Announcement: On May 3rd, we will have a special guest for our paid-subscriber Zoom meetup: Ilya Khotimsky, translator of Russian economist Mikhail Khazin’s Recollections of the Future: Modern Economic Ideas. I wrote about his summary of the book here.
Really thoughtful piece. I appreciated the clarity and the tension you hold throughout.
I'm not sure you’ll get a satisfying answer to your question, because the premise assumes people, like leaders, are operating from conscious ethical reasoning, when they're not.
Most are under the influence of forces they don’t recognise: archetypes, ideologies, group enchantment...forces that distort perception and blur moral lines. I don’t think they cross red lines so much as they’re drawn into them, believing all the while they’re on the side of good. They're unconsciously following a program that takes them deeper into depravity.
Until we reckon with that kind of possession, we’ll keep expecting rational standards from people under irrational influence
Good point. I guess questions like these only apply at a certain point - until a person is at the point to be able to ask the question themselves, it's kind of moot.
I love reading your work. I have no answers for you. I have some experience with a family member in a family which was cohesive and harmonious. Without boring you with the details, one incident didn’t go the way a family member wanted and caused some confusion and hurt - none intended. However, in seeking to absolve herself of any blame for the confusion, over the course of months, she managed to blow up the whole family (to my reading she appears to be a covert narcissist). Basically, anyone who didn’t fully support her and fully condemn the other family member was ‘no longer someone she felt safe around’. She’s not evil so I draw the line there. But she’s damaged in some way I don’t quite relate to. Sure we all screw up with unintended consequences and usually an apology does the trick. More confounding, this person has a degree in mediation! The real culprit in my opinion is the husband who I believe is under the complete spell of his wife. Most healthy marriages have one spouse pulling back the other when the other is veering towards the zone of unreasonable. This is not the case here - so he’s like the family member who not only just can’t see the others’ point of view, but also actively accuses his family members of deliberately treating his wife badly (which of course is not true - people just don’t want to take sides). Sadly, we are no longer the cohesive clan we once were.
As for geo-politics - as you’ve shown, it’s down to the leaders not the peoples. How many times have we heard from people who’ve been here or there in foreign countries and how nice the locals treated them - especially in places we are led to believe are godforsaken. The dark personalities that manage to climb the greasy poles of power seem to never be satiated - like lord of the rings and the ring. Best summed up with, ‘the US has no allies only interests’. I’m pretty sure that’s not a uniquely American leadership quality - likely applies to any leader once they have the power to exploit such disloyalty. I would also say, these power seekers create cults among the populace - so many smart, formerly normal people have totally lost the plot. Did that happen in Soviet times?
The road to globalism is likely one which commenced centuries ago as the same secretive families pass the mission on from generation to generation. Feels like it’s all coming to a head now. Does psychopathy run in families? Is it an inherited trait?
Good points. I hadn’t thought to include the “flying monkey” syndrome (the husband in your example). As for psychopathy in families, Lobaczewski thought so, but as far as I know, that area remains understudied.
I think from my experience maintaining the status quo is a big driver. It can be life changing to see parents take the side of their in law other their own child. Often, advising them to give in to the demands of the in law. Even if it puts their child and grandchild at risk. Then they deny, justify or put their own childs behaviour on trial.
From my mid-teens to mid-twenties, I had a best friend named Matt who had major antisocial tendencies. He had a roommate named Chris and we all used to hang out on this one message board (this was before social media). Chris was a DJ, and at one point he spent his rent money producing these mix CDs that he thought would catapult his career. He then moved all his stuff out of the apartment when Matt was at work, sticking Matt with the rent.
If that wasn't galling enough, He immediately went back to posting on this message board, now from his mom's house, as though there was no problem and nothing happened. Matt and I told everyone on the board what he did, and we antagonized him every time he posted anything. But he kept posting anyway, said he had a right to post wherever he wanted and that Matt was a shitty roommate (which I'm sure was true). Anyway, this just went on forever and Chris started making threats against Matt on this message board, even claiming he was hiring someone to attack Matt. Just despicable behavior.
One night, Matt and I went to this club where Chris was and Matt said he wanted to punch him out. I told him he should do it, and he did. Right in the middle of the dance floor, surrounded by party people. Just decked him on the dance floor and walked out.
I didn't see the punch, but I saw the aftermath. Chris was with his friend, Gina, who told Chris to tell the cops he was hit by a bottle, because she knew this would elevate the charge to aggravated assault and Matt could be charged with a felony. So that's what he did: Chris pressed charges, claiming he was hit by a bottle, and Gina corroborated this as a witness.
Anyway, Matt was terrified he would go to prison and he begged me to testify as a witness on his behalf, contradicting the claim about the bottle. Problem was, I didn't actually see the incident. I just believed Matt. And like I said, Matt was my best friend. So I agreed. I went to court completely prepared to perjure myself on the witness stand.
