(Civilizations, as we call them, are largely the history of competing psychopaths ....)
CIVILIZATION --- EMPATHETIC REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNANCE VS. EXTRA-NATIONAL PSYCHOPATHIC PIRACY:
Soros’ crusade includes worldwide legalization of drugs, which would make it easier to rule humanity. One may be very capable, yet remain a cool, morally uninhibited, psychopath. Such predilection may sometimes be biological, associated with quality of brain-synapse signals, such as among amygdala, hippocampus, and corpus callosum.
Regarding Soros, see interesting test: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/96/open_boss-quiz.html.
See also: http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=936; http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath_2.htm; http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopathy_aspd_sociopathy.htm.
See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/04/980410101830.htm:
If you are an individual whose right orbital cortex is not functioning well, you're biologically disadvantaged in developing a conscience."
Outside of any effect they may have in predisposing an individual to violence, such brain deficits can only be detected through such relatively new functional brain imaging techniques as PET scans.
Raine says the USC-UCI study sheds light on a long-standing mystery in crime and punishment -- how some criminals appear so clearly to be a product of their background, while others seem to defy their seemingly benign upbringing.
*******
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopath:
In practice, mental health professionals rarely treat psychopathic personality disorders as they are considered untreatable and no interventions have proved to be effective. In England and Wales the diagnosis of dissocial personality disorder is grounds for detention in secure psychiatric hospitals under the Mental Health Act if they have committed serious crimes, but since such individuals are disruptive for other patients and not responsive to treatment this alternative to prison is not often used.
….
… psychopathy leans towards the hereditary whereas sociopathy tends towards the environmental.
******
Does Obama play the role of malignant narcissist to Soros’ psychopathy?
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malignant_narcissism:
The malignant narcissist is inherently weak because he/she derives their ego functioning ability by constantly feeding off the emotions of other people (to build up their sense of self-worth to higher levels). This is why malignant narcissism is likened to a drug addiction. The drug addict (like the malignant narcissist) needs higher dosages of a drug to get the same after-effect. The narcissist (on the other-hand) needs to build up their sense of self-worth at increasingly higher levels to maintain the same level of ego-functioning. The malignant narcissist will go to extreme levels to build up their esteem, often resorting to antisocial behaviors and isolation of others (which is why antisocial, schizoid and paranoid personality disorders accompany this disease).
*******
See http://www.angelfire.com/biz2/daimonic/psychologyofevil.html:
It is admittedly tempting to dismiss the reality of evil entirely due to its inherent subjectivity and relativity. As that wise bard William Shakespeare bade Hamlet speak: "For there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." This recognition of the relativity of good and evil, and its basis in egoistic evaluations of right and wrong, positive and negative, has a time-honored tradition in Asian religion and Oriental philosophy. But as Jung said, the fact that the conceptions of "good" and "evil" are limited inventions of the human mind (ego consciousness), convenient cognitive categories into which we try to neatly sort the stuff of life, does not detract from the vital importance of properly discerning between them. For without such psychological distinctions, what ethics will serve to guide our daily behavior? On what moral ground can we stand in making the many minor and major day-to-day decisions modem life demands? To cite Justin Martyr on this matter: "'The worst evil of all is to say that neither good nor evil is anything in itself, but that they are only matters of human opinion."
….
… Carus responds: "Evil and good may be relative, but relativity does not imply non-existence. Relations are facts too."
….
Evil is a very real phenomenon. But it is not a "thing," with physical properties of its own apart from those human actions which comprise it; nor is it an "entity" with a will of its own, as the traditional doctrine of the devil advocates. Evil is a process in which we humans more or less inevitably participate. Indeed, it is a psychological--or spiritual, if you prefer--process of negation.
….
It says that while evil exists it can only exist by living off the good and cannot exist on its own." Of course, the same may be said of the "good," which cannot exist on its own either, without some reference and comparison to that' which is "evil."
….
… who then shall be the crowning connoisseur of good and evil? The individual? The community? The court?
….
Good can come from defiantly facing evil. But evil, alas, will always find another face.
*****
PERSONAL COMMENT: To me, “evil” is that which impedes civilization that is stable, sustainable, and amenable of surpassage.
***********
WHAT FLOATS WITH HOPE? I WORRY OUR ELECTORAL SYSTEM IS CONTRIVED MORE TO CAUSE SH*T TO FLOAT THAN CREAM TO RISE:
PERSONAL COMMENTS --- SELECTING AGAINST RULE BY POLITICAL PSYCHOPATHS:
Some folks, despairing that modern representative governance is ill equipped to weed against mechanisms favoring the selection of psychopathic leaders, are beginning (tongue in cheek?) to advocate stochastocracy, or the random selection and replacement of political leaders.
However, before we throw the baby out with the bath water, alternative measures for preserving the legitimacy of representative governance would seem preferable. After all, why suppose psychopaths would not evolve in paths for evading even random selection of leaders, simply by corrupting randomness of the selection process?
So, before we “storm the Bastille” in order to impose stochastocracy, we may first prefer to seek alternative combinations of methods for filtering out political psychopaths.
Examples of alternative methods:
1) Outlaw use by psychopaths and politicians of income tax revenues for the purpose of redistributing wealth to their armies and supporters.
