- RED FLAG #4. Showing a lack of remorse or shame.
The DSM-V entry on antisocial personality disorder indicates that sociopaths lack remorse, guilt or shame.
- RED FLAG #5. Staying eerily calm in scary or dangerous situations.
A sociopath might not be anxious following a car accident, for instance, M.E. Thomas said. And experiments have shown that while normal people show fear when they see disturbing images or are threatened with electric shocks, sociopaths tend not to. person car accident
- RED FLAG #6. Behaving irresponsibly or with extreme impulsivity.
Sociopaths bounce from goal to goal, and act on the spur of the moment, according to the DSM. They can be irresponsible when it comes to their finances and their obligations to other people.
- RED FLAG #7. Having few friends.
Sociopaths tend not to have friends--not real ones, anyway. "Sociopaths don't want friends, unless they need them. Or all of their friends are superficially connected with them, friends by association," psychotherapist Ross Rosenberg, author of the Human Magnet Syndrome, told The Huffington Post. nofriends
- RED FLAG #8. Being charming--but only superfically.
Sociopaths can be very charismatic and friendly -- because they know it will help them get what they want. "They are expert con artists and always have a secret agenda," Rosenberg said. "People are so amazed when they find that someone is a sociopath because they're so amazingly effective at blending in. They're masters of disguise. Their main tool to keep them from being discovered is a creation of an outer personality."
As M.E. Thomas described in a post for Psychology Today: "You would like me if you met me. I have the kind of smile that is common among television show characters and rare in real life, perfect in its sparkly teeth dimensions and ability to express pleasant invitation."
- RED FLAG #9. Living by the "pleasure principle."
"If it feels good and they are able to avoid consequences, they will do it! They live their life in the fast lane -- to the extreme -- seeking stimulation, excitement and pleasure from wherever they can get it," Rosenberg wrote in Human Magnet Syndrome.
- RED FLAG #10. Showing disregard for societal norms.
They break rules and laws because they don't believe society's rules apply to them, psychiatrist Dr. Dale Archer wrote in a blog on Psychology Today.
- RED FLAG #11. Having "intense" eyes.
Sociopaths have no problem with maintaining uninterrupted eye contact. "Our failure to look away politely is also perceived as being aggressive or seductive," M.E. Thomas wrote for Psychology Today. stare
I am a man, and an alpha male at that, and I have stumbled in to a couple of (professional)women that fit six out of the eleven mentioned. When men lie they are convincing, when women lie they are believable. What's the difference? Nothing, they are the same type of people. Different genders only.
458 Fans .
This is the guy I broke up with, after two yrars, last week. In retrospect, I thought of him more as a narcissist. My heart hurts, but my head is relieved. Whatever you call it, these peoplr only know how to use. They are charming and know how disarm. I will be smarter next time.
The author of this article implies that sociopaths are men. Believe me, there are plenty of women who fit the description.
7.7% of men and in 1.9% of women. According to Wiki. Not a terribly reliable source, but other websites tend to agree with this one.
we had two sociopath's in the white house, guess ?
ItsGettingWeird (or is it just me?) .
Sees no value in personal photographs of family & friends ("just pieces of paper" to them). Any photos will not be cared for and placed in frames or albums; you'll find them stuffed into a box, stored out of sight.
Not very interested in movies, novels, music, either. That's stuff about human emotions and relationships, and sociopaths see it as a waste of their time.
I read somewhere that it's 1:10 for hedge fund folks. what a surprise!
#1 clue - constantly lying about insignificant or stupid stuff for absolutely no reason. When caught, they either change the subject, or get angry/violent (which also changes the focus away from the lie). They really enjoy making you wonder "why" (about everything and anything), because it gives them power over you.
Jane Cubelli .
How is this different from just being a pathological liar? I'm just asking since I know a pathological liar and he doesn't fit the other criteria of a sociopath.
July 27, 2013 | Jesse's Café Américain... ... ...
I have a high regard for Frank Ochberg, although he normally writes about other aspects of psychology especially Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and victimization.
Like others in business, I have had the occasional misfortune to encounter a few obvious narcissists, and probable psychopaths, during my thirty years long corporate business career. I learned to avoid them at all costs, no matter how intriguing or attractive their activities and personalities may have been. There was always a price to be paid. And if you have one as a boss, change is sometimes the only recourse.
They are rarely responsive to or capable of genuine friendship, but rather tend to relate best on a power-subordinate level, and in peers prefer more active controls like greed, scheming, and if possible, various forms of blackmail, often financial but sometimes more involved.
They do not like the independent minded person or moral personality in the least. They despise and fear them because they view morality or other limitations as a weakness, and fear them because they do not bend easily to control. Even if loyalty is offered they do not trust it because they do not know what it is. It is most often about the need for certainty and control on a primitive level.
Invariably if you know someone who holds quite a few people in contempt, and not mere dislike, the chances are pretty good that at some point they will hold you in the same contempt as well. If you wish to know the measure of a person, watch how they treat those who they perceive to be weaker or vulnerable. Listen to their words, but pay more regard to their actions.
And they tend to attract other people with personality disorders into loose groupings that can become self-promotional. If they ever obtain a significant amount of control of a business, that entity will sooner or later be in serious trouble, often shockingly so. What were they thinking? They were well beyond reason, and their morality is largely self-referential.
It is a problem that far too often power attracts those who would abuse it. And so there is a need for transparency, checks and balances, and rules that limit concentrations of power, both in the corporate and in the political worlds.
All systems that rely on the assumption of a natural rationality and inherent goodness of leaders and key participants are doomed to a tragic failure. There is strength in diversity, simple because as Lord Acton observed, 'where there are concentrations of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that.'
Humans, like dogs, need to know who the pack leader is. Which is why the sociopaths are usually at the head of the pack.
No; that's just some humans. It isn't just a matter of sociopaths rising to the top; there's an ongoing complicity between sociopaths and that segment of the population who quite like to have them in charge. The rest of us pay the price.
