There's always been that thing where class warriors were very rarely from the actual working class but it wasn't until we got to the 21st Century when such people ditched any pretensions they'd adopted in that regard, and all of a sudden working class meant Cher, Madonna and Barbra Streisand, and the actual working class were deemed 'deplorable', 'right wing', etc.
"The primary traditional and ideological values may then, for a long time, protect an association which has succumbed to the ponerization process from the awareness of society, especially its less critical components, providing it with a peculiar “mask of sanity.”"
I think this is in line with what I was trying to explore with me "Conan" essay. The mask of sanity or secondary mantle/skin worm isn't immediately detected by the general population, who mostly agree with the tine-tested rhetoric if not the current observable reality. But the tendency for altruistic-leaning people is to at least pay lip service to the former, because obtaing and promoting the latter requires not just ti.e and effort, but the courage (or audacity) to describe the new emperor's finery with any accuracy.
One of the most useful takeaways from The Fourth Way, and this is a facet of self-remembering, is the formula "When false personality is active, essence becomes passive. When essence is active, false personality becomes passive". It got me through that whole Covidmania/lockdown period in London, in which not once did I wear a mask, not once was I challenged, and not once did I pay lip service to any of it.
Quote from the PsyPost article linked near the top of the article:
“Assuming that the DEVP is valid, minority groups should be made aware of the narcissistic ‘enemies’ from within their activist movement, as these individuals could hijack the cause thereby reducing the success of the activism in many ways,” they explained. “As grandiose narcissists typically desire fame, distinction, elevated social status, and high social importance, they can be assumed to strive for influential positions that involve social visibility and outreach as well as access to financial and other resources.”
“While pretending to be prosocial, narcissists tend to have low empathy and to be primarily interested in satisfying their self-centered needs. Therefore, instead of striving for reasonable solutions, narcissistic individuals will rather be interested in keeping the perception of problems going to maintain their highlighted position.”
“Also, narcissistic individuals might use the resources of the activist movements for their own private purposes, thereby causing irreparable financial and reputational harm to the activist movement,” Krispenz and Bertrams told PsyPost. “The perception of such narcissistic behaviors within an activist movement might then lead to dwindling support for the activist movement by the public and – in the worst case – could even be wielded against the respective movement.”
"such individuals use ideologies and political activism as a vehicle to satisfy their own ego-focused needs instead of actually aiming at social justice and equality. For example, a highly narcissistic/psychopathic person may participate in a pro-BLM protest pretending to fight against racism while actually using such protesting activities to meet their own aggressive motives and thrills" As in, virtue-signaling; being fascist anti-fascists; and being reckless as to whether they are actually contributing to increase racial division, aggravate gender debates, and destroy the environment in the name of saving it (renewable energy manufacturing is a HUGE polluter and ignores more severe sources of pollution in the pursuit of greenhouse gases).
Yep, such individuals aren't actually concerned about fascism, racial division, gender, the environment, etc. They just want to enslave the majority who aren't psychopaths.
Sad but true. :) But that explains why they call people racists or homophobes who aren't, and why we must stand up to them and their toxic bullying.... Another dimension is how much this resembles a cult. I have written as an attorney about how government embracing this ideology is violating the Establishment Clause by institutionalizing what is clearly a hate-cult.
I think it's important to understand that the woke thing is being shepherded and that a backlash to the woke thing is also likely to be shepherded. The more people understand that, the less likely they will be prone to the mechanical forces of errant shepherds.
My point was, in saying what you said, all you have done is created an inversion. That's what the woke do. They do it with everything, and they do it because of mechanical forces. They decriminalise shoplifting because they think they have 'reason and love', they defund the police because they think they have 'reason and love', they burn the town down over the killing of George Floyd, because they think they have 'reason and love' and so on and so forth. They think they have reason and love, but all they do is create inversions.
Quite remarkable how close the authors come to what A.L. talked about in ponerology, presumably without having read him. Goes to show how ahead of his time L. was, and how relevant his work still is.
My thought exactly. I think he was just ahead of his time and knew what he was talking about. Now others are rediscovering the wheel, as the conditions are ripe for it.