2) Impose progressive taxes on consumption of political resources (political contributions), to render the field of competition less leveraged in favor of established family elites of psychopaths.
3) Outlaw political contributions by all entities, except from individual, adult citizens.
4) Impose death taxes progressive enough to check against rising polyarchies and aristocracies of gross inequalities in wealth and influence.
5) Limit the voting franchise to responsible, experienced, educated, non-felonious, non-alien, adult citizens.
PERSONAL COMMENTS --- SELECTING AGAINST RULE BY POLITICAL PSYCHOPATHS:
Some folks, despairing that modern representative governance is ill equipped to weed against mechanisms favoring the selection of psychopathic leaders, are beginning (tongue in cheek?) to advocate stochastocracy, or the random selection and replacement of political leaders.
However, before we throw the baby out with the bath water, alternative measures for preserving the legitimacy of representative governance would seem preferable. After all, why suppose psychopaths would not evolve in paths for evading even random selection of leaders, simply by corrupting randomness of the selection process?
So, before we “storm the Bastille” in order to impose stochastocracy, we may first prefer to seek alternative combinations of methods for filtering out political psychopaths.
Examples of alternative methods:
1) Outlaw use by psychopaths and politicians of income tax revenues for the purpose of redistributing wealth to their armies and supporters.
2) Impose progressive taxes on consumption of political resources (political contributions), to render the field of competition less leveraged in favor of established family elites of psychopaths.
3) Outlaw political contributions by all entities, except from individual, adult citizens.
4) Impose death taxes progressive enough to check against rising polyarchies and aristocracies of gross inequalities in wealth and influence.
5) Limit the voting franchise to responsible, experienced, educated, non-felonious, non-alien, adult citizens.
6) Protect borders and limit immigration, so no seditious demagogue can entice or bribe aliens to enter and vote in such numbers as to swamp democracy under a cult of personalty deluge.
7) Establish responsible means for preventing vote and voter fraud.
8) Reduce disparate power of individuals over monopolies on goods and ideas by imposing progressive taxes (on "consumption of political influence") and by taking action to bust monopolies; use tax revenues therefrom to fund jobs for servicing infrastructure and worker health.
*******
Snippets from http://cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm:
THE PSYCHOPATH - The Mask of Sanity
The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth.
….
Most of us would not imagine any correspondence between conceiving an ethnic genocide and, say, guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish.
Most of us feel mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another person.
Those who have no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.
The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more significant than intelligence, race, or even gender.
What differentiates a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what makes the difference betwen an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer - is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple opportunity.
What distinguishes all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche, where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions.
*********
7) Establish responsible means for preventing vote and voter fraud.
8) Reduce disparate power of individuals over monopolies on goods and ideas by imposing progressive taxes (on "consumption of political influence") and by taking action to bust monopolies; use tax revenues therefrom to fund jobs for servicing infrastructure and worker health.
*******
Snippets from http://cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm:
THE PSYCHOPATH - The Mask of Sanity
The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth.
….
Most of us would not imagine any correspondence between conceiving an ethnic genocide and, say, guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish.
Most of us feel mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another person.
Those who have no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.
The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more significant than intelligence, race, or even gender.
What differentiates a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what makes the difference betwen an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer - is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple opportunity.
What distinguishes all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche, where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions.
*********
Snippets from http://www.newimprovedhead.com/stoch1.htm:
Psychopaths Ride the Curve
by Peterson F. Whalley, dean of Grantchester College, Cambridge
February 26, 2004
….
Representative liberal democracy is in crisis. It has been for some while but the crisis has now approached a threshold; further erosion will irrevocably shift the countries that enjoy this form of government into a terra incognita in which liberal democracy will have degenerated into a new form of autocracy, which we call "spinocracy". To retrieve liberal democracy now requires radical action.
….
Democracy is the only means yet devised for the control of power by psychopaths. This has provided an interregnum, a respite of perhaps 100–200 years. The psychopaths are slowly taking over again.
….
The massive over-representation of psychopaths among the powerful is strong evidence of a selection principle at work. That principle is the advantage psychopaths have over "normals" in the pursuit of power. Where there are large numbers of people there will, by chance, be relatively large numbers of psychos, but, in addition, where power is also concentrated, there will be disproportionately large numbers of them. New York and Washington are likely to have the largest concentrations of psychopaths on the planet.
In very small groups psychopaths are rare, soon discovered and shunned (or jailed, or killed). In larger groups - typical of tribes - they are likewise rare, discovered, shunned but given some socially-acceptable function, like shamans. In larger societies they are much less rare, much harder to discover and, precisely because they are unfeeling and manipulative, often rise to assume political authority.
This, then, is what we assert the historical record shows. Civilizations, as we call them, are largely the history of competing psychopaths and the war of psychopaths against the normal humans.
This is pretty shocking. You mean Alexander the Great was a psychopath? Julius Caesar? Attila? Charlemagne? William the Conqueror? Napoleon? Peter the Great? Surely not!
This intuitive test of historical leaders seems to confirm our working hypothesis. But what about Cromwell? Washington?….Lincoln?