Perhaps we should filter them out at birth
Might be better to abandon the patently absurd notion that authority, moral discipline, the inculcation of rules and respect, etc. etc. are guarantors of civilisation. Rampant authority produces authoritarian types - fearful followers and damaged and brutalised shitheads.
If society stopped producing people with authoritarian personalities (from the obnoxious martinets who stalk Cif wanking on about drugs, fecklessness and the death penalty to the vast herds of lost, obedient cud chewers who vote for strong leaders with simple messages) most sociopaths would be rendered quite harmless....even good fun. A good many artists are sociopaths. ("Some of my best friends...." It's a damaged society that renders them dangerous.
Of course that's a pretty tall order - society reproduces the notion that raising children is like training marines or breaking wild horses in pretty much the same way that violent parents make for violent children.
SkepticLiberal@NOTaREALmerican - Stop saying sociopath FFS. Is that the new 'crypto-facist' buzz word for you to attribute every shortcoming to?IllusionOfFairness
If you use that term so broadly, it loses all meaning. People who put themselves first and spend time (and social credit) manipulating people to get what they want (but not too much) will by definition get a better result. There is literally nothing anyone could hope to do to change that.
All we can (and ought?) to do is ensure that the incentive system is set up such that those people stay within acceptable boundaries. i.e. within the law and within public opinion. That way they are able to succeed by staying within the law instead of being pushed outside it.@SkepticLiberal -
Stop saying sociopath FFS. Is that the new 'crypto-facist' buzz word for you to attribute every shortcoming to?
Yep, for the last couple of years everything has been the fault of "sociopaths". When stated on the internet, it seems to mean anyone you don't like and is something fixed and unchanging that you can identify from--roughly--birth. I think at some point someone got hold of the crypto-facist dictionary, crayoned out "undesirable" and replaced it with "sociopath" adding in some little pseudo-scientific snippets to the definition for good measure.
(BTW, less snarkily, I agree with you on both overuse and indentivisation.)
May 19, 2013 | naked capitalism
I keep going back to Jeffrey Sachs, with whom Flassbeck and Jay (and Soros) seem to agree:
Jeffrey Sachs: Well, thank you very much for saying it and practicing it. I do believe – by the way, I'm just going to end here because I've been told I have to run to the U.N. in fact right now – I believe we have a crisis of values that is extremely deep, because the regulations and the legal structures need reform. But I meet a lot of these people on Wall Street on a regular basis right now. I'm going to put it very bluntly. I regard the moral environment as pathological. And I'm talking about the human interactions that I have. I've not seen anything like this, not felt it so palpably. These people are out to make billions of dollars and nothing should stop them from that. They have no responsibility to pay taxes. They have no responsibility to their clients. They have no responsibility to people, counterparties in transactions. They are tough, greedy, aggressive, and feel absolutely out of control, you know, in a quite literal sense. And they have gamed the system to a remarkable extent, and they have a docile president, a docile White House, and a docile regulatory system that absolutely can't find its voice. It's terrified of these companies.
If you look at the campaign contributions, which I happened to do yesterday for another purpose, the financial markets are the number one campaign contributors in the U.S. system now. We have a corrupt politics to the core, I'm afraid to say, and no party is – I mean there's – if not both parties are up to their necks in this. This has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It really doesn't have anything to do with right wing or left wing, by the way. The corruption is, as far as I can see, everywhere. But what it's led to is this sense of impunity that is really stunning, and you feel it on the individual level right now, and it's very, very unhealthy.
I have waited for four years, five years now, to see one figure on Wall Street speak in a moral language, and I've not seen it once. And that is shocking to me. And if they won't, I've waited for a judge, for our president, for somebody, and it hasn't happened. And by the way it's not going to happen anytime soon it seems.
mansoor h khan:
Throughout history elites in all societies have always worked to preserve and maintain social stability. They know war and chaos is very risky and will probably end their good life eventually.
Are our elites that stupid? Why would they not have some balance in society to avert war and chaos?
May 19, 2013 at 10:30 am
We have elites which support Monstanto and nuclear power, things that have the potential of wiping out all life on earth, including that of the elites?
The obvious answer of course is that they are not stupid, but psychotic. If you look at it from that perspective, then everything the elites do makes perfect sense.
May 20, 2013 at 12:59 am
They are incapable of being afraid of long-term consequences, due to a mental defect.
"But in the end, they cannot succeed with that. They can only succeed with a flourishing economy, and you can make money in the long term only if the economy is growing sufficiently quick." ……………
..obviously unaware of "Shock Doctrine-Rise of Disaster Capitalism", performed upon South-Central American nations, 70′s, 80′s…(and related war crimes, by Friedmanite-"Chicago Boys" war criminals)…
..have we already forgotten HW telling "W" he didn't take out Saddam, as it would DESTABILIZE the entire Middle-East?? Does anyone believe DEstabilization was not the Cheney-"W"-bushit GOAL??
"Civilization" be damned…mother earth takes no prisoners…historical documentation (Kevin Phillips-"American Dynasty"-"American Theocracy") shows what happens when manufacturing based economies DEvolve into "financial services"=paper debt economies…and Phillips was Nixon acolyte..
Timothy Y. Fong
May 19, 2013
"But the political economy is as much like a family as government is like a household. Is there a way forward here? Readers?" The problem is pretty simple. American elites seem to believe that the US is immune to the cycle of nations. They simply cannot grasp the potential negative outcomes. That is, if things go really wrong, some oligarchs and their retainers (both public and private) will find themselves torn apart by angry crowds, or pursued to the ends of the earth by a new revolutionary government.
The denial falls into two categories. The first, and most common, is a belief that "democracy" and the Constitution mean that things can never fall apart. This is a common belief amongst attorneys and other working professionals.
I find this view to be especially ironic when expressed by relatively conservative Christians, since one of the basic tenants of Christianity is that human beings are fundamentally fallen and imperfect. Apparently, however, that doesn't apply to Americans, which again, makes no sense, seeing as the Bible does not mention the United States anywhere. Then again, it does make sense, as a friend of mine in the clergy has observed that some of his most rabidly conservative congregants have never actually read the Bible.