When I showed up, Chris and Gina were there, but when Chris saw me, he changed his story and now claimed there was no bottle. So then Matt pled guilty to a misdemeanor and got community service, if I remember correctly. I didn't have to testify.
So why was I willing to lie under oath? First, loyalty; second, although Matt was not the most reliable narrator, in general, I believed him on this (and I was right); third, he claimed I egged him on, which is true.
Also, like I mentioned at the beginning, Matt had some antisocial traits, and on some level I admired his audacity. I've never known anyone so adept at antagonizing strangers and getting in so many altercations and near-altercations. I was constantly having to run cover for him and try to diffuse problems he created. And the people he ran with were people like Chris and Gina—galling, unscrupulous.
Matt used to say I was his true 'mate', and that I understood the code of 'mates', by which he was referencing a line from the movie Trainspotting:
"Begbie's fuckin' psycho, man! But... he's a mate, so what can you do?"
Anyway, a couple years later Matt fucked my girlfriend and I stopped talking to both of them.
There are so many dynamics in play here, from historical, psychological, spiritual, and of course economics. What goes through the mind of those individuals who were forcefully subjected to MK ultra/Monarch Programing (The Manchurian Candidate(s)? And what do those who have recovered from those abuses learned, like Kathy O'Brien? Super soldier alphas that developed a "disconnect" switch between empathy and apathy? Having been abused by The State of Utah and a common cult of the Mormons there, I know how delusional group think righteousness can deviate from what the rest of the country might call "Societal Norms". With the advent of electricity, radio, television, the internet and other forms of media, how can mass formation be achieved but by a rote education and subliminal programing? Do you remember in grade school everyone having to put their hands over their hearts and recite "The Pledge of Allegiance"? By the 4th grade it had become reflexive, like the programed alters of Monarch slaves. Along the lines of various ambiguities, could the acronym DP (Dark Personalities) also be equivalent to Demon Possession? Can those persistent predatory personalities (PPP) ever be assuaged or satiated?
Have you ever wondered why the hypocrites of Jesus's day were unable to dissuade him from bringing his message about repentance to the people, even though he already knew they were going to "Take him for a Ride"? Are we witnessing a repeating pattern of Dread, Despair, and Dependency? Is it even possible for people to retain their individuality, without disconnecting from the more forceful reality staged before their own eyes? Can we call a liar, a murderer and a thief, a CPS worker, A Policeman and a Judge with equal conviction? If not for the Holy Bible and the precepts taught therein, by what single (as in not duplicitous) standards should be applied to any given culture and society? I know I've probably ask more questions that provide answers, but calling a "Spade a Spade" is the most honest assessment of any given individuals perceptions, who are able to remain autonomous and independent of the (mis)managed perceptions.
I actually had MKULTRA in mind when writing a few of the sentences in this article. That’s a whole other discussion, with implications for all the issues discussed here, as you point out.
My best friends mom was a patient in the Canadian hospital where they did one if the mkultra experiments ( sleep deprivation ). It just destroyed her life she was so f***** up after all that but she was never dangerous or mean or any of that but interestingly it was her husband who had her committed to the psychiatric hospital that did that to her. He was a narcissist or a sociopathic type and he had her admitted several times even though there was nothing wrong with her other than she was very naive and very easily fooled. A terribly sad story. She died before her class action suit against the government was finalized. She died a pauper so to speak. One step up from homeless.
What a rough story. She got destroyed by both ends of psychiatric abuse: a psychopath convincing others she's crazy, and a sick doctor doing the government's dirty work. Tragic.
Do you know if it was the same Hospital that Cameron worked in? There were several documentaries by a man named Scott Noble about "Human Resources" and other expose's of government atrocities on an international scale, with more of an emphasis on the United States and Canada. He had an aunt in the Canadian hospital that they really messed up as well. If they are finished with their toys from broken people, (as in, cannot sell them for sex or soldiers) then they usually are discarded among the homeless and intentionally kept in a condition of perpetual poverty. Kathy O'Brien was one of the exceptions, but the most unpublished genocide/democide are the fragmented people who were pushed beyond their limits. I think there are a lot more of them than society wants to admit to.
Yes, it was Allan memorial from 59 thru to 63. If i recall correctly a total of 8 different visits. The longest being 11 months in the last year, several 30 day admissions in the first year then progressively money. She had no recollection of where she was after discharge from some of them and there is no record of her anywhere, she would literally just disappear. I dint know how many in total but I think as many as 100 plus patients were involved in several of the class action lawsuit attempts.
I think the leaders of men are predators more often than not. They are the strongest of us, and they desire power far more than healthy people do.
I think history makes a lot more sense when viewed through this lens. Why is war so ubiquitous, when it's terrible for everyone? When it harms even the victors? Same reason mafiosos fight with each other even though they're all in the business of victimizing other people. It's all about who's on top.
This could be true, but I think there are a lot of leaders who are quite sane and "desire power" in order to do good things. I don't think most people realize that some people are simply more powerful than others, and will seek high positions because it suits them, and they can handle such positions relatively sanely. Those who seek high positions just to protect themselves from being discovered for the criminals they really are are a different breed of cat. Our challenge is to get many more people to recognize the difference between the two.