This is where it gets murky. Why? These names coincide with the rise of liberal representative democracy. In this form of government, to gain power you have to get people to vote for you. This radically undercuts the natural advantage of the psychopath. Unfortunately, as the population has grown and the selective advantage of psychopaths has gone to work we have entered an era in which the psychopaths have found ways to gain control.
Our analysis of and solution to this problem is basically that proposed by Karl Popper [*PERSONAL COMMENT – GEORGE SOROS IS A FAMOUS FORMER STUDENT OF KARL POPPER]. Representative democracy is to be preferred because it provides a method of preventing authoritarianism. Unfortunately, Popper's favoured solution - proportional representation - will not work. This is because it neglects the rise of psychopathic control of the system that governs the elected leaders - which is to say the giant private and public bureaucracies, especially the former.
As the electoral system has become increasingly a money game, elected politicians have turned to the largest sources of money - private business corporations. These are ideal breeding grounds for psychopaths.
The promotion process in large private and public bureaucracies embodies a selection principle that heavily favours the psychopathic personality. Psychopaths have no difficulty denigrating fellow workers or claiming credit for work done by others. They are the quintessential power-lunchers, breakfasters, stay-after-workers.
….
The majorities of managers and executives are likely to be normal. This is what makes the problem intractable. There's no way to weed out the psychopaths. Yet, we assert, as you go up the chain, the chances of encountering pseudo and genuine psychopaths increases.
Moreover, it is likely that psychopathy runs in families, not so much because of genetics as the subtle but pervasive influence of family mores and behaviours. The single biggest factor determining who is in the senior ranks of large organizations is socio-economic status, which means family. Which means that what is still relatively rare among most of the world's inhabitants becomes quite prevalent at the exalted levels occupies by the World's power elites.
As another intuitive test, think about the following list of names, from robber barons to contemporary high-profile figures: Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, John Rockefeller, Kurt Waldheim, Boutros-Boutros Ghali, Kofi Annan, Jeffrey Skilling, Chainsaw Al Dunlap, Martha Stewart.
….
Remarkably, political authority is quite like Puff the Magic Dragon: once those subject to authority cease to believe in it, it fades away.
….
There are now so many groups that have achieved or seek "equality" before the law that it's impossible to tell which is the "fundamental" equality. Am I equally obliged to the government of the land or to groups with which I identify? If bespectacled, fat bigots of anglo-saxon descent who demand the right to be smeared in marmite in public can't get charitable status, like thousands of other groups, do I organize a coup?
….
… that people's attitudes, which are what underlie any opinions they may give to pollsters or anyone else, are very unstable. Reported attitudes have been shown to be heavily influenced by such matters as: the tone of voice in which the questions were asked; the physical conditions in which written surveys were answered; etc.. In other words, factors that would not affect measured attitudes if they were really measuring anything worthwhile. This is all the more so if the elicited attitudes are about topics about which the subjects may not have thought very much, like the interest rate elasticity of government debt.
Focus groups have taken this sham to a new level. Focus groups don't even pretend to be "representative". Rather, the spin-doctor gurus search for meaningful revelations of the underlying angst of the populace as revealed by the verbal entrails of people at the mall with nothing better to do for a few hours.
….
… Americans now apparently grant the Courts more legitimacy than their Legislatures. This warms the hearts of psychopaths.
….
Next week, kiddies, we'll teach you how to cure all known disease.
***********************
Snippets from http://www.sott.net/articles/show/168879-The-Road-to-Hell-is-paved-with-Free-Market-Capitalism-Imperialism-and-Psychopaths:
The Road to Hell is paved with Free Market Capitalism, Imperialism and Psychopaths
Simon Davies & Donald Hunt
SOTT.net
Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:38 UTC
….
Expansion became an end in and of itself and its protagonists became "nothing but functionaries of violence [who] could only think in terms of power politics. They were the first who, as a class and supported by their everyday experience, would claim that power is the essence of every political structure."
The perpetual cycle of accumulation of property/capital begetting the accumulation of power begetting the accumulation of property, onwards forever, requires perpetual expansion. The great waves of change of the Industrial Revolution, the age of Imperialism and the age modern empire, whether under the guise of Cold War or War on Terror, have led to the ceding of all power to the financial/capitalist elite. Since the age of colonial imperialism this elite has succeeded, in complete accordance with its creed of perpetual accumulation of property and power, in gathering ever greater amounts of both.
….
… referred to "High society's admiration for the underworld....its step-by-step retreat on all questions of morality, and its growing taste for the anarchical cynicism of its offspring".
….
… published on Sott.net.
From The Psychopath - The Mask of Sanity
Imagine, if you can, not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken.
And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools.
Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless.
You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition.
In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world.
You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered.
*****
The entire fabric of Free Market Capitalist societies is governed by fear, an all pervading, overwhelming fear. A world where one is perpetually in competition, where what ever one has can be taken by the next man in his pursuit of property or through crime, where the fundamental basis of society is based upon the accumulation of unlimited capital and unlimited power for their own sakes, that is a world based on unlimited fear. A world entirely reflective of the psychopaths manipulation of the psyche of normal people.