Professionals of course, generally have to make it through the filtering system of higher education in the United States, which means buying into the reigning political orthodoxy. Incidentally, that recent survey about American attitudes toward armed rebellion seemed to show that the more education someone had, the less likely they were to believe that armed rebellion would be necessary in the coming years.
The second view, which I suspect is in play amongst the pathological elite mentioned by Sachs, is the belief that they can buy protection. Call it the "high walls and trustworthy details" philosophy. I can see how a person could believe that if they live in a walled community (or co-op with a doorman), and have a trustworthy security detail, they can avoid any consequences for their actions. Security details can be either wholly private, or simply off duty police officers. Indeed, in a place like NYC, the police can be ordered (paid) to bust the heads of any pesky protesters.
In that light, Mayor Bloomberg's campaign to more strictly control firearms makes perfect sense. The truly worthy….err…wealthy, will always be able to hire off duty armed police officers (pistols politely concealed) as bodyguards. Removing firearms from the hands of everyone else is a nice insurance policy. I understand that the dogma around here is that firearms and violence are ineffective nowadays in political struggles, but, I'm sorry, the fundamental drives of humans don't change, no matter how much we'd like to think otherwise. Bloomberg won't get his way outside of the Northeast. There are simply too many firearms in circulation, and any effective action to seize them would probably precipitate a civil war– at least secession, if not a split amongst security service personnel.
Ian Welsh had a very good interview the other day where he mentioned that if things go wrong, it will be very ugly, and a lot of innocent people will get hurt. That is true, and it is a measure of how depraved and foolish our elites are that they are risking that turn of events.
This is going to sound somewhat harsh, but perhaps what our society really needs is an extremely ugly lesson in the unintended consequences that can happen when a few people decide to take all the wealth and oppress the shit out of everyone else. That would be a decisive end to the ridiculous nonsense about how "it can't happen here because we have democracy." If that happens, and we survive, somehow, we should take a cue from the Japanese and their tsunami markers. After a tsunami, people mark the safe areas, and the areas where the water came up to. In some cases the markers are centuries old, a warning for the future. We should put up markers to remind everyone of the consequences of acting like short sighted sociopaths. Sociopaths may not feel empathy, but they certainly have an instinct for self preservation– and future sociopathic elites (let's not kid ourselves– they'll be back) should have a dire reminder of the lethal consequences of overreach.
I am afraid you are being romantic and melodramatic in your expectations. What is more likely is that the middle class will move seamlessly into customer service at Walmart and other oases of putrid consumerism.
Americans to the end will be passive consumers of vapid entertainment and disgusting fast food and carbonated sugar water. Look at the amazing number who still smoke cigarettes and gamble at casinos and horsetracks, not to mention bookmakers.
Our individualism may be carcinogenic and idiotic but it is deeply inbred.
Generalfeldmarschall Von Hindenbur:
I wish I could say jake is wrong. Things here will have to devolve to the level of the Latin American latifundia with the descendants of today's "middle class" (working class is a forbidden term) living in favelas and being hunted for sport by the children of the elites before they pull their head out and disabuse themselves of this Horatio Alger/Ayn Rand mythology that anyone can be rich through prayer and hard work.
Nations don't matter–we live in an emergent international Empire with an emergent imperial court and a virtual Emperor.
I don' believe this country is a Constitutional democracy on the federal level. The two Party system doesn't work anymore because the power-elite has gamed the system. The genius act the oligarchs used was to create an Orwellian state of permanent war which actually suspends the Constitution which is in place only at the pleasure of the power-elite. Boston showed what can happen should anything that looks like "terrorism" occur.
Washington is the main global imperial court and all who work there are all part of it. There is no difference between government officials, politicians and journalists other than the fact they represent somewhat different interests.
Great comment on education and how it vets the elite–that's why universities turn out little scared clones today.
I think armed rebellion is unlikey but I'm thankful to be living in the South nonetheless
Yes let's go for it! Would anybody like to join my new religious movement 'Hang a Banker for Christ.' If you won't do it for yourself, if you won't do it for your loved ones, if you won't do it for that stranger in need, then do it for the Lord!
To paraphrase George Carlin: Where do you think these "pathological elites" come from? Mars?
Parasites as "pathological" as the American ones could only survive on a certain type of host: a people of proud ignorance and infinite obedience.
What you call an infection (a Lenin o a Mao Tse-Tung) would actually require a population with many redeeming qualities. America, on the other hand, is the same old opportunist genocider it started out as, it just goes into hibernation for awhile, dormant like a retrovirus.
Americans would sooner idolize the pus-filled sac while calling to lay waste to the nearest defenseless minority.
I have the unfortunate history of having had too much experience with sociopaths, starting first and foremost with a parent who with the exception of murder (at least that I know of) meets all but one of the criteria of a textbook sociopath.
The sociopaths have gained control of the world. They care only of themselves. They are sadistic. They enjoy and receive pleasure from the suffering of others. So far, the only way I have found to counter such behavior is through the acts of creation and generosity. Art, music, dance, smithing, carving, cooking, sewing, knitting, weaving, gardening, any activity that leads to creation is the antithesis of the destruction. The act of giving freely is the antidote to greed.
So look around and say, what can I do myself? The very act of making your own bread and sharing it with others is the anarchy we so desperately need today.
Susan the other :
Reading Aesop's Fables is always encouraging because all those tales try to caution against greed by using an interesting truth. Which is as Lincoln told us "…. but you can't fool all of the people all of the time." And once trust is lost it is never recovered. It is always changed. Trust is a good example of evolution. It isn't a static thing. Just remember your parents, if you are old enough, who lived through the 30s and never trusted the banks or the stock market again and were extremely skeptical of real estate. That distrust ran so deep and was partially passed on to our generation that it created a condition whereby the Finance Industry had to think up all sorts of tricks to lure us back in. Which they did. But they regret it as much as we do. All this mess because corporations are trying hard not to pay livable wages. Sad and foolish.