It would be unhealthy if there were not something predatory in our leadership. If groups are to remain cohesive around competitors, leadership who attract loyal followers are those who can organize violence.
Would we prefer a butterfly settling on a sword hilt or a wolf in sheep's clothing?
I suspect there was an advantage to tribes, in prehistoric times, to have a few psychopathic members. I don't think it's much of an advantage today. You don't have to be cruel to be strong.
You think about thought--and reason, and ethics and morality. You, undoubtedly, have given much thought to a moral/ethical code that you have developed. I have also. We tend to assume this is a process everyone develops, but they don't. Many people respond emotionally, or from fear--making them easy to manipulate and making our territory difficult to navigate. When I don't understand a behavior, I try to withdraw, or step back, or in any case, to remain silent until I have had time to assess and figure out whether to respond or not and if so, how--considering as many of the possible outcomes as I can. I don't know of any other way, though I am open to suggestions. I do admire those people who appear to have an unerring sense of how to proceed, always. I do know that I am not that person.
I have been troubled by a few of my brother's behaviors. I love him dearly and he is trying to do what he believes is best. He sold his interest in some family land to outsiders. I found out by accident. He still hasn't told me. I had deeded mine upon my death to his sons so that they could have the whole share. His actions rather negated mine, which he knew about. It's been three months. I'm not upset any longer, just disappointed. I haven't said anything because I think he'll just get defensive out of a sense of guilt.But at some point, I have to say something out of fairness to him. All of this could have been avoided had he just been honest up front and trusted me. That's where the disappointment comes in.
To me, women who are sexually attracted to evil or criminal men are following an evolutionary imperative: they are attracted to power, because powerful men are protective men. Without even thinking about it, women want a mate who will provide, and will protect them. That is why women are also attracted to Type A personality business bigwigs. Unless a woman happens to be a particularly meta-conscious thinking type, she may not try to analyze her feelings and reject them as immoral.
Sounds about right to me. Unfortunately, young women aren’t taught to differentiate between “provide/protect” and “use/destroy” when it comes to powerful men!
"political movements that seem to deliberately choose the lowest forms of humanity to turn into icons. There must be some type of conversive thinking that produces this anomaly, but I do not understand it. If any reader has an anecdote to share, please do so.'
I have lead a rather bookish and introspective life so please forgive that I have no direct personal experience to share, but allow me to point your readers towards a few historical ones in the interest of further discussion.
Right off the top of my head for political movements turning the lowest forms of humanity into icons, I nominate, in chronological order; Alcibiades (Athens c.450–404 BC), Robin Hood (England 12th/13th century AD), John Paul Jones (Scotland/United States of America 1747-1792) and Stephan Bandera (Ukraine 1909 - 1959).
I might chime back in to the comments later to detail my particular reasons for including each one of them if anyone wants to pick me up on this, but suffice to say each of them was a criminal and a murderer according to the laws of their own people and era and each became a hero.
As for why? I suggest at least part of the reason must be because they were bold and took the fight to the enemy. Was that a false sort of psychotic bravery? Perhaps, but they were bold never the less and people admire that.
People like to think that they have a vicious dog fighting on their side, even if it is really a wolf.
I don’t know enough about the others, but I agree with the inclusion of Alcibiades and Bandera. Cleckley has a great section in The Mask of Sanity explaining Alcibiades’ psychopathy in depth.
And in the current day Luigi the alleged shooter of the United Healthcare CEO and the El Salvadoran illegal immigrant “Maryland husband” recently deported.
A Democratic congressman has gone to El Salvador to speak with him and media siloed ‘liberals’ celebrate both of these bad actors ignoring evidence and basic transgressive violent criminality.
(We can look to the academic work on decolonization to sample the philosophical musings of justified violence… and it’s just a fact that it’s blood lust porn.)
On an active human level the phenomenon involves lionizing those who appear to have the courage to act out the aggression which the hypnosis suppresses and sympathy with the underdog as a paraempathy.
Mental constructs/ ideals are used self protectively to keep anxiety and aggression at bay. But the resulting mob psychology intoxication supports a dangerous obstruction/accumulation of these emotions and can lead to a sleepwalking into atrocities with “moral” certitude.
The powers that should NOT be are well aware of this potential and have been running military grade psyops to induce the madness.
There’s not an American alive today who hasn’t been impacted negatively by CIA project MK Ultra AND its spin offs‼️30,000 directly experimented on btw, tortured. Kamala has signs of such damage and was near the program at the vulnerable age her particular signs suggest.
Everyone’s a casualty and untold numbers of dead
Covid comes to mind over 100 million deaths globally due to policies etc.
The biography of John Paul Jones might be worth going over with a “Dark Personality” eye especially for an American. He has been called “The Father of the US Navy”. According to the standards of his own time (so we will have to pass over the transporting slaves bit) he was either probably or definitely guilty of multiple instances of piracy/armed robbery, murder and rape. But he was a bold warrior at the right time and the right place to take the fight to the enemy.