***********************
PROPOSALS ---- STEADY STATE ECONOMY VS. CONSTANT GROWTH ECONOMY:
Snippets from http://www.sott.net/articles/show/168879-The-Road-to-Hell-is-paved-with-Free-Market-Capitalism-Imperialism-and-Psychopaths:
Herman Daly
The US economist HERMAN DALY, delivered a paper to the Sustainable Development Commission in the UK in April this year in which he reiterated his idea of a Steady State Economy that can replace the "failed growth economy".
In this paper Daly was challenging the basis of free market capitalism as summarised by Arendt, the perpetual accumulation of property/capital. He implicitly acknowledges the fact that free market capitalism has to consume to grow and has to grow to survive. Logically this is not possible perpetually when one looks at the world as a finite system. He therefore proposes that a move away from the growth economy of the last 300 years to an economy that is stable, one that does not grow. On a global basis this would mean that the developed economies would have to use their resources more efficiently, allowing the developing economies a greater share of the world's resources until such time as they had achieved a reasonable quality of life amongst their citizens.
Daly proposes:-
A more equitable sharing of basic global resources
Reform of the tax systems to an ecologically based tax system
Limit the range of inequality in income distribution-a minimum income and a maximum income. Without aggregate growth poverty reduction requires redistribution. Complete equality is unfair; unlimited inequality is unfair. Seek fair limits to inequality.
Change the way we work so as to provide work for everybody rather than slavery for some and unemployment for others.
Re-regulate international trade. Limit the freedom of movement of capital, restrain globalisation.
Downgrade the IMF, the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation to a new model designed for equality amongst nations.
Abolish fractional reserve banking. Give the control of money back to governments and away from banks.
Put scarce resources under public control and remove the private control on knowledge and information. Stop treating the scarce as if it were non scarce, and the non scarce as if it were scarce.
Stabalise world population.
Change national accounting to reflect reality so as to be able to see when growth ceases to benefit a nation as a whole.
Whether all Daly ideas are good ones is not really the point. What they serve to illustrate is that serious economists, (Daly used to be at the World Bank), do have ideas as to how our world could be run differently. So when you hear the liars telling you that this and that 'reform' is necessary to keep the existing system running hopefully now you can see through their lies and can tell anybody else who'll listen.
6 comments:
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/whats_next_for_the_american_me.html:
Growing up to Huntley, Brinkley, and Chancellor, MSM seemed reputable and knowledgeable --- sort of like a classy lady. Then, MSM began slipping, sometime during reporting about Vietnam.
Sadly, MSM has devolved from classy lady to call girl to whore-by-the-hour to 25-cent-street-slut-on-knees. That's change you can believe in!
Maybe our world line just took a path where Clarence forgot to save George Bailey. This is not cause for celebration. Small time pimps have made common cause with international psychopaths.
For the sake of America, this is cause for Bert and Ernie to engage vigilant resolve, not mindless celebration!
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/11/the_seven_aphorisms.html:
Our intercourse with elite "intellectual" leftists has vibrated Humpty Dumpty off the wall! Now, we summon SCOTUS, doctor of love, to patch things up. Will Obama's horses and men arrive in time to save the day? Or, will they so admire one another as to wander off in search of equal rights to inter-marry? Stay tuned -- fair(ie) change is coming. Your old world is rapidly crumbling. Ring around the rosie. All we need is love! Love is all we need! Just do it! Can you dig it? To the laugh-house with you! Ho ho ho!
****
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/11/pc_madness_reaches_new_heights.html:
Now we lie down to surrender to psychopathic providers of security, with a whimper. Next whimper: "American" will be consigned to the slur heap. G'day!
****
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/11/minnesota_dems_keep_counting_a.html:
Remember the scene in "Saving Private Ryan," where the German, as he is pushing the knife into the character played by Ben Affleck, is shushing his whimpering lips to cover the obscenity?
****
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/how_barack_obama_will_ensure_h.html:
Stochastocracy:
Snippets from http://www.newimprovedhead.com/stoch1.htm:
Psychopaths Ride the Curve
by Peterson F. Whalley, dean of Grantchester College, Cambridge
February 26, 2004
….
Representative liberal democracy is in crisis. It has been for some while but the crisis has now approached a threshold; further erosion will irrevocably shift the countries that enjoy this form of government into a terra incognita in which liberal democracy will have degenerated into a new form of autocracy, which we call "spinocracy". To retrieve liberal democracy now requires radical action.
….
Democracy is the only means yet devised for the control of power by psychopaths. This has provided an interregnum, a respite of perhaps 100–200 years. The psychopaths are slowly taking over again.
….
The massive over-representation of psychopaths among the powerful is strong evidence of a selection principle at work. That principle is the advantage psychopaths have over "normals" in the pursuit of power. Where there are large numbers of people there will, by chance, be relatively large numbers of psychos, but, in addition, where power is also concentrated, there will be disproportionately large numbers of them. New York and Washington are likely to have the largest concentrations of psychopaths on the planet.
In very small groups psychopaths are rare, soon discovered and shunned (or jailed, or killed). In larger groups - typical of tribes - they are likewise rare, discovered, shunned but given some socially-acceptable function, like shamans. In larger societies they are much less rare, much harder to discover and, precisely because they are unfeeling and manipulative, often rise to assume political authority.
This, then, is what we assert the historical record shows. Civilizations, as we call them, are largely the history of competing psychopaths and the war of psychopaths against the normal humans.