Very like the French Revolution.
About a year ago I saw a BBC program about Versailles and the decades running up to the French Revolution and it was spookily like the situation in the US today. The government was perenially short of revenues – partly because of wars, but mainly because of a system which taxed only the poor (who, naturally couldn't pay much) while exempting the aristocracy who repeatedly used their political power to block any move to tax their vast wealth. In the end they paid with their heads while Britain won the struggle for colonial supremacy.
Those who ignore the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.
"What continually amazes me is why anybody in the country listens to anything they ever say?"
It seems that you have nailed the crux of the problem.
On one hand, we have the relatively small group of sociopaths who control the entire system - practicing their brand of sadism. On the other hand, we have the teeming middle class made up of both sycophant/inept sociopaths and willfully ignorant, self-hating masochists.
I'm actually beginning to believe there's something in our water supply that causes the majority of people to be docile. Any other generation of people at any other time in history would have seen this for what it is, by now, and would have put an end to it, one way or the other.
Then again, maybe not. Rome went on for a long time as a war-mongering kleptocracy governed by sociopaths
12 Million Americans Are Sociopaths
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. d.h.lawrence
It's interesting to see how people dance around the concepts of kleptocracy, class war, and wealth inequality. Apply these to the interview above and all the surprise and incomprehension melt away.
Flassbeck says "What we have is the systemic malfunctioning of the system, system malfunctioning of the labor market, systemic malfunctioning of the financial markets." This seems to me like a half statement. The system is indeed malfunctioning, as in not serving the interests of the 99%, but as an engine of looting and suppression of the 99% by the 1%, it is working just fine. The rich and elites may be evil and/or stupid but mostly they are criminal.
They are not irrational. They will loot to a crash and then loot the crash. They will keep doing this until there is nothing left or they are overthrown. This is the essence of kleptocracy. It is the real system we have, and it is functioning exactly as intended.
... ... ...
Moreover, much of the discussion in the comments is more interesting than in the post in that commenters question the why of the middle class and others as well as of the 1%. Why indeed do we – or so many of us – go along with this broken, or criminal, system? I'm not sure Lambert means it that way (applying to both the 1% AND the 99%) when he calls it, "the eternal question", but since both sides of a pathological relationship (the abusors and the abusees) are important if there is to be such a relationship at all, it IS pertinent. Finally, I assume like objects, a system taken alone can't be criminal or evil. Those qualities are imbued by the people who inhabit and use or are used by the system.
I'm not arguing your points, except perhaps the implication that, it's simple, (or easily understandable) "[if one applies the] concepts of kleptocracy, class war, and wealth inequality." Those may indeed be useful concepts with which to look at it, but even then IT is still not simple or easily cleared up to understanding regardless of the tools you bring to bear or of which side of the abuse one examines or both.
Mar 24, 2013 | ForbesHere's where it gets even more interesting. Last summer, Berezovsky's Chechen links came to the surface in a $6.5 billion London lawsuit that he had brought (and lost) against Roman Abramovich, a rival Russian oligarch. Abramovich claimed during the trial that Boris had links to Chechen terrorists, while an ex-Chechen separatist claimed that Boris financed separatists in the 1990s. Berezovsky denied these and other allegations. But the judge in the case - Mrs. [Elizabeth] Justice Gloster - valued what she called Abramovich's "responsible approach to giving answers which he could honestly support."
On the other hand, she annihilated Berezovsky. She declared that Boris had been an "unimpressive, and inherently unreliable, witness, who regarded truth as a transitory, flexible concept, which could be moulded to suit his current purposes. At times the evidence he gave was deliberately dishonest." At other times, the judge concluded, Berezovsky had "deluded himself into believing his own version of events." She ordered him to pay Abramovich's legal fees, which exceeded $100 million.
Of course, Klebnikov had concluded that much about Berezovsky nearly two decades ago. Recalls Forbes' London counsel, David Hooper, one of the world's top media-defense lawyers: "The man was a fairly polished liar because one of the things that Paul accused him of was how he milked his links with [Russian President Boris] Yeltsin and set up bank accounts for Yeltsin. Berezovsky denied it, but in the Abramovich case it suited him to change his story and say the opposite - so his evidence now became that he did have those close links with Yeltsin, and he claimed that that is what made him so valuable to Abramovich. He was a brazen liar, but Mrs. Justice Gloster saw through his mendacity."
Judging by Berezovsky' psychological profile he would never kill himself, no matter how much he suffered. Can he kill anybody else like Paul Khlebnikov for example ?
Absolutely and with very high probability.
No doubt, Berezovsky was very educated and clever person, but he also was a pathologically self-centered , egoistical , greedy beyond reason and ambitious person. This deadly combination made him a cold-blooded killer. Not that he was making killing himself, but he was a mastermind of many political killings, though unproved in court of law and thus speculative.
Isn't it amazing how London and other major financial centers seem to turn a blind eye when it comes to these oligarchs? No one asks too many questions. From what I have read, real estate taxes on expensive homes are very low in London. Very few people will be saying kaddish over the death of this one time thug.
March 26, 2013 | The Moscow Times
Boris Berezovsky could have, indeed, committed suicide. He was miserable in the final months of his life. A man who once flew only chartered flights was reduced to bumming $5,000 off a friend to buy an airplane ticket recently and reportedly sent a note to President Vladimir Putin telling the leader how great he was.
At the height of his powers in 1997, a businessman proposed a project to Berezovsky that he said could reap $25 million in profits. When Berezovsky turned it down, explaining that he "doesn't get involved with anything worth less than $50 million," he wasn't grandstanding in the least.
Yet Berezovsky was never a true businessman. Other people ran his businesses for him, people such as billionaire Roman Abramovich, who discarded Berezovsky the moment he fell out of favor with the authorities.
Above all, Berezovsky was a con man. Money was necessary for him, of course, but only as one of the devilish addictions that dominated his life: power, influence and sex.