'In the Lobaczewski’s terms, a concern with social justice will be more associated with people concerned with actual unfairness or injustice (or at least the appearance of it). When actual injustice exists, altruistic people will be motivated to protest it in the hopes of bringing it to wider attention and ultimately rectifying it. However, as people with a normal emotional-instinctive substrate, they will not necessarily be particularly concerned with tearing down the entire social order, and they won’t be radically anti-conventional. ' It is a situation that is expressed in almost the entire globe and in many political parties. The infiltration of psychopathic elements is undeniable. Here in Argentina is what has happened with the Justicialist Party (a.k.a. Peronism). The party was born with the idea of social justice but both ideologically and philosophically in its origin it was always traditionalist, of faith and deeply Christian roots since its doctrine of social justice is the philosophical/political version of Christianity. But now the party is infiltrated by the psychopathic elements we see in progressive woke, and years ago by rampant neoliberalism. And all this even though its original doctrine is very well thought out and structured where it makes clear and foresees in advance that this would happen in the world.
Given that I know little of Argentina's history, I take your word for the content of Justicialism.
However, I note that Juan Peron accepted German Nazis and Croatian Ustashas wholesale into Argentina after WW II, such that there was a brief Nazi takeover of Argentina in the 1970's. I also note that Eva Peron was quite "flamboyant" and perhaps narcissistic as well.
Could it be the Justicialism was an ideological mask for Peron's naked "will to power" from the very start?
Perhaps you have some inside insights that I do not have.
What happens is that before dealing with the concepts of justicialism/peronism you first have to learn the idiosyncrasy of the Argentinean. The second thing is the history of the country before justicialism. After that, to understand what happened, you have to read the works, the manuscripts with the justicialist doctrine and understand that Peron was above all a pragmatist and played with the rules of the moment. He knew very well that the world was moving in a pendulum and knowing those movements he could more or less predict the best strategy to take to guarantee and protect the interests of the nation.
Observing the movement of the world, we pass now in this pendulum movement, through the center, through the vertical of the pendulum that oscillates between individualism and collectivism.
The Peronist Political Doctrine It was shown as a doctrine of national liberation, understanding as such the struggle against the imperialist attempts of communism and capitalism, represented by the USSR and the USA respectively.
But as I pointed out at the beginning, it is difficult to understand if you do not first understand the idiosyncrasy and history of Argentina. Before that, it is necessary to understand and comprehend the role of the Spanish empire in the creation of what would later become Hispanoamerica, how the Spanish black legend was created by the British empire as the first fake news in history, in order to understand that the Justicialist movement in some aspects took up the legacy of the Spanish empire from its Catholic-Christian base. All this deserves its own separate study.
From the sounds of it, Justicialism, like its English counterpart Distributism, is an attempt to translate Catholic Social Teaching into workable policy. Is that a fair assessment?
You spoke of the "idiosyncratic nature of Argentina's history." How does that relate to the mass importation of Nazis and Ustashas? Sorry, but that one still sticks in my craw.
Arguably, yes. You can see in a summarized way how Peronist justicialism is perceived in its decalogue (of twenty points):
The Twenty Peronist Truths were pronounced by Juan Domingo Perón on October 17, 1950, on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the founding date of the Peronist movement, to give a clear concept of the objectives and the idealistic and philosophical basis of the movement.
1. True democracy is one where the government does what the people want and defends only one interest: that of the people.
2.Peronism is essentially popular. Any political circle is anti-popular and, therefore, not Peronist.
3.The Peronist works for the Movement. He who, in its name, serves a circle or a caudillo, is so in name only.
4.For Peronism there is only one class of people: those who work.
5.In the new Argentina of Perón, work is a right that creates the dignity of Man and it is a duty, because it is fair that everyone produces at least what he consumes.
6.For a Peronist there can be nothing better than another Peronist. In 1973, Perón argued that this "truth" should be reformulated by the following: "For an Argentine there can be nothing better than another Argentine".
7.No Peronist should feel more than what he is or less than what he should be. When a Peronist begins to feel more than what he is, he begins to become an oligarch.
8.In political action, the scale of values of every Peronist is as follows: first the homeland, then the Movement and then men.
9.For us, politics is not an end, but only the means for the good of the homeland, which is the happiness of its children and national greatness.
10.The two arms of Peronism are social justice and social aid. With them, we give the people an embrace of justice and love.
11.Peronism longs for national unity and not for struggle. It desires heroes, but not martyrs.
12.In the new Argentina, the only privileged people are children.
13.A government without doctrine is a body without a soul. That is why Peronism has a political, economic and social doctrine: justicialism.
14.Justicialism is a new philosophy of life, simple, practical, popular, deeply Christian and profoundly humanistic.