This is pretty shocking. You mean Alexander the Great was a psychopath? Julius Caesar? Attila? Charlemagne? William the Conqueror? Napoleon? Peter the Great? Surely not!
This intuitive test of historical leaders seems to confirm our working hypothesis. But what about Cromwell? Washington?….Lincoln?
This is where it gets murky. Why? These names coincide with the rise of liberal representative democracy. In this form of government, to gain power you have to get people to vote for you. This radically undercuts the natural advantage of the psychopath. Unfortunately, as the population has grown and the selective advantage of psychopaths has gone to work we have entered an era in which the psychopaths have found ways to gain control.
Our analysis of and solution to this problem is basically that proposed by Karl Popper. Representative democracy is to be preferred because it provides a method of preventing authoritarianism. Unfortunately, Popper's favoured solution - proportional representation - will not work. This is because it neglects the rise of psychopathic control of the system that governs the elected leaders - which is to say the giant private and public bureaucracies, especially the former.
As the electoral system has become increasingly a money game, elected politicians have turned to the largest sources of money - private business corporations. These are ideal breeding grounds for psychopaths.
The promotion process in large private and public bureaucracies embodies a selection principle that heavily favours the psychopathic personality. Psychopaths have no difficulty denigrating fellow workers or claiming credit for work done by others. They are the quintessential power-lunchers, breakfasters, stay-after-workers.
….
The majorities of managers and executives are likely to be normal. This is what makes the problem intractable. There's no way to weed out the psychopaths. Yet, we assert, as you go up the chain, the chances of encountering pseudo and genuine psychopaths increases.
Moreover, it is likely that psychopathy runs in families, not so much because of genetics as the subtle but pervasive influence of family mores and behaviours. The single biggest factor determining who is in the senior ranks of large organizations is socio-economic status, which means family. Which means that what is still relatively rare among most of the world's inhabitants becomes quite prevalent at the exalted levels occupies by the World's power elites.
[*PERSONAL COMMENT – GEORGE SOROS IS A FAMOUS FORMER STUDENT OF KARL POPPER]
*****
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/how_barack_obama_will_ensure_h.html:
SCARY? Consider Obama’s mentors and associates; then consider ---
http://www.mindofasociopath.com/library/InsideMindSociopath_Excerpt.pdf:
Inside the Mind of a Sociopath
This excerpt is from: "The Sociopath Next Door: The Ruthless vs. the Rest of Us" by Martha Stout Ph.D. (Broadway Books, New York, 2005, ISBN 0-7679-1581-X). Martha Stout is a clinical instructor at Harvard Medical School and elaborates on the tales of ruthlessness in everyday life based on her 25 years of practice as a specialist in the treatment of psychological trauma survivors.
Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern of the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken. And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools. Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless. You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience that they seldom even guess at your condition. In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world. You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered.
How will you live your life? What will you do with your huge and secret advantage, and
with the corresponding handicap of other people (conscience)?
*****
COMMENTS:
Some folks, despairing that modern representative governance is ill equipped to weed against mechanisms favoring the selection of psychopathic leaders, are beginning (tongue in cheek?) to advocate stochastocracy, or the random selection and replacement of political leaders (first 2000 people named in the phone book, etc.).
However, before we throw the baby out with the bath water, alternative measures for preserving the legitimacy of representative governance would seem preferable. After all, why suppose psychopathic pirates of finance would not evolve in paths for evading even random selection of leaders, simply by corrupting randomness of the selection process?
So, before we “storm the Bastille” in order to impose stochastocracy, we may first prefer to seek alternative combinations of methods for filtering out political psychopaths and protecting ourselves from their grossly disproportionate power and influence.
Examples of alternative methods (?):
1) Outlaw use by psychopaths and politicians of income tax revenues for the purpose of redistributing wealth to their cronies, supporters, and armies.
2) Impose progressive taxes on consumption of political resources (political contributions), to render the field of competition less leveraged in favor of established family elites of psychopaths.
3) Outlaw political contributions by all entities, except from individual, adult citizens.
4) Impose death taxes progressive enough to check against rising polyarchies and aristocracies of gross inequalities in wealth and influence.
5) Limit the voting franchise to responsible, experienced, educated, non-felonious, non-alien, adult citizens.
6) Protect borders and limit immigration, so no seditious demagogue can entice or bribe aliens to enter and vote in such numbers as to swamp democracy under the deluge of a cult of personalty.
7) Establish responsible means for preventing vote and voter fraud.
8) Reduce disparate power of individuals over monopolies on goods and ideas by imposing progressive taxes (on "consumption of political influence") and by taking action to bust monopolies; use tax revenues to fund jobs for servicing infrastructure and worker health.
Patriphobia Against America:
Note to Blair (Re: “Activisim and "street theatre" is religious ceremony for them. Not far removed from beating tom-toms and dancing in circles around a fire. It is driven mostly by an infantile hatred of male authoritarianism and a longing for a return to the mother's breast.”)
I found the quote below at http://maxentropy.squarespace.com/, Politics as Pathology:
“… the far Left’s actions remain as nihilistic manifestations of a patriphobia and it is that neurosis which forms “the dark center of the radical heart”: a compulsion to castrate or kill the symbolic father in all its forms.”