Berezovsky had a nasty habit of lying. One of Berezovsky's favorite tricks was to call someone and inform them that he had appointed them to an influential post when, in fact, he had done nothing of the sort. He had only been present in the Kremlin when the appointment was made.
Berezovsky was the most highly placed con man in history, and he had an almost superhuman ability to translate his delirious fantasies into reality.
He was not the sole force behind Putin's rise to power: That was actually a decision made by "the Family," former President Boris Yeltsin's inner circle. But Berezovsky sincerely believed that he was responsible for Putin's political rise in 1999 and had no qualms about reminding everyone - including Putin - of it. That proved to be his fatal mistake.
Even after Berezovsky was no longer calling the shots, Abramovich paid him $2 billion for his stake in Sibneft and RusAl. Over the next 10 years, Berezovsky spent every last penny of that money on women, luxury villas, yachts, chartered flights and pointless lawsuits.
Following his unsuccessful lawsuit against Abramovich, Berezovsky was a broken man, a complete wreck. In reality, he should have won the case, but he torpedoed his own chances with his deeply rooted habit of lying - this time under oath in a London court.
What he didn't understand is that you can act like that in Moscow and get away with it, but not in London. In that case, Berezovsky claimed he had created Sibneft and opened the doors to the Kremlin halls of power. But those words held little weight because he had testified during a previous legal dispute with Forbes that he had no relationship to Sibneft and was not the "godfather of the Kremlin."
Losing the case to Abramovich was the final blow for Berezovsky, and it left him with huge debts and no hope. Nobody needed him anymore - not even his own family members, who had come to see Berezovsky as their endless source of wealth.
Berezovsky, who not long ago wrote a letter about how he would stage a revolution in Russia, ended up appealing to Putin for permission to return to his homeland. Putin ignored him. After that, there was nothing left for him but to die.
I'm going to try to compare/contrast the "psychopathic" and "sociopathic" traits of the elite, wealthy, higher-echelon class of the new world order. Understanding the way they think is beneficial because they even admit that 90% of the war on the people is psychological.
Why do I want to do this? Because it seems like the people are afraid of them because they don't know how they tick. If you figure out the behavior and mindset of the elite, you de-construct the matrix and it's all laid out in front of you. But since most people are NOT psychopathic or sociopathic, they cannot understand why a criminal element would want to "cull" 80-90% of the population, why they would be so bloodthirsty, why they are ruthless, why they like to hurt the innocent more than punishing the wicked, etc. When faced with the prospect that some people just really are that wealthy and mentally ill.
When people are inbred as much as some of the elite have, they begin to display abnormal behavioral symptoms along with genetic birth defects ("shallow gene pool" effect). These people are sick and twisted emotionally and psychologically, but it's important to understand the different KINDS of psychopathy, the way they operate, because God KNOWS they've been doing that to us for hundreds of years. Time to dissect the mind of the criminal elite.
The Psychopathic Personality
The Psychopathic Personality
Revised: May 20, 2007
The psychopath is one of the most fascinating and distressing problems of human experience. For the most part, a psychopath never remains attached to anyone or anything. They live a "predatory" lifestyle. They feel little or no regret, and little or no remorse - except when they are caught. They need relationships, but see people as obstacles to overcome and be eliminated. If not, they see people in terms of how they can be used. They use people for stimulation, to build their self-esteem and they invariably value people in terms of their material value (money, property, etc..). (Sounds like the entire Rockefeller family and the majority of wall street execs and washington lobbyists)
A psychopath can have high verbal intelligence, but they typically lack "emotional intelligence". They can be expert in manipulating others by playing to their emotions. There is a shallow quality to the emotional aspect of their stories (i.e., how they felt, why they felt that way, or how others may have felt and why). The lack of emotional intelligence is the first good sign you may be dealing with a psychopath. A history of criminal behavior in which they do not seem to learn from their experience, but merely think about ways to not get caught is the second best sign. (This is becoming more and more obvious as time goes on that the elite's plan for world government is falling apart at the seams, and the public is waking up and finding out what they have done. Instead of learning their lesson (humans are not their slaves, that to try to manipulate humanity and stunting the growth of the competition is a crime against God, etc.) and backing off, though, the elite have merely looked for ways to do it anyway and get away with it.
The following is a list of items based on the research of Robert Hare, Ph.D. which is derived from the "The Hare Psychopathy Checklist-Revised, .1991, Toronto: Multi-Health Systems." These are the most highly researched and recognized characteristics of psychopathic personality and behavior.
* glibness/superficial charm
* grandiose sense of self worth
* need for stimulation/prone to boredom
* pathological lying
* lack of remorse or guilt
* shallow emotional response
* callous/lack of empathy
* parasitic lifestyle
* poor behavioral controls
* promiscuous sexual behavior
* early behavioral problems (the elite children are no doubt raised by nannies most of their early childhood, and extravagantly expensive prep school programs. The nannies and teachers are encouraged to promote narcissistic, elitist and nihilistic behavior among their students, and to follow "traditional standards of behavior" (double standard) of the elite--that they can do whatever they want. Literally. So when these elites display behavioral problems as children, they're probably rewarded for it, or it is swept under the rug.
* lack of realistic long term goals (goal-setting isn't a problem for the elite. REALISTIC goal-setting might be, though--like wanting to grab the guns from the American people--not too realistic, guys)
* impulsivity (8-8-8, anyone?)
* irresponsibility (also displayed on 8-8-8, as the REAL actions of the Georgians were blasted all over the web by the infowarriors out there--Good job, guys. )
* failure to accept responsibility for their own actions ( brzezinski not taking public responsibility for encouraging the Chinese to support Pol Pot)
* many short term relationships
* juvenile delinquency (see above at "early behavioral problems")
* revocation of conditional release (not a problem, they never go to jail)
* criminal versatility (BECAUSE they've gotten away with so much, they can take it to an extreme level before any kind of public outrage about anything)
According to wikipedia (links to real studies):
Relationship to other terms
Relationship to sociopathy
The difference between sociopathy and psychopathy, according to Hare, may "reflect the user's views on the origins and determinates of the disorder."