I think I can still see a pro-American revolutionary spirit bending this biography in his favor in the wikipedia entry. What is described in the introduction as “accused of assaulting a minor” gets written up towards the end as an attested and almost certain aggravated rape of a child.
I’ve been accused of a very serious crime against a child. It is the sort of allegation which to many people is definitively proven by virtue of being alleged. Allowances must be made for prosecutors, police, prisoners and justices who would be expected to mete out punishment.
Some officials were in a position to realize the allegations were wrong but proceeded anyway. They were indifferent to the morality of it. Too intelligent to plead naivety. They were too highly placed to attribute their sadism to a sense of personal grievance or helpless frustration. It’s unsettling to discover some of the worst people in there were running the place.
“I personally wouldn’t judge the entire family of a notorious high-functioning predatory pedophile for throwing him to the wolves. But I would probably write a sarcastic and deridisive tweet about a family that did the same to an innocent man who was falsely accused.“
One friend was intimidated by the howling public and obviously wanted to dissociate himself from me to avoid the taint of the allegations.
Fortunately, all the charges were cleared affirmatively. The neurologist involved seemed enthusiastic about having set a precedent to help his other patients. Unfortunately, he died suddenly, shortly after being vaccinated...
I loved this essay. I am currently addicted to police bodycam videos of drunk driving arrests. "Call my father NOW" is common. The field sobriety testing takes long enough that many have summoned a parent who arrive in time to witness their screaming, fighting arrests. This behavior is learned. Maybe I have an extremely closely-held red line...nobody who knows me is going to ask for my help burying any bodies.
Great post. I recently read the 3 book by Gmirkin which you recommended in a recent podcasts and it was hard not to think that what happened in 270BC was a concerted effort by a pathological group of individuals. A group which was already in advanced stages in the ponerogenesis.
You wrote:
"Members of a group can sometimes hypnotize themselves into believing that they can do no wrong, have never in fact done anything wrong, and are always innocent victims. Anything and everything they do is justified."
It has been an amazingly successful ponerogenic association and which having gone onchecked for so long, has wrecked almost limitless amount of evil. The question in line with your post is, when will the red line be crossed which will break the hypnotic spell?
There are many mechanisms that protect psychopaths or justify psychopathic behaviors. And family is certainly one of them. Group loyalty is another. I knew a few people who were pretty insane but were able to retain their positions for years because they were useful to the group in the jobs they were assigned to. They eventually became so socially disruptive, though, that they had to be expelled. They still make trouble for the group, but from outside it. And this is a group that is aware of psychopathy and even has a therapy for it.
When it comes to the whole planet, we can't humanely expel people from the planet, no matter how insane they are. And all indications suggest that killing them just causes them to come back, as crazy as they were the last time. We must have humane ways of separating such people from the general population. In the past, those methods have ended up being taken over by psychopaths and used against their "enemies." So a whole system will have to be put in place, based on education and training about how to detect and handle these people. This education will have to be very broad, or these measures would never get popular support, as they seem "too extreme." Only if people can be clearly shown how much damage these people cause will they be willing to support extreme measures to keep those people "quarantined."
In this respect, we have a significant barrier to overcome, which involves the victims of psychopaths. A person can become so victimized by one or more dark personalities that they move down into a level of thought that is not rational. They aren't insane like the psychopath, but they will agree to insane ideas because for them fear or hopelessness is more real to them than optimism and self-confidence. Such people unwittingly serve psychopaths and will have to be rehabilitated before they will recognize the error of their ways, forgive themselves, and help us move to a more rational style of life.
As to your question, from the outside it looks like a form of hypnosis: they literally don't see, are unaware of, what happened and the evilness of it. From the inside (their perspective), it's as if their minds are repelled by a magnetic force, they cam't "go there". To the degree they do manage, because they may be forced or can't escape, the contact with that mindspace is fleeting and immediately done away with using brief surface level rationalizations which again are more like a repelling force than real thought.
At the geopolitical level I would be happy if alliances were explicitly judgement-free. This is the Westphalian model (internal politics of our allies is irrelevant) and it is what China, Russia and the BRICS practice - everyone except the West in fact.
But I suppose it arises from any degree of democracy or populism. Going right back to Greece and Rome, if the plebs get any say at all in the conduct of a war or an alliance (which is always in service of actual or potential war) then they need to be propagandised.
I am reminded of another Johnny - Johnny the Boy in the original Mad Max. A vicious psychopath who pleads for mercy at the end. That scene prophetically encapsulates the liberal pathology of giving in to manipulative evil - and the correct response. (Max gives Johnny a hacksaw and the advice that he can cut through his own arm before the burning car he is handcuffed to, explodes).
Really thoughtful piece. I appreciated the clarity and the tension you hold throughout.