15.As a political doctrine, justicialism balances the rights of the individual with those of the community.
16.As an economic doctrine, justicialism realizes the social economy, placing capital at the service of the economy and the latter at the service of social welfare.
17.As a social doctrine, justicialism realizes social justice, which gives each person his right in (his) social function.
18.We want a socially just, economically free and politically sovereign Argentina.
19.We constitute a centralized government, an organized state and a free people.
20.In this land, the best thing we have is the people.
Analysis and Explanation of Peronist Truths
Many of these truths are explained in the book Peronist Philosophy, written by Juan Domingo Perón. In that book, Perón explains that:
Every collective movement that tries to introduce fundamental modifications in the social structure, must have a solid philosophical justification. This affirmation is corroborated by history, since the great transforming currents have always worked with a firm philosophical backing.
According to José Luis Di Lorenzo:
"The Justicialist Philosophy develops a conception about Man, nature, history, the State, power and the relationship with transcendence. It is a philosophy of the periphery and therefore disqualified as inferior, barbaric, even non-existent."
Now, to your last question, Peronism since its inception has been the subject of slander because in its 18th point it implies that it does not want foreign intervention or manipulation. And those slanders are the manofactured history of being a quasi-absolute receptacle of Nazis.
The world's leading specialist on the issue, the Israeli historian Raanan Rein, came to the conclusion that the number of Nazi war criminals who took refuge in the country was around 50.
The number is undoubtedly significant, but put in perspective it is not so remarkable. Several European and American countries and even the Soviet Union received Nazi fugitives in equal or greater numbers, sometimes unknowingly, sometimes with open arms (for example, when they had scientific or intelligence knowledge that could be put to good use).
So there were Nazis in Argentina? In the same way that there were in the USA when German scientists were spread around the world. For example, in Argentina we have the work of Kurt Tank designing the I.Ae. 33 Pulqui II. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.Ae._33_Pulqui_II
Interesting article. I've always considered myself a Progressive, but I've been very angry about the Left's abandonment of Women's Rights for Trans Ideology. We've seen perfect examples of Authoritarian violence at #LetWomenSpeak events, which are public open-mic gatherings where women talk about their lives, needs and experiences. Over the last year, they've been met with direct violence from Trans Activists, Liberal Allies, and masked Antifa thugs in most of the English speaking countries. The women who participate are mostly middle-aged and older, but that hasn't stopped the TRA's from breaking their bones. In many cases, we've seen male participants who show up to enthusiastically brutalize women under the guise of Social Justice. TRAs openly advocate violence against "TERFs"- Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists* - and Liberals will ostracize, protest, and campaign to have women banned from social media and fired from university positions if she dares question even the most radical aspects of Trans
Ideology. The Right and the Left are both too extreme on this topic. We need some sane Centrists to work out accomodations in which everyone's Rights are respected, but that isn't happening. Authoritarianism is bad for everyone, no matter from which end of the political field it originates.
*TERF is a misnomer. Most of the Activists are neither Radical nor Feminists (though RadFems have led the charge for decades) and the goal is to exclude male bodies from women's single sex spaces, facilities and events, as well as safeguard children. Many are lesbians and many allies are gay men. It takes guts to show up at these events because the "be kind" crowd are vicious if you challenge their orthodoxy.
Unfortunately, our political systems are geared to create just these kinds of polarizations. Lobaczewski attempted to lay out the outlines of a system that would avoid all this: logocracy. The main "party" would be a logocratic association, essentially a collection of centrists who valued character and talent over party platforms and battling over contentious "single issues."
Your conclusion that LWA and RWA can act out of the same personality disorders has me thinking of the right wing people of the past who became left wing and vice versa. Of course, political realignment is a natural and normal process but it's the extreme cases who fit into these studies. I'm thinking of a particular extreme right winger now who was an extreme left winger in his younger days. I won't use his name because I have no desire to debate the particulars. I'm politically left but that person and I were penpals mostly based on our shared love of literature. But I was aware that the tone of his politics was very similar to my more left wing friends and colleagues. And his right wing politics eventually crowded out our literary commonality. And I can't even reconcile the man who loved the mysteries and complexities of novels with the narrow-minded pundit he has become. In short, I'd say that the most dangerous people, left or right, are the ones who are sure of themselves.