David T. Lykken proposes psychopathy and sociopathy are two distinct kinds of antisocial personality disorder. He believes psychopaths are born with temperamental differences such as impulsivity, cortical underarousal, and fearlessness that lead them to risk-seeking behavior and an inability to internalize social norms. (I believe most of the key players for the nwo are psychopaths: the rockefellers, the rothschilds, on down to the "pseudo-elites" like politicians and top lobbyists (like the Bushes, the Clintons, any of the Bohemian Grove members in general)
On the other hand, he claims sociopaths have relatively normal temperaments; their personality disorder being more an effect of negative sociological factors like parental neglect, delinquent peers, poverty, and extremely low or extremely high intelligence. (they just described the 20-25% of the white collar class that knowingly lets the elite get away with everything. they are usually highly intelligent but compartmentalized to a degree. They know that what they're doing is wrong, they know the elites are doing wrong, but they choose to do nothing about it because they like the mini-power trip it gives them, and the feeling of being "special" and "elite" even though it's obvious that they live in bondage to the new world order. This would also apply to TV personalities who are obvious about towing the party line)
Both personality disorders are, of course, the result of an interaction between genetic predispositions and environmental factors, but psychopathy leans towards the hereditary whereas sociopathy tends towards the environmental.
Relationship to antisocial personality disorder
The criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder were derived from the Research Diagnositic Criteria developed by Spitzer, Endicott and Robbins (1978). There was concern in the development of DSM-IV there was too much emphasis on research data and not enough on the more traditional psychopathic traits such as a lack of empathy, superficial charm, and inflated self appraisal. Field trial data indicated some of these traits of psychopathy derived from the Psychopathy Checklist developed by Hare et al., 1992, were difficult to assess reliably and thus were not included. Lack of remorse is an example. The antisocial person may express genuine or false guilt or remorse and/or offer excuses and rationalizations. However, a history of criminal acts in itself suggests little remorse or guilt. (This is the majority of the key nwo players in the biotech and military/intelligence fields, like the ones who KNEW about the HIV in the blood used for Factor VIII, but did nothing to stop it from being shipped out. It also pertains to the big university professors who like to go on and on about how humanity is a scourge upon the earth and how they can't wait until 90% of us DIE--http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,190479,00.html. )
The American Psychiatric Association removed the word "psychopathy" or "psychopathic", and started using the term "Antisocial Personality" to cover the disorder in DSM-II. (Maybe their bosses felt targeted.)
The World Health Organization's stance in its ICD-10 refers to psychopathy, sociopathy, antisocial personality, asocial personality, and amoral personality as synonyms for dissocial personality disorder. Further, the DSM was meant as a diagnostic guide, and the term psychopath best fit the criteria met for antisocial personality disorder.
 Relationship to sex offenders (I think the Franklin cover-up and DynCorp's recent doings, not to mention the mk-Ultra victims like Cathy O'brien that claim sexual abuse show a direct relationship between psychopaths and sex crime--particularly sex with children. But the "research studies" basically just say that "apples can be red or green but that not everything red or green is an apple" and claims that the evidence for psychopaths being pedophiles is "outdated". No, it's just not being investigated)
No clinical definition of psychopathy indicates that psychopaths are especially prone to commit sexually-oriented murders, and scientific studies do not suggest that a large proportion of psychopaths have committed these crimes. Although some claim a large proportion of such offenders have been classified as psychopathic, this evidence comes from a single, unrepeated research study using the Rorschach Inkblot Test, an invalid test for psychopathy and for sex offenders, references not considering psychopathy,  and studies concerning sexual homicide, a somewhat different population than the general class of sex offenders and not from meta-studies combining repeatable results.
The prototypical psychopath has deficits or deviances in several areas: interpersonal relationships, emotion, and self-control. Psychopaths lack a sense of guilt or remorse for any harm they may have caused others, instead rationalizing the behavior, blaming someone else, or denying it outright. (We see this effect with the latest psychological warfare carried out on the people of the world, particularly on the American people:
9/11 conspiracy theorists are holocaust deniers, what?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuASoVK8f9c, "those who question or even attempt to JUSTIFY 9/11...",
"In addition to believing the World Trade Centers were demolished by the "New World Order," they also push theories that man did not walk on the moon, Minnesota Sen. Paul Wellstone was assassinated by the Bush administration, the Srebrenica massacre and even the Holocaust never happened."...
: this one really took the cake: brzezinski wants us all to think that the Iranian coup was the extent of the false-flag terror, rachel maddow basically says 9/11 truthers are holocaust deniers, and Brzezinski re-inforces that idea and also the one that Obama is like "JFK 2.0" )
Psychopaths also lack empathy towards others in general, resulting in tactlessness, insensitivity, and contemptuousness. All of this belies their tendency to make a good, likable first impression. Psychopaths have a superficial charm about them, enabled by a willingness to say anything without concern for accuracy or truth.
(This is the scariest thing about Barack Obama...he's nothing like the idiot monkey George W. Bush, he's like-able, he seems genuine, and he's totally dangerous because psychopaths on this level can actually lie without getting caught...they are BOTH psychopaths AND sociopaths. They are pathological liars, and are willing to say the opposite of what's really going on and actually try to make people believe it. When a serial killer is both a psychopath and sociopath, they tend to go a long time without getting caught, such as the BTK killer or Jeffrey Dahmer).
This extends into their pathological lying and willingness to con and manipulate others for personal gain or amusement. The prototypical psychopath's emotions are described as a shallow affect, meaning their overall way of relating is characterized by mere displays of friendliness and other emotion for personal gain; the displayed emotion need not correlate with felt emotion, in other words. (Like this video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYI7JXGqd0o , or the "Katrina effect"--remember this? and this? , and see how Obama doesn't seem to care when the lady is emotional about rationed health care: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lh6v2GEc4r8 and almost seems to not understand or even care what that lady said, because he knew she was too close to actually making him answer real questions about the health care situation...