I'm not sure you’ll get a satisfying answer to your question, because the premise assumes people, like leaders, are operating from conscious ethical reasoning, when they're not.
Most are under the influence of forces they don’t recognise: archetypes, ideologies, group enchantment...forces that distort perception and blur moral lines. I don’t think they cross red lines so much as they’re drawn into them, believing all the while they’re on the side of good. They're unconsciously following a program that takes them deeper into depravity.
Until we reckon with that kind of possession, we’ll keep expecting rational standards from people under irrational influence
Good point. I guess questions like these only apply at a certain point - until a person is at the point to be able to ask the question themselves, it's kind of moot.
I love reading your work. I have no answers for you. I have some experience with a family member in a family which was cohesive and harmonious. Without boring you with the details, one incident didn’t go the way a family member wanted and caused some confusion and hurt - none intended. However, in seeking to absolve herself of any blame for the confusion, over the course of months, she managed to blow up the whole family (to my reading she appears to be a covert narcissist). Basically, anyone who didn’t fully support her and fully condemn the other family member was ‘no longer someone she felt safe around’. She’s not evil so I draw the line there. But she’s damaged in some way I don’t quite relate to. Sure we all screw up with unintended consequences and usually an apology does the trick. More confounding, this person has a degree in mediation! The real culprit in my opinion is the husband who I believe is under the complete spell of his wife. Most healthy marriages have one spouse pulling back the other when the other is veering towards the zone of unreasonable. This is not the case here - so he’s like the family member who not only just can’t see the others’ point of view, but also actively accuses his family members of deliberately treating his wife badly (which of course is not true - people just don’t want to take sides). Sadly, we are no longer the cohesive clan we once were.
As for geo-politics - as you’ve shown, it’s down to the leaders not the peoples. How many times have we heard from people who’ve been here or there in foreign countries and how nice the locals treated them - especially in places we are led to believe are godforsaken. The dark personalities that manage to climb the greasy poles of power seem to never be satiated - like lord of the rings and the ring. Best summed up with, ‘the US has no allies only interests’. I’m pretty sure that’s not a uniquely American leadership quality - likely applies to any leader once they have the power to exploit such disloyalty. I would also say, these power seekers create cults among the populace - so many smart, formerly normal people have totally lost the plot. Did that happen in Soviet times?
The road to globalism is likely one which commenced centuries ago as the same secretive families pass the mission on from generation to generation. Feels like it’s all coming to a head now. Does psychopathy run in families? Is it an inherited trait?
Good points. I hadn’t thought to include the “flying monkey” syndrome (the husband in your example). As for psychopathy in families, Lobaczewski thought so, but as far as I know, that area remains understudied.
I think from my experience maintaining the status quo is a big driver. It can be life changing to see parents take the side of their in law other their own child. Often, advising them to give in to the demands of the in law. Even if it puts their child and grandchild at risk. Then they deny, justify or put their own childs behaviour on trial.
From my mid-teens to mid-twenties, I had a best friend named Matt who had major antisocial tendencies. He had a roommate named Chris and we all used to hang out on this one message board (this was before social media). Chris was a DJ, and at one point he spent his rent money producing these mix CDs that he thought would catapult his career. He then moved all his stuff out of the apartment when Matt was at work, sticking Matt with the rent.
If that wasn't galling enough, He immediately went back to posting on this message board, now from his mom's house, as though there was no problem and nothing happened. Matt and I told everyone on the board what he did, and we antagonized him every time he posted anything. But he kept posting anyway, said he had a right to post wherever he wanted and that Matt was a shitty roommate (which I'm sure was true). Anyway, this just went on forever and Chris started making threats against Matt on this message board, even claiming he was hiring someone to attack Matt. Just despicable behavior.
One night, Matt and I went to this club where Chris was and Matt said he wanted to punch him out. I told him he should do it, and he did. Right in the middle of the dance floor, surrounded by party people. Just decked him on the dance floor and walked out.
I didn't see the punch, but I saw the aftermath. Chris was with his friend, Gina, who told Chris to tell the cops he was hit by a bottle, because she knew this would elevate the charge to aggravated assault and Matt could be charged with a felony. So that's what he did: Chris pressed charges, claiming he was hit by a bottle, and Gina corroborated this as a witness.
Anyway, Matt was terrified he would go to prison and he begged me to testify as a witness on his behalf, contradicting the claim about the bottle. Problem was, I didn't actually see the incident. I just believed Matt. And like I said, Matt was my best friend. So I agreed. I went to court completely prepared to perjure myself on the witness stand.
When I showed up, Chris and Gina were there, but when Chris saw me, he changed his story and now claimed there was no bottle. So then Matt pled guilty to a misdemeanor and got community service, if I remember correctly. I didn't have to testify.
So why was I willing to lie under oath? First, loyalty; second, although Matt was not the most reliable narrator, in general, I believed him on this (and I was right); third, he claimed I egged him on, which is true.