Yeah, something like your anecdote could be related, for sure. Though there are also Marxists who seem to become more reasonable with age, like Thomas Sowell or Michael Rectenwald, for example. I think you nailed it at the end: the ones who are sure of themselves. Lobaczewski called this "egotism of the natural worldview" when it happens in regular people, and "pathological egotism" in those with personality disorders.
May 28, 2023·edited May 28, 2023Liked by Harrison Koehli
I talk about this on the show this week. I have a hard time understanding their apparent finding that **only** psychopathy, not narcissism, not neuroticism, correlates with aggression against hierarchy. My own eyes tell me that doesn't seem to be the case.
I also suspected, but can't know, that the authors were either:
a) unaware that Borderline and Histrionics are often heavily influenced to do this kind of aggression by malignant narcs and psychos
b) Inadvertently, or advertently, washed away the Borderlines and Histrionics under the finding "neuroticism had no correlation." I think, but can't be sure, that they disappeared "lower level" Cluster B behavior (meaning, non-psychopathic, non purely narcissistic, but still Cluster b, such as borderline) with "neuroticism" and then dismissed that set because their instrument didn't find a correlation.
Do you understand this better than I do, Harrison? If you do, or if you'd like to talk about it, would you consider coming on my show for next Sunday? If so, I'd love to have you. Email me at us@disaffected.fm.
I won't pretend to understand better than the authors, but here's my take. On neurotic narcissism, Zeigler-Hill found that it did correlate with LWA (0.23 compared to 0.61 for antagonistic). And these authors also found that it did correlate with LWA (0.27), but only when not controlled by other factors like age and gender. Now, assuming their samples were representative, and their findings sound, then this may suggest that when we see more neurotic types expressing such attitudes, it isn't their emotionality that is the primary driver so much as age or gender. I didn't mention this in the post for length and simplicity.
As for borderline and histrionic, they didn't include those in the analysis at all, so there still could be something there. Histrionic though, probably overlaps with "extraverted narcissism," and Zeigler-Hill found that it correlated with LWA between antagonistic and neurotic (0.34). For borderline, my speculation is that if it were to be studied you'd probably find that the borderlines would probably overlap a LOT with the scales for antagonistic narcissism and psychopathy. So the correlation might still be there, it is just hidden in this study because they didn't explicitly look for it.
Psychologists helped government Nudge units scare the proles into submitting to The Jab...They showed governments how to demonise, isolate, and turn the proles against the "unvaxxed", now they are Framing (justifying as a Target) an amorphous grouping called "the left"...
Psychology reveals that there are psychopaths of all political persuasions, and that not every politically persuaded person is a psychopath...
Psychologists know that State Enforcer groups aka The police are composed of Humans with psychopathic traits - the State is the existence of social psychopathology...
It's a dead certainty that All Billionaires are Psychopaths - or is such a statement Politically Uncorrect ?
//Psychologists helped government Nudge units scare the proles into submitting to The Jab...They showed governments how to demonise, isolate, and turn the proles against the "unvaxxed",//
//now they are Framing (justifying as a Target) an amorphous grouping called "the left"...//
Ehh, not really. Not unless "they" is a small group of less than a dozen researchers using standard terminology.
//Psychology reveals that there are psychopaths of all political persuasions, and that not every politically persuaded person is a psychopath...//
Yes. That is precisely what the authors of the article state.
//Psychologists know that State Enforcer groups aka The police are composed of Humans with psychopathic traits - the State is the existence of social psychopathology...//
No. That is a gross generalization.
//It's a dead certainty that All Billionaires are Psychopaths - or is such a statement Politically Uncorrect ?//
Not a dead certainty at all. Where did you learn statistics and demographics?
I'm always wary whenever someone, especialy those considered an Authority, offers psychological profiles of groups...
Every day in the comments section of online posts one or more commenter labels someone or some group psychopaths...Is there such a person as an Asymptomatic Psychopath ?
Did you read the article or the paper on which it was based? It is clearly not profiling a group: it is warning that there is a small number of dangerous individuals who put groups like "the left" in danger.
No, there is no such thing as an asymptomatic psychopath.
There's always been that thing where class warriors were very rarely from the actual working class but it wasn't until we got to the 21st Century when such people ditched any pretensions they'd adopted in that regard, and all of a sudden working class meant Cher, Madonna and Barbra Streisand, and the actual working class were deemed 'deplorable', 'right wing', etc.