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/a_place_where_only_liberal_spe.html:
Very interesting! I note that the balance of voting influence in the U.S. seems to have shifted from a "male" (analytic, engineering) to a "feminine" (intuitive, musical) perspective. Before WWII, our society was much more blue collar, self reliant, factory and farm oriented. As such, we won WWII. Now, many American blue collar production jobs have been shipped overseas. Has this caused us to become less manly, or did our becoming less manly cause us to ship producing jobs overseas? Regardless, if America has tilted for the long term to the feminine, our world may have to endure the hardships, affronts to freedom, and atrocities of socialistic theory for quite some time!
This may be the sort of question that should beggar Larry Summers!
MAN WHO WOULD BE KING:
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/the_odd_story_of_romance_in_dr.html:
To Rich, re: "For sake of argument lets assume this piece is 100% correct, as I suspect it is....
Then does it matter beyond our own self doubt about ourselves for letting this election happen the way it did?
Sadly, no."
********
Well, to me, it matters a great deal indeed! In that, I hardly think I am rare. This is an issue that may well become, in essence, statistically proved. Were that to sink in, "change" will come. That change may be akin to the tipping point depicted in "The Man Who Would Be King," when the native asked something to the effect of, "What sort of God is he who bleeds?"
Sure, die-hard Libs will continue to want to be deceived. But an angry majority will not. A clear majority may not clamor for more blood, but their honeymoon will end, and they may clamor for impeachment. Likely, radical change will become more limited.
The romantic fate of all advocacy for "the greater good" in trade for abandoning self-reliance is to serve a masquerade for evil. The sooner this masquerade ends, the better.
*****
PSYCHOPATHIC CHARLATANS:
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/hindus_jews_and_jihad_terror_i.html:
Psychic Dice (“Although some Hindus still kill Christians in India, most live and let live. They, along with the Sikhs, are our allies against militant Islam. The next the word "raghead" pops into your consciousness, try to figure out whether you are dealing with a militant Islamic thug or a Sikh.”)
John Galt (“The Muslims have a saying. "First the Satuday people, then the Sunday people")
******
An encompassing pattern is emerging. We incline too much to believe the Arab adage, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” is most diligently practiced among Arabs.
In fact, that adage is practiced by all who find themselves either in desperate straits or in an agitated state of unrequited ambition. We hope the ambition of America is generally restricted to nurturing a civilized world.
Regardless, the ambition of dictators (i.e., charlatans of “the greater good”) tends to be more blood-curdling hungry. I often wonder why Russia and China play so much footsie with dictatorial Islamic counterparts. Well, weighing friends in a world filled with psychopathically ambitious charlatans is not sport for the feint hearted.
******
MARCH TO SOCIALISM:
Snipped comment by John, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/making_the_world_safe_for_marx.html:
This is a very important article, and must be circulated widely. I believe Randall Hoven has articulated exactly what many, many Americans believe, and fear. The infrastructure to implement the planks of Communism has been completed. As a student of revolutionary change, either violent or non-violent, there must be control of certain critical cultural "levers." Of course the challenge is how does a minority gain acceptance over the majority. The seven key cultural levers to control:
1. Media. Newspapers, magazines, television, radio (the "Fairness" Doctrine will address this one)
2. Entertainment, most especially movie, documentary just like Joseph Goebbels found invaluable.
3. Religion must be marginalized so the state can assume the vacuum. As Stalin found to be critical.
4. Schools, high schools, and colleges and indoctrinate, "re-educate" the youth. Like the N. Vietnamese.
5. Family structure breakdown down, redefined to be ambiguous so the state can assume the vacuum.
6. Judicial system with a few well paced radical judges to legislate doctrine from the bench.
7. Labor unions to control and extort critical industries for economic leverage and crisis making.
With the above infrastructure in place it is possible to set the following conditions:
1. Uninformed, and misinformed population. Distort, misrepresent, and suppress information.
2. Establish new icons to reinforce new values, attitudes and beliefs. John Wayne vs. Alex Baldwin.
3. Remove moral and organized opposition. Remember Poland and Pope John Paul II?
4. Rewrite history, espouse the virtues of Marxism vs. evil corporations. "MTV says Marxism is cool"
5. Weaken the family authority and influence on values. Aryes Annenberg "experiment" was just this.
6. Overturn the Constitution without the need for majority legislation, and enact the above items.
7. Lessen the power of capital engines (corporations), control segments of the economy / voting blocks.
With these seven "levers" in place, all that's needed is an "incident" or "crisis" to cause the launch. Something big like the current financial crisis we are experiencing. Unveiled a month before the presidential elections, created by the Marxists through enactment of the Community Reconstruction Act, and nurtured to a magnitude of national and global disaster. This concept is right out of Barack Obama's and Hillary Clinton's mentor, Marxist Saul ALinsky. Rhoam Emmanuel recently said that we must not waste the opportunity of this crisis . .
With a "dumbed down", uninformed, and misinformed population, a "smoke and mirrors" presidential campaign can be successful if a charismatic candidate, regardless of credentials and qualifications, could be presented. The Marxist have been waiting, that's why they called Obama "The One." With enough money, a little luck, and the above seven levers in place, the plan to move the United State of America to a Marxist country is in its end game. All this happened with most Americans not having a clue. The Republicans brought a knife to a gun fight.