Also, like I mentioned at the beginning, Matt had some antisocial traits, and on some level I admired his audacity. I've never known anyone so adept at antagonizing strangers and getting in so many altercations and near-altercations. I was constantly having to run cover for him and try to diffuse problems he created. And the people he ran with were people like Chris and Gina—galling, unscrupulous.
Matt used to say I was his true 'mate', and that I understood the code of 'mates', by which he was referencing a line from the movie Trainspotting:
"Begbie's fuckin' psycho, man! But... he's a mate, so what can you do?"
Anyway, a couple years later Matt fucked my girlfriend and I stopped talking to both of them.
Amazing. As a composition, this was perfect. All the necessary information, no fluff. Seriously, I would read a book of your anecdotes.
There are so many dynamics in play here, from historical, psychological, spiritual, and of course economics. What goes through the mind of those individuals who were forcefully subjected to MK ultra/Monarch Programing (The Manchurian Candidate(s)? And what do those who have recovered from those abuses learned, like Kathy O'Brien? Super soldier alphas that developed a "disconnect" switch between empathy and apathy? Having been abused by The State of Utah and a common cult of the Mormons there, I know how delusional group think righteousness can deviate from what the rest of the country might call "Societal Norms". With the advent of electricity, radio, television, the internet and other forms of media, how can mass formation be achieved but by a rote education and subliminal programing? Do you remember in grade school everyone having to put their hands over their hearts and recite "The Pledge of Allegiance"? By the 4th grade it had become reflexive, like the programed alters of Monarch slaves. Along the lines of various ambiguities, could the acronym DP (Dark Personalities) also be equivalent to Demon Possession? Can those persistent predatory personalities (PPP) ever be assuaged or satiated?
Have you ever wondered why the hypocrites of Jesus's day were unable to dissuade him from bringing his message about repentance to the people, even though he already knew they were going to "Take him for a Ride"? Are we witnessing a repeating pattern of Dread, Despair, and Dependency? Is it even possible for people to retain their individuality, without disconnecting from the more forceful reality staged before their own eyes? Can we call a liar, a murderer and a thief, a CPS worker, A Policeman and a Judge with equal conviction? If not for the Holy Bible and the precepts taught therein, by what single (as in not duplicitous) standards should be applied to any given culture and society? I know I've probably ask more questions that provide answers, but calling a "Spade a Spade" is the most honest assessment of any given individuals perceptions, who are able to remain autonomous and independent of the (mis)managed perceptions.
I actually had MKULTRA in mind when writing a few of the sentences in this article. That’s a whole other discussion, with implications for all the issues discussed here, as you point out.
My best friends mom was a patient in the Canadian hospital where they did one if the mkultra experiments ( sleep deprivation ). It just destroyed her life she was so f***** up after all that but she was never dangerous or mean or any of that but interestingly it was her husband who had her committed to the psychiatric hospital that did that to her. He was a narcissist or a sociopathic type and he had her admitted several times even though there was nothing wrong with her other than she was very naive and very easily fooled. A terribly sad story. She died before her class action suit against the government was finalized. She died a pauper so to speak. One step up from homeless.
What a rough story. She got destroyed by both ends of psychiatric abuse: a psychopath convincing others she's crazy, and a sick doctor doing the government's dirty work. Tragic.
Very
Do you know if it was the same Hospital that Cameron worked in? There were several documentaries by a man named Scott Noble about "Human Resources" and other expose's of government atrocities on an international scale, with more of an emphasis on the United States and Canada. He had an aunt in the Canadian hospital that they really messed up as well. If they are finished with their toys from broken people, (as in, cannot sell them for sex or soldiers) then they usually are discarded among the homeless and intentionally kept in a condition of perpetual poverty. Kathy O'Brien was one of the exceptions, but the most unpublished genocide/democide are the fragmented people who were pushed beyond their limits. I think there are a lot more of them than society wants to admit to.
Yes, it was Allan memorial from 59 thru to 63. If i recall correctly a total of 8 different visits. The longest being 11 months in the last year, several 30 day admissions in the first year then progressively money. She had no recollection of where she was after discharge from some of them and there is no record of her anywhere, she would literally just disappear. I dint know how many in total but I think as many as 100 plus patients were involved in several of the class action lawsuit attempts.
I think the leaders of men are predators more often than not. They are the strongest of us, and they desire power far more than healthy people do.
I think history makes a lot more sense when viewed through this lens. Why is war so ubiquitous, when it's terrible for everyone? When it harms even the victors? Same reason mafiosos fight with each other even though they're all in the business of victimizing other people. It's all about who's on top.
This could be true, but I think there are a lot of leaders who are quite sane and "desire power" in order to do good things. I don't think most people realize that some people are simply more powerful than others, and will seek high positions because it suits them, and they can handle such positions relatively sanely. Those who seek high positions just to protect themselves from being discovered for the criminals they really are are a different breed of cat. Our challenge is to get many more people to recognize the difference between the two.
It would be unhealthy if there were not something predatory in our leadership. If groups are to remain cohesive around competitors, leadership who attract loyal followers are those who can organize violence.