"The primary traditional and ideological values may then, for a long time, protect an association which has succumbed to the ponerization process from the awareness of society, especially its less critical components, providing it with a peculiar “mask of sanity.”"
I think this is in line with what I was trying to explore with me "Conan" essay. The mask of sanity or secondary mantle/skin worm isn't immediately detected by the general population, who mostly agree with the tine-tested rhetoric if not the current observable reality. But the tendency for altruistic-leaning people is to at least pay lip service to the former, because obtaing and promoting the latter requires not just ti.e and effort, but the courage (or audacity) to describe the new emperor's finery with any accuracy.
Great stuff.
One of the most useful takeaways from The Fourth Way, and this is a facet of self-remembering, is the formula "When false personality is active, essence becomes passive. When essence is active, false personality becomes passive". It got me through that whole Covidmania/lockdown period in London, in which not once did I wear a mask, not once was I challenged, and not once did I pay lip service to any of it.
Quote from the PsyPost article linked near the top of the article:
“Assuming that the DEVP is valid, minority groups should be made aware of the narcissistic ‘enemies’ from within their activist movement, as these individuals could hijack the cause thereby reducing the success of the activism in many ways,” they explained. “As grandiose narcissists typically desire fame, distinction, elevated social status, and high social importance, they can be assumed to strive for influential positions that involve social visibility and outreach as well as access to financial and other resources.”
“While pretending to be prosocial, narcissists tend to have low empathy and to be primarily interested in satisfying their self-centered needs. Therefore, instead of striving for reasonable solutions, narcissistic individuals will rather be interested in keeping the perception of problems going to maintain their highlighted position.”
“Also, narcissistic individuals might use the resources of the activist movements for their own private purposes, thereby causing irreparable financial and reputational harm to the activist movement,” Krispenz and Bertrams told PsyPost. “The perception of such narcissistic behaviors within an activist movement might then lead to dwindling support for the activist movement by the public and – in the worst case – could even be wielded against the respective movement.”
"such individuals use ideologies and political activism as a vehicle to satisfy their own ego-focused needs instead of actually aiming at social justice and equality. For example, a highly narcissistic/psychopathic person may participate in a pro-BLM protest pretending to fight against racism while actually using such protesting activities to meet their own aggressive motives and thrills" As in, virtue-signaling; being fascist anti-fascists; and being reckless as to whether they are actually contributing to increase racial division, aggravate gender debates, and destroy the environment in the name of saving it (renewable energy manufacturing is a HUGE polluter and ignores more severe sources of pollution in the pursuit of greenhouse gases).
Yep, such individuals aren't actually concerned about fascism, racial division, gender, the environment, etc. They just want to enslave the majority who aren't psychopaths.
Sad but true. :) But that explains why they call people racists or homophobes who aren't, and why we must stand up to them and their toxic bullying.... Another dimension is how much this resembles a cult. I have written as an attorney about how government embracing this ideology is violating the Establishment Clause by institutionalizing what is clearly a hate-cult.
https://johnklar.substack.com/p/woke-theocracy-dominates-america
Just a thought: The road to hell is paved with good intentions. That will likely be just as true if a grand anti-woke snap-back occurs.
Amen.
We must always counter their hate with reason and love..... Lest we become psychopaths in response. :)
I think it's important to understand that the woke thing is being shepherded and that a backlash to the woke thing is also likely to be shepherded. The more people understand that, the less likely they will be prone to the mechanical forces of errant shepherds.
"We must always counter their hate with reason and love". At this point I feel I ought to remind you of a popular woke meme.... "Love Trumps Hate"
My point was, in saying what you said, all you have done is created an inversion. That's what the woke do. They do it with everything, and they do it because of mechanical forces. They decriminalise shoplifting because they think they have 'reason and love', they defund the police because they think they have 'reason and love', they burn the town down over the killing of George Floyd, because they think they have 'reason and love' and so on and so forth. They think they have reason and love, but all they do is create inversions.
"I'm pretty sure that's also Lobaczewski's point as well."
Precisely!
Quite remarkable how close the authors come to what A.L. talked about in ponerology, presumably without having read him. Goes to show how ahead of his time L. was, and how relevant his work still is.
My thought exactly. I think he was just ahead of his time and knew what he was talking about. Now others are rediscovering the wheel, as the conditions are ripe for it.