This is how we got in the situation we are in. With a close to 60 Democrat majority, it's all but certain we will move Socialist under a Marxist ideology. Things are going to happen that will shock and anger many Americans, but there won't be a thing that can be done. Much damage will occur to the land of the free, that won't be even partly undone for a long, long time, if ever. The American people made a big, big mistake by not doing their civic duty of learning about the candidates. Each specific voting block, that put Obama into office could only see "what's in it for me?", "who will I get the most from?" Worse yet "who looks the coolest?" Americans did not vote as Americans, for the common good. American Idol voter mentality. "Checkmate" was called on November 4th, 2008 by the Marxist who planned the strategy, George Soros, Peter Davis, and George Lakeoff, with their front man Barack Obama. That's exactly my point, we are playing bingo, they were playing chess. God bless and help the United States of America.
*********
MARCH TO DICTATORSHIP:
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/shadow_world_resurgent_russia.html:
To Loosegravel:
"Take a look around the world at the nation states that proclaim themselves to be communist. China? If Marx were alive today would he describe China as a communist utopia? Is the prolatariat in control of the state? Is government withering away? It appears that they've embraced capitalism with open arms. In fact, much of their industry appears to be guility of the kind of labor abuse that was prevalent in England and the United States the period of their industrial revolution when the robber barons appeared.
How about Cuba. Now there's a real communist utopia. To each what he needs. You betcha! How is the prolatariat doing there and again, is the government withering away? The condition of the masses in terms of living standards appear to be something short of utopia. And Fidel Castro's one man rule for decades does not resemble anything that Carl Marx had in mind.
Communism doesn't exist. Dictatorial governments do and they are run by the same kind of people that have always run those kinds of governments. There is not a successful communistic government on the face of the planet, not one. However, there are a slew of governments that do their best to gain power and then keep it by the ruthless use of force. And to do so they proclaim that they are communistic and acting in the interests of the masses. It's crystal clear that the interests of the masses seem to always suffer in comparison to the interests of the ruling elite and in every case the government somehow seems to increase its authority and power and not the opposite. And these governments are in no way ruled by the prolatariat as theorized by Marx.
Calling these countries communist is nuts! They should be called what they are and that's just out and out dictatorships. Whether the dictators hide behind religiosity or poltical/religous idiologies such as communism makes little or no difference. The result is the same. Our enemies are nations who intend us harm and what they call themselves doesn't matter, only their intentions do. "
*******
Well put! Regimes based primarily on socialism are FRAUDS.
Their rulers do not care whether their rulings are handed down based on their interpretation of religious authority or on their interpretation of the greatest good --- either way, unless you're the lead dog, the end result of their rule is the same old dreary view.
Likewise, those personages with "power behind the throne " with control over captive media and to whom big government is beholden need not worry so much about whomever happens to be the government's figurehead.
In all shapes, the "greatest good for the community" is less a governing principle than a slogan for psychopaths, for cloaking evil that is used to mislead and benumb the masses. In reality, the "greatest good" becomes newspeak for that which serves the real ruler's whims.
A society that really wants opportunity to pursue the "greatest good" needs the liberty for its citizens that is availed by market-like checks and balances. The government that is best tends to be the one that restricts liberty only to the extent that markets have shown themselves to be otherwise unable to advance civilization or to preserve competition.
We may never get the greatest good. But we can get opportunity to pursue it --- unless, in greed or ignorance or timidity, we trade our liberty with Big Governors in exchange for their false promises to change and enrich us from the wealth of others.
******
RESISTANCE:
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/the_more_things_change.html:
The best way to help Obama spread success, notwithstanding his announced leftist "hard-wiring," is to hope for peace with him while preparing for war.
To prevail, family-friendly civilization, ultimately, must win on a battlefield of ideas, where clarity of voice is given through insistently reasoned examples and discourse --- in votes, visits to representatives, media, debates, talks, pamphlets, flyers, and counter protests.
We must not shy from identifying and tracking the enemy to his lair. Somehow, we must institutionalize and impose something like "term limits," especially to protect us against those who pretend authority on behalf of communities to impose politically-correct community-thought and invasively bureaucratic obeisance upon the rest of us.
Ultimately, we must re-set free markets and representative governance by imposing confiscatory consumption taxes against so-called "liberal" billionaires of no discernible patriotic loyalty to the extent they use and abuse their wealth by applying it for gaming disproportionate, "off-the-charts," political influence and invasive social control.
We must recruit enough non-Marxist women, blacks, Hispanics, Jews, and non-anarchic gays to take the victimhood card away from Obama'ites. Certainly, we do not win by making Obama some sort of martyr for weak minded admirers of Che Guevara.
Those with enough mental horsepower and vigor must join the debate and counter-organize the rest of us. Those with minds and nerves less quick, but with energetic and solid, intuitive grasp of our challenges must dedicate their time and presence.
Regardless, networks of intelligence must be established, to anticipate and root out fascist community shenanigans. Effective means for fielding volunteers to respond to such intelligence must be organized.