Would we prefer a butterfly settling on a sword hilt or a wolf in sheep's clothing?
There is a third option.
I suspect there was an advantage to tribes, in prehistoric times, to have a few psychopathic members. I don't think it's much of an advantage today. You don't have to be cruel to be strong.
But even prehistoric tribes knew some things were a bridge too far: https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-kunlangeta-part-i
You think about thought--and reason, and ethics and morality. You, undoubtedly, have given much thought to a moral/ethical code that you have developed. I have also. We tend to assume this is a process everyone develops, but they don't. Many people respond emotionally, or from fear--making them easy to manipulate and making our territory difficult to navigate. When I don't understand a behavior, I try to withdraw, or step back, or in any case, to remain silent until I have had time to assess and figure out whether to respond or not and if so, how--considering as many of the possible outcomes as I can. I don't know of any other way, though I am open to suggestions. I do admire those people who appear to have an unerring sense of how to proceed, always. I do know that I am not that person.
I have been troubled by a few of my brother's behaviors. I love him dearly and he is trying to do what he believes is best. He sold his interest in some family land to outsiders. I found out by accident. He still hasn't told me. I had deeded mine upon my death to his sons so that they could have the whole share. His actions rather negated mine, which he knew about. It's been three months. I'm not upset any longer, just disappointed. I haven't said anything because I think he'll just get defensive out of a sense of guilt.But at some point, I have to say something out of fairness to him. All of this could have been avoided had he just been honest up front and trusted me. That's where the disappointment comes in.
To me, women who are sexually attracted to evil or criminal men are following an evolutionary imperative: they are attracted to power, because powerful men are protective men. Without even thinking about it, women want a mate who will provide, and will protect them. That is why women are also attracted to Type A personality business bigwigs. Unless a woman happens to be a particularly meta-conscious thinking type, she may not try to analyze her feelings and reject them as immoral.
Sounds about right to me. Unfortunately, young women aren’t taught to differentiate between “provide/protect” and “use/destroy” when it comes to powerful men!
"political movements that seem to deliberately choose the lowest forms of humanity to turn into icons. There must be some type of conversive thinking that produces this anomaly, but I do not understand it. If any reader has an anecdote to share, please do so.'
I have lead a rather bookish and introspective life so please forgive that I have no direct personal experience to share, but allow me to point your readers towards a few historical ones in the interest of further discussion.
Right off the top of my head for political movements turning the lowest forms of humanity into icons, I nominate, in chronological order; Alcibiades (Athens c.450–404 BC), Robin Hood (England 12th/13th century AD), John Paul Jones (Scotland/United States of America 1747-1792) and Stephan Bandera (Ukraine 1909 - 1959).
I might chime back in to the comments later to detail my particular reasons for including each one of them if anyone wants to pick me up on this, but suffice to say each of them was a criminal and a murderer according to the laws of their own people and era and each became a hero.
As for why? I suggest at least part of the reason must be because they were bold and took the fight to the enemy. Was that a false sort of psychotic bravery? Perhaps, but they were bold never the less and people admire that.
People like to think that they have a vicious dog fighting on their side, even if it is really a wolf.
He maybe a bastard but he's OUR bastard.
I don’t know enough about the others, but I agree with the inclusion of Alcibiades and Bandera. Cleckley has a great section in The Mask of Sanity explaining Alcibiades’ psychopathy in depth.
I nominate Ché Guevara
And in the current day Luigi the alleged shooter of the United Healthcare CEO and the El Salvadoran illegal immigrant “Maryland husband” recently deported.
A Democratic congressman has gone to El Salvador to speak with him and media siloed ‘liberals’ celebrate both of these bad actors ignoring evidence and basic transgressive violent criminality.
(We can look to the academic work on decolonization to sample the philosophical musings of justified violence… and it’s just a fact that it’s blood lust porn.)
On an active human level the phenomenon involves lionizing those who appear to have the courage to act out the aggression which the hypnosis suppresses and sympathy with the underdog as a paraempathy.
Mental constructs/ ideals are used self protectively to keep anxiety and aggression at bay. But the resulting mob psychology intoxication supports a dangerous obstruction/accumulation of these emotions and can lead to a sleepwalking into atrocities with “moral” certitude.
The powers that should NOT be are well aware of this potential and have been running military grade psyops to induce the madness.
There’s not an American alive today who hasn’t been impacted negatively by CIA project MK Ultra AND its spin offs‼️30,000 directly experimented on btw, tortured. Kamala has signs of such damage and was near the program at the vulnerable age her particular signs suggest.
Everyone’s a casualty and untold numbers of dead
Covid comes to mind over 100 million deaths globally due to policies etc.
The biography of John Paul Jones might be worth going over with a “Dark Personality” eye especially for an American. He has been called “The Father of the US Navy”. According to the standards of his own time (so we will have to pass over the transporting slaves bit) he was either probably or definitely guilty of multiple instances of piracy/armed robbery, murder and rape. But he was a bold warrior at the right time and the right place to take the fight to the enemy.