'In the Lobaczewski’s terms, a concern with social justice will be more associated with people concerned with actual unfairness or injustice (or at least the appearance of it). When actual injustice exists, altruistic people will be motivated to protest it in the hopes of bringing it to wider attention and ultimately rectifying it. However, as people with a normal emotional-instinctive substrate, they will not necessarily be particularly concerned with tearing down the entire social order, and they won’t be radically anti-conventional. ' It is a situation that is expressed in almost the entire globe and in many political parties. The infiltration of psychopathic elements is undeniable. Here in Argentina is what has happened with the Justicialist Party (a.k.a. Peronism). The party was born with the idea of social justice but both ideologically and philosophically in its origin it was always traditionalist, of faith and deeply Christian roots since its doctrine of social justice is the philosophical/political version of Christianity. But now the party is infiltrated by the psychopathic elements we see in progressive woke, and years ago by rampant neoliberalism. And all this even though its original doctrine is very well thought out and structured where it makes clear and foresees in advance that this would happen in the world.
Given that I know little of Argentina's history, I take your word for the content of Justicialism.
However, I note that Juan Peron accepted German Nazis and Croatian Ustashas wholesale into Argentina after WW II, such that there was a brief Nazi takeover of Argentina in the 1970's. I also note that Eva Peron was quite "flamboyant" and perhaps narcissistic as well.
Could it be the Justicialism was an ideological mask for Peron's naked "will to power" from the very start?
Perhaps you have some inside insights that I do not have.
What happens is that before dealing with the concepts of justicialism/peronism you first have to learn the idiosyncrasy of the Argentinean. The second thing is the history of the country before justicialism. After that, to understand what happened, you have to read the works, the manuscripts with the justicialist doctrine and understand that Peron was above all a pragmatist and played with the rules of the moment. He knew very well that the world was moving in a pendulum and knowing those movements he could more or less predict the best strategy to take to guarantee and protect the interests of the nation.
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/_kdcsVoFMTKM/Sa_NWkYU3SI/AAAAAAAASO4/jukJ6X7-H4I/s1600/untitled.bmp
I translate the text of the image:
Our third position is NOT a centrist position.
Observing the movement of the world, we pass now in this pendulum movement, through the center, through the vertical of the pendulum that oscillates between individualism and collectivism.
The Peronist Political Doctrine It was shown as a doctrine of national liberation, understanding as such the struggle against the imperialist attempts of communism and capitalism, represented by the USSR and the USA respectively.
But as I pointed out at the beginning, it is difficult to understand if you do not first understand the idiosyncrasy and history of Argentina. Before that, it is necessary to understand and comprehend the role of the Spanish empire in the creation of what would later become Hispanoamerica, how the Spanish black legend was created by the British empire as the first fake news in history, in order to understand that the Justicialist movement in some aspects took up the legacy of the Spanish empire from its Catholic-Christian base. All this deserves its own separate study.
Thanks! That is an interesting graphic.
From the sounds of it, Justicialism, like its English counterpart Distributism, is an attempt to translate Catholic Social Teaching into workable policy. Is that a fair assessment?
You spoke of the "idiosyncratic nature of Argentina's history." How does that relate to the mass importation of Nazis and Ustashas? Sorry, but that one still sticks in my craw.
Arguably, yes. You can see in a summarized way how Peronist justicialism is perceived in its decalogue (of twenty points):
The Twenty Peronist Truths were pronounced by Juan Domingo Perón on October 17, 1950, on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the founding date of the Peronist movement, to give a clear concept of the objectives and the idealistic and philosophical basis of the movement.
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veinte_Verdades_Peronistas
1. True democracy is one where the government does what the people want and defends only one interest: that of the people.
2.Peronism is essentially popular. Any political circle is anti-popular and, therefore, not Peronist.
3.The Peronist works for the Movement. He who, in its name, serves a circle or a caudillo, is so in name only.
4.For Peronism there is only one class of people: those who work.
5.In the new Argentina of Perón, work is a right that creates the dignity of Man and it is a duty, because it is fair that everyone produces at least what he consumes.
6.For a Peronist there can be nothing better than another Peronist. In 1973, Perón argued that this "truth" should be reformulated by the following: "For an Argentine there can be nothing better than another Argentine".
7.No Peronist should feel more than what he is or less than what he should be. When a Peronist begins to feel more than what he is, he begins to become an oligarch.
8.In political action, the scale of values of every Peronist is as follows: first the homeland, then the Movement and then men.
9.For us, politics is not an end, but only the means for the good of the homeland, which is the happiness of its children and national greatness.