Shallow affect also describes the psychopath's tendency for genuine emotion to be short lived and egocentric with an overall cold demeanor. Their behavior is impulsive and irresponsible, often failing to keep a job or defaulting on debts. (The impulsivity the banker bailout and the irresponsibility of Barack Obama as one of the lead proponents (and stakeholders) of the hijacking of our economy by lobbyists and wall street execs and banker bosses is one of the biggest indicators that our government has been taken over by a psychopathic element and is no longer working for us--especially since they got 1,000:1 phone calls saying "NO" to the bailout in the first place--By passing it anyway, at gunpoint basically, was very telling of their mindset towards us now--that was them saying to the American people, "SHUT UP--WE DON'T CARE WHAT YOU WANT, WE WANT COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE MONEY SUPPLY)
Most research studies of psychopaths have taken place among prison populations. This remains a limitation on its applicability to a general population. Findings indicate psychopathic convicts have a 2.5 time higher probability of being released from jail than undiagnosed ones even though they are more likely to recidivate.
It has been shown that punishment and behavior modification techniques do not improve the behavior of what Hare, and other followers of this theory call a psychopath. Psychopathic individuals have been regularly observed to become more cunning and hiding their behavior better. It has been suggested by them traditional therapeutic approaches actually make psychopaths if not worse, then far more adept at manipulating others and concealing their behavior. They are generally considered to be not only incurable but also untreatable.
Psychopaths also have a markedly distorted sense of the potential consequences of their actions, not only for others, but also for themselves. They do not, for example, deeply recognize the risk of being caught, disbelieved or injured as a result of their behaviour.
Psychopaths may often be successful in the military, as they will more readily participate in combat than most soldiers.
(Yeah, they just thought they'd tag that on in the ending, there--"Oh, btw, there are lots of psychos in the military"--that's wikipedia, for you.)
(The following commentary includes material obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Behavioral Analysis Unit.)
Psychopathy is a personality disorder manifested in people who use a mixture of charm, manipulation, intimidation, and occasionally violence to control others, in order to satisfy their own selfish needs. Although the concept of psychopathy has been known for centuries, the FBI leads the world in the research effort to develop a series of assessment tools, to evaluate the personality traits and behaviors attributable to psychopaths.
Interpersonal traits include glibness, superficial charm, a grandiose sense of self-worth, pathological lying, and the manipulation of others. The affective traits include a lack of remorse and/or guilt, shallow affect, a lack of empathy, and failure to accept responsibility. The lifestyle behaviors include stimulation-seeking behavior, impulsivity, irresponsibility, parasitic orientation, and a lack of realistic life goals.
Research has demonstrated that in those criminals who are psychopathic, scores vary, ranging from a high degree of psychopathy to some measure of psychopathy. However, not all violent offenders are psychopaths and not all psychopaths are violent offenders. If violent offenders are psychopathic, they are able to assault, rape, and murder without concern for legal, moral, or social consequences. This allows them to do what they want, whenever they want. Ironically, these same traits exist in men and women who are drawn to high-profile and powerful positions in society including political officeholders.
The relationship between psychopathy and serial killers is particularly interesting. All psychopaths do not become serial murderers. Rather, serial murderers may possess some or many of the traits consistent with psychopathy. Psychopaths who commit serial murder do not value human life and are extremely callous in their interactions with their victims. This is particularly evident in sexually motivated serial killers who repeatedly target, stalk, assault, and kill without a sense of remorse. However, psychopathy alone does not explain the motivations of a serial killer.
What doesn't go unnoticed is the fact that some of the character traits exhibited by serial killers or criminals may be observed in many within the political arena. While not exhibiting physical violence, many political leaders display varying degrees of anger, feigned outrage and other behaviors. They also lack what most consider a "shame" mechanism. Quite simply, most serial killers and many professional politicians must mimic what they believe, are appropriate responses to situations they face such as sadness, empathy, sympathy, and other human responses to outside stimuli.
Understanding psychopathy becomes particularly critical to law enforcement during a serial murder investigation and upon the arrest of a psychopathic serial killer. The crime scene behavior of psychopaths is likely to be distinct from other offenders. This distinct behavior can assist law enforcement in linking serial cases.
Psychopaths are not sensitive to altruistic interview themes, such as sympathy for their victims or remorse/guilt over their crimes. They do possess certain personality traits that can be exploited, particularly their inherent narcissism, selfishness, and vanity. Specific themes in past successful interviews of psychopathic serial killers focused on praising their intelligence, cleverness, and skill in evading capture.
Experts recognize that more research is needed concerning the links between serial murder and psychopathy, in order to understand the frequency and degree of psychopathy among serial murderers. This may assist law enforcement in understanding and identifying serial murderers.
Over the past twenty years, law enforcement and experts from a number of varying disciplines have attempted to identify specific motivations for serial murderers and to apply those motivations to different typologies developed for classifying serial murderers. These range from simple, definitive models to complex, multiple-category typologies that are laden with inclusion requirements. Most typologies are too cumbersome to be utilized by law enforcement during an active serial murder investigation, and they may not be helpful in identifying an offender.
As most homicides are committed by someone known to the victim, police focus on the relationships closest to the victim. This is a successful strategy for most murder investigations. The majority of serial murderers, however, are not acquainted with or involved in a consensual relationship with their victims.
For the most part, serial murder involves strangers with no visible relationship between the offender and the victim. This distinguishes a serial murder investigation as a more nebulous undertaking than that of other crimes. Since the investigations generally lack an obvious connection between the offender and the victim, investigators instead attempt to discern the motivations behind the murders, as a way to narrow their investigative focus.
Serial murder crime scenes can have bizarre features that may cloud the identification of a motive. The behavior of a serial murderer at crime scenes may evolve throughout the series of crimes and manifest different interactions between an offender and a victim. It is also extremely difficult to identify a single motivation when there is more than one offender involved in the series.
Identifying a homicide series is easier in rapidly-developing, high profile cases involving low risk victims. These cases are reported to law enforcement upon discovery of the crimes and draw immediate media attention.