I think I can still see a pro-American revolutionary spirit bending this biography in his favor in the wikipedia entry. What is described in the introduction as “accused of assaulting a minor” gets written up towards the end as an attested and almost certain aggravated rape of a child.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Paul_Jones
I’ve been accused of a very serious crime against a child. It is the sort of allegation which to many people is definitively proven by virtue of being alleged. Allowances must be made for prosecutors, police, prisoners and justices who would be expected to mete out punishment.
Some officials were in a position to realize the allegations were wrong but proceeded anyway. They were indifferent to the morality of it. Too intelligent to plead naivety. They were too highly placed to attribute their sadism to a sense of personal grievance or helpless frustration. It’s unsettling to discover some of the worst people in there were running the place.
“I personally wouldn’t judge the entire family of a notorious high-functioning predatory pedophile for throwing him to the wolves. But I would probably write a sarcastic and deridisive tweet about a family that did the same to an innocent man who was falsely accused.“
One friend was intimidated by the howling public and obviously wanted to dissociate himself from me to avoid the taint of the allegations.
Fortunately, all the charges were cleared affirmatively. The neurologist involved seemed enthusiastic about having set a precedent to help his other patients. Unfortunately, he died suddenly, shortly after being vaccinated...
Excellent article. I linked to it and took it to the arena of resistance groups and activism.
https://shepardscale.substack.com/p/loyalty-and-the-line-when-standing
I loved this essay. I am currently addicted to police bodycam videos of drunk driving arrests. "Call my father NOW" is common. The field sobriety testing takes long enough that many have summoned a parent who arrive in time to witness their screaming, fighting arrests. This behavior is learned. Maybe I have an extremely closely-held red line...nobody who knows me is going to ask for my help burying any bodies.
Great post. I recently read the 3 book by Gmirkin which you recommended in a recent podcasts and it was hard not to think that what happened in 270BC was a concerted effort by a pathological group of individuals. A group which was already in advanced stages in the ponerogenesis.
You wrote:
"Members of a group can sometimes hypnotize themselves into believing that they can do no wrong, have never in fact done anything wrong, and are always innocent victims. Anything and everything they do is justified."
It has been an amazingly successful ponerogenic association and which having gone onchecked for so long, has wrecked almost limitless amount of evil. The question in line with your post is, when will the red line be crossed which will break the hypnotic spell?
There are many mechanisms that protect psychopaths or justify psychopathic behaviors. And family is certainly one of them. Group loyalty is another. I knew a few people who were pretty insane but were able to retain their positions for years because they were useful to the group in the jobs they were assigned to. They eventually became so socially disruptive, though, that they had to be expelled. They still make trouble for the group, but from outside it. And this is a group that is aware of psychopathy and even has a therapy for it.
When it comes to the whole planet, we can't humanely expel people from the planet, no matter how insane they are. And all indications suggest that killing them just causes them to come back, as crazy as they were the last time. We must have humane ways of separating such people from the general population. In the past, those methods have ended up being taken over by psychopaths and used against their "enemies." So a whole system will have to be put in place, based on education and training about how to detect and handle these people. This education will have to be very broad, or these measures would never get popular support, as they seem "too extreme." Only if people can be clearly shown how much damage these people cause will they be willing to support extreme measures to keep those people "quarantined."
In this respect, we have a significant barrier to overcome, which involves the victims of psychopaths. A person can become so victimized by one or more dark personalities that they move down into a level of thought that is not rational. They aren't insane like the psychopath, but they will agree to insane ideas because for them fear or hopelessness is more real to them than optimism and self-confidence. Such people unwittingly serve psychopaths and will have to be rehabilitated before they will recognize the error of their ways, forgive themselves, and help us move to a more rational style of life.
Happy Substack Birthday!
As to your question, from the outside it looks like a form of hypnosis: they literally don't see, are unaware of, what happened and the evilness of it. From the inside (their perspective), it's as if their minds are repelled by a magnetic force, they cam't "go there". To the degree they do manage, because they may be forced or can't escape, the contact with that mindspace is fleeting and immediately done away with using brief surface level rationalizations which again are more like a repelling force than real thought.
At the geopolitical level I would be happy if alliances were explicitly judgement-free. This is the Westphalian model (internal politics of our allies is irrelevant) and it is what China, Russia and the BRICS practice - everyone except the West in fact.
But I suppose it arises from any degree of democracy or populism. Going right back to Greece and Rome, if the plebs get any say at all in the conduct of a war or an alliance (which is always in service of actual or potential war) then they need to be propagandised.
I am reminded of another Johnny - Johnny the Boy in the original Mad Max. A vicious psychopath who pleads for mercy at the end. That scene prophetically encapsulates the liberal pathology of giving in to manipulative evil - and the correct response. (Max gives Johnny a hacksaw and the advice that he can cut through his own arm before the burning car he is handcuffed to, explodes).