10.The two arms of Peronism are social justice and social aid. With them, we give the people an embrace of justice and love.
11.Peronism longs for national unity and not for struggle. It desires heroes, but not martyrs.
12.In the new Argentina, the only privileged people are children.
13.A government without doctrine is a body without a soul. That is why Peronism has a political, economic and social doctrine: justicialism.
14.Justicialism is a new philosophy of life, simple, practical, popular, deeply Christian and profoundly humanistic.
15.As a political doctrine, justicialism balances the rights of the individual with those of the community.
16.As an economic doctrine, justicialism realizes the social economy, placing capital at the service of the economy and the latter at the service of social welfare.
17.As a social doctrine, justicialism realizes social justice, which gives each person his right in (his) social function.
18.We want a socially just, economically free and politically sovereign Argentina.
19.We constitute a centralized government, an organized state and a free people.
20.In this land, the best thing we have is the people.
Analysis and Explanation of Peronist Truths
Many of these truths are explained in the book Peronist Philosophy, written by Juan Domingo Perón. In that book, Perón explains that:
Every collective movement that tries to introduce fundamental modifications in the social structure, must have a solid philosophical justification. This affirmation is corroborated by history, since the great transforming currents have always worked with a firm philosophical backing.
According to José Luis Di Lorenzo:
"The Justicialist Philosophy develops a conception about Man, nature, history, the State, power and the relationship with transcendence. It is a philosophy of the periphery and therefore disqualified as inferior, barbaric, even non-existent."
Now, to your last question, Peronism since its inception has been the subject of slander because in its 18th point it implies that it does not want foreign intervention or manipulation. And those slanders are the manofactured history of being a quasi-absolute receptacle of Nazis.
https://www.eldiarioar.com/cultura/mito-argentina-santuario-nazi_129_8742120.html
The world's leading specialist on the issue, the Israeli historian Raanan Rein, came to the conclusion that the number of Nazi war criminals who took refuge in the country was around 50.
The number is undoubtedly significant, but put in perspective it is not so remarkable. Several European and American countries and even the Soviet Union received Nazi fugitives in equal or greater numbers, sometimes unknowingly, sometimes with open arms (for example, when they had scientific or intelligence knowledge that could be put to good use).
So there were Nazis in Argentina? In the same way that there were in the USA when German scientists were spread around the world. For example, in Argentina we have the work of Kurt Tank designing the I.Ae. 33 Pulqui II. https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.Ae._33_Pulqui_II
"So there were Nazis in Argentina? In the same way that there were in the USA when German scientists were spread around the world. "
Touche!
Interesting article. I've always considered myself a Progressive, but I've been very angry about the Left's abandonment of Women's Rights for Trans Ideology. We've seen perfect examples of Authoritarian violence at #LetWomenSpeak events, which are public open-mic gatherings where women talk about their lives, needs and experiences. Over the last year, they've been met with direct violence from Trans Activists, Liberal Allies, and masked Antifa thugs in most of the English speaking countries. The women who participate are mostly middle-aged and older, but that hasn't stopped the TRA's from breaking their bones. In many cases, we've seen male participants who show up to enthusiastically brutalize women under the guise of Social Justice. TRAs openly advocate violence against "TERFs"- Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists* - and Liberals will ostracize, protest, and campaign to have women banned from social media and fired from university positions if she dares question even the most radical aspects of Trans
Ideology. The Right and the Left are both too extreme on this topic. We need some sane Centrists to work out accomodations in which everyone's Rights are respected, but that isn't happening. Authoritarianism is bad for everyone, no matter from which end of the political field it originates.
*TERF is a misnomer. Most of the Activists are neither Radical nor Feminists (though RadFems have led the charge for decades) and the goal is to exclude male bodies from women's single sex spaces, facilities and events, as well as safeguard children. Many are lesbians and many allies are gay men. It takes guts to show up at these events because the "be kind" crowd are vicious if you challenge their orthodoxy.
The long arc of transhumanism. What people repeatedly fail to grasp is that the 'trans' issue has barely even got going yet... https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ruben-Hopwood/publication/273700990/figure/fig2/AS:667785617223683@1536223906189/Annual-growth-of-transgender-patient-population-at-Fenway-Health-from-1997-to-2013-Data.png
Unfortunately, our political systems are geared to create just these kinds of polarizations. Lobaczewski attempted to lay out the outlines of a system that would avoid all this: logocracy. The main "party" would be a logocratic association, essentially a collection of centrists who valued character and talent over party platforms and battling over contentious "single issues."