In contrast, identifying a series involving high risk victims in multiple jurisdictions is much more difficult. This is primarily due to the high risk lifestyle and transitory nature of the victims. Additionally, the lack of communication between law enforcement agencies and differing records management systems impede the linkage of cases to a common offender.
While many political leaders will deny the assessment regarding their similarities with serial killers and other career criminals, it is part of a psychopathic profile that may be used in assessing the behaviors of many officials and lawmakers at all levels of government.
Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a staff writer for the New Media Alliance (thenma.org). In addition, he's the new editor for the House Conservatives Fund's weblog. Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.
He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer for TheConservativeVoice.Com and PHXnews.com. He's also a columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. He's appeared as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, Fox News, etc.
To subscribe to Kouri's newsletter write to COPmagazine@aol.com and write "Subcription" on the subject line.
Oh-oh! Politicians share personality traits with serial killers: Study
Using his law enforcement experience and data drawn from the FBI's behavioral analysis unit, Jim Kouri has collected a series of personality traits common to a couple of professions.
Kouri, who's a vice president of the National Assn. of Chiefs of Police, has assembled traits such as superficial charm, an exaggerated sense of self-worth, glibness, lying, lack of remorse and manipulation of others.
These traits, Kouri points out in his analysis, are common to psychopathic serial killers.
But -- and here's the part that may spark some controversy and defensive discussion -- these traits are also common to American politicians. (Maybe you already suspected.)
Yup. Violent homicide aside, our elected officials often show many of the exact same character traits as criminal nut-jobs, who run from police but not for office.
Kouri notes that these criminals are psychologically capable of committing their dirty deeds free of any concern for social, moral or legal consequences and with absolutely no remorse.
"This allCapitol Hill Domeows them to do what they want, whenever they want," he wrote. "Ironically, these same traits exist in men and women who are drawn to high-profile and powerful positions in society including political officeholders."
Good grief! And we not only voted for these people, we're paying their salaries and entrusting them to spend our national treasure in wise ways.
We don't know Kouri that well. He may be trying to manipulate all of us with his glib provocative pronouncements. On the other hand ...
"While many political leaders will deny the assessment regarding their similarities with serial killers and other career criminals, it is part of a psychopathic profile that may be used in assessing the behaviors of many officials and lawmakers at all levels of government."
-- Andrew Malcolm
We are absolutely not seeking to manipulate Ticket readers by glibly saying with superficial charm that they are certainly among the world's most intelligent people. Nor do we seek to manipulate every one of them to click here for Twitter alerts on each new Ticket item.
July 31, 2012 | Amazon.com
What a disappointment. I was married to a psychopath and should have known better than to buy this book. A psychopath has a mental/character flaw that may range from serial killer to just no good and abusive but a psychopath is a psychopath regardless of the extent of his/her appearance or damage. Some normal people may have behaviors similar to a psychopath but that does not make them almost a psychopath. Normal people may be selfish, misguided or even down right mean but they feel love, hate, guilt, shame, joy sadness just like we do...even if it is suppressed, it is there. The main difference between normal and psychopath is not behavior but the lack of any emotion, an inability to love, empathize or even care about another person.
A psychopath is hard wired, cannot be cured and is a psychopath regardless of the extent of the perceived or actual harm inflicted. There are a lot of psychopaths out there; this author just wants to claim they are not quite psychopaths.
Believe me when I say the normal looking, acting and semi successful lawyer I married was a full blooded psychopath. He put on a beautiful show of love and kindness and he violently raped me and laughingly humiliated me on our wedding night and for the entire length of our marriage. I had instantly become a possession. The show was over except for public display. He targeted me because I was vulnerable because my mother died and I had no family support. His only pleasure from then on was to use and abuse me to boost his ego, to make himself think he was better. It took me ten years and two children to prepare myself to get out.
Do not be deceived by this misleading book. Be afraid, a psychopath is a very dangerous creature without conscience pretending to be your best friend or soul mate...there is nothing almost about them! They will turn on you as soon as you are entrapped. As Sandra Brown, an expert on psychopathy says, psychopaths cause inevitable harm. Buy her books and do not read or be misled by this drivel.
RONALD AMON :
You missed their schtick. They are trying to sell a book to a certain market and trying to interest as many as they possibly can in purchasing it. So they bend things a little. As in "almost." Which can pretty much cover any and everyone at one time or another. Or no one. Take your pick.
You know what, Betsy? I believe you are right. I think this book probably should have had the title of BPD (Borderline Personality Disorder) or BNPD (Borderline Narcissistic Personality Disorder) because many sociopaths traits are similar to them. I'll bet the previous commenter (Ronald Amon) was also onto something because there are so many titles that already deal with the subject (BPD and BNPD) that they figured lets put the name sociopath in the title to make it sound more scary and get folks to buy the book.
I'm sorry for your past troubles with your psychopath husband! And you are correct
Phyllis Antebi Ph.D:
Friendly is safe and unfriendly is not safe. If the person lies, cheats, or steals, (any or all of these) he is someone without a conscience. Who cares about labels! That's for obsessive compulsive people to ponder. If it hurts when you least expect it, you are being abused.
With a psychopath friendly can be the most dangerous part. They lure you in with a smooth loving facade and then hook you into the mind control, abuse and total annihilation if possible.
But you have the rest right on. I love, " If it hurts when you least expect it, you are being abused." So very true and well put.
I believe the book was well written but seemed to drift away to other areas of personality disorders far too much. There are so many books written on narcissistic disorder or other disorders that are available that I believe the author could have only highlighted these disorders relative to the subject matter rather than filling up half the book with the other disorders and their traits.
Google matched content
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2018 by Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) in the author free time and without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
|You can use PayPal to make a contribution, supporting development of this site and speed up access. In case softpanorama.org is down you can use the at softpanorama.info|
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the author present and former employers, SDNP or any other organization the author may be associated with. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose.
Last modified: September, 12, 2017