We have already identified most of our institutional bastions and newspapers that propagate the fascist community. Local groups, if willing, could easily respond in pickets, waves, and internet chains to each outbreak of fascist propaganda. Surely, some charismatic college students must be bright and vigorous enough to lead student counter-groups to shame the fascist onslaught and its professoriate.
If free-thinkers do not rise to the occasion, we will be reduced to the same level as fascist and socialist slitherers. On battlefields, our forebears made grave sacrifices for our liberty, which are continued even now by our troops in the field. Do we honor their sacrifices, or shame them in trade for Twinkies?
******
INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST FINANCING:
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/11/obama_wants_more_money_from_hi.html:
If Obama's egalitarian goal, by winks and nods, is to reduce America to status as just another member of the U.N., is he not guaranteed to reap mountains of foreign money? Regardless of citizenship of presidential candidates, when America can no longer be relied upon to assimilate loyalty to America, the enemy may as well be at the gates. To hope for peace respecting Obamaites, we must prepare for war --- and war it may come to.
For Fascism, Islamic Style --- see http://newcriterion.com:81/articles.cfm/whats-in-a-name-3602; http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/legendary_songwriter_now_march.html.
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/legendary_songwriter_now_march.html:
The underhanded and dishonest techniques used by Fanatic Religious Fascists are remarkably similar to those of Secular Marxist Fascists. The deformed minds of fascists may own the night, but their ideas cannot stand the light of day. Fascists may own the underground of anarchic violence, but free thinkers own the world of civilizing ideas. While the hidden deceits of mind-controllers (i.e., Vladimir the Mind Reducer) avail an infinity of tricks and escapes, the light of free thinkers avails a disinfecting eternity of hounds. Sic ‘em!
ender ("People keep saying "but we have better armed police to protect us"")
Many among activists bent on trading liberty for security turn right around and impede those who would provide our security. They remain all too quick to want to call cops pigs, excoriate Bush as a torturer, erect walls between the CIA and FBI, chasten the CIA, imprison our Border Patrol agents, lay down our borders, give invaders sanctuary (and sometimes driver's licenses), and nominate as AG a man who facilitated the pardoning of convicted terrorists.
Thank God we still have faithful defenders. But the monster allayed against us and them ought not be underestimated. Surely, the quality and quantity of our formal defenders is eroding.
You have to ask yourself, in this culture of adolescents, given the quality of care suggested by our elected adolescents for defending our Constitution, if you were drawing a paycheck from the CIA, FBI, or law enforcement: Just how far would you be willing to stick out your neck to defend such a culture? And then, how limited would become your law-enforcement career prospects?
****
Comments by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/mumbai_a_message_for_america.html:
The Angry Capitalist,
You are correct in that psychopaths among us often rule countries, so that it sometimes becomes necessary "to give war a chance." Imagine the fate of Israel, if it succumbs to the rule of green-beans and do-goodies (i.e., , root-cause-commiserates, aka "RCC's")?
No doubt, our enemies will love us under the new rule of our RCC's. So, our CIA, FBI, and law enforcement agencies can now beat their firearms into plowshares and, when seeing riots, simply plunge in with ever-so-much-more-effective good will and sweet talk. You know, just like libs do when their friends are being mugged (not!).
****
Comment by Dlanor, at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/w_too_nice_to_be_president.html:
Texas Ted
Re: "LOL - Thanks for not trying to deny that Clinton reduced the size of Government. I guess you forgot Cheney led the charge of reducing the size of our military back in the Bush41 days."
Well, in the fullness of time, Bill Clinton will be found to have done some good things. Among such things, how many were consistent with three prongs: smaller government, traditional values, and a capable military? Among things Clinton did that were consistent with any such prongs, how many were less the spawn of Clinton’s character and vision than the rationalization of his finger-to-the-wind fear of an upset electorate?
Eventually, historians will help analyze to what extent Clinton was a leaf being blown in the wind (only occasionally being blown towards the politics of Scoop Jackson), and to what extent admirers of Scoop Jackson have been blown into the tent of Social Conservatives.
Regardless, against blows of change, so to speak, neither Clinton nor Bush were true to all three prongs. Both presided while Conservatism has mainly just shadowed our climaxing towards Progressive Entitlement’ism. Cheers!
Comment at http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/the_islamophobia_canard_after.html:
Re: "Saudi King Abdullah has been urging the United Nations to pass a universal law prescribing imprisonment for criticizing Islam."
How would this differ from a universal law banning independent thought or communication?
Should every scientist who wishes to empirically test a hypothesis be imprisoned if his hypothesis in any way implicates a possibly different interpretation from that of the nearest Islamic authority?
Should everyone who considers the Saudi King to be an ignoramus, despot, or both be imprisoned?
Among any two authorities of Islam who differ in their interpretations, should they both be bound in irons and thrown in the ocean, to determine which one is right based on which one floats?
This would be funnier were we not enriching these people so they can blast us with their psychopathy and mind torture.
How about a universal law requiring that activist Muslims and their fellow traveling sympathizers and media put warning signs on their lawns, cars, and publications: "Caution -- you are entering a mental zombie zone. Please surrender your mind before entering." Maybe save that for the U.N. in a parallel universe -- the one not surrendered to dolts.
Post a Comment