Your conclusion that LWA and RWA can act out of the same personality disorders has me thinking of the right wing people of the past who became left wing and vice versa. Of course, political realignment is a natural and normal process but it's the extreme cases who fit into these studies. I'm thinking of a particular extreme right winger now who was an extreme left winger in his younger days. I won't use his name because I have no desire to debate the particulars. I'm politically left but that person and I were penpals mostly based on our shared love of literature. But I was aware that the tone of his politics was very similar to my more left wing friends and colleagues. And his right wing politics eventually crowded out our literary commonality. And I can't even reconcile the man who loved the mysteries and complexities of novels with the narrow-minded pundit he has become. In short, I'd say that the most dangerous people, left or right, are the ones who are sure of themselves.
Yeah, something like your anecdote could be related, for sure. Though there are also Marxists who seem to become more reasonable with age, like Thomas Sowell or Michael Rectenwald, for example. I think you nailed it at the end: the ones who are sure of themselves. Lobaczewski called this "egotism of the natural worldview" when it happens in regular people, and "pathological egotism" in those with personality disorders.
Ah, yes, those distinctions on the type of egotism seem to be very accurate.
I talk about this on the show this week. I have a hard time understanding their apparent finding that **only** psychopathy, not narcissism, not neuroticism, correlates with aggression against hierarchy. My own eyes tell me that doesn't seem to be the case.
I also suspected, but can't know, that the authors were either:
a) unaware that Borderline and Histrionics are often heavily influenced to do this kind of aggression by malignant narcs and psychos
b) Inadvertently, or advertently, washed away the Borderlines and Histrionics under the finding "neuroticism had no correlation." I think, but can't be sure, that they disappeared "lower level" Cluster B behavior (meaning, non-psychopathic, non purely narcissistic, but still Cluster b, such as borderline) with "neuroticism" and then dismissed that set because their instrument didn't find a correlation.
Do you understand this better than I do, Harrison? If you do, or if you'd like to talk about it, would you consider coming on my show for next Sunday? If so, I'd love to have you. Email me at us@disaffected.fm.
Thanks for being on top of this subject matter!
I won't pretend to understand better than the authors, but here's my take. On neurotic narcissism, Zeigler-Hill found that it did correlate with LWA (0.23 compared to 0.61 for antagonistic). And these authors also found that it did correlate with LWA (0.27), but only when not controlled by other factors like age and gender. Now, assuming their samples were representative, and their findings sound, then this may suggest that when we see more neurotic types expressing such attitudes, it isn't their emotionality that is the primary driver so much as age or gender. I didn't mention this in the post for length and simplicity.
As for borderline and histrionic, they didn't include those in the analysis at all, so there still could be something there. Histrionic though, probably overlaps with "extraverted narcissism," and Zeigler-Hill found that it correlated with LWA between antagonistic and neurotic (0.34). For borderline, my speculation is that if it were to be studied you'd probably find that the borderlines would probably overlap a LOT with the scales for antagonistic narcissism and psychopathy. So the correlation might still be there, it is just hidden in this study because they didn't explicitly look for it.
That really helps thank you.
Idle hands are the devil's playground.
All I can say is...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72KbeqN7pZ4
I clicked on the link and wasted my time.
And now you're wasting mine, too! Shame on you.
Does your mother know that you're wasting your time on the internet?
Thank HK. Fancy labels? Different names?
No. Call them what they are Evil Psycopaths.
Psychologists helped government Nudge units scare the proles into submitting to The Jab...They showed governments how to demonise, isolate, and turn the proles against the "unvaxxed", now they are Framing (justifying as a Target) an amorphous grouping called "the left"...
Psychology reveals that there are psychopaths of all political persuasions, and that not every politically persuaded person is a psychopath...
Psychologists know that State Enforcer groups aka The police are composed of Humans with psychopathic traits - the State is the existence of social psychopathology...
It's a dead certainty that All Billionaires are Psychopaths - or is such a statement Politically Uncorrect ?
//Psychologists helped government Nudge units scare the proles into submitting to The Jab...They showed governments how to demonise, isolate, and turn the proles against the "unvaxxed",//
Yes. I wrote a bit about it here: https://ponerology.substack.com/p/logocracy-chapter-14-the-wise-council
//now they are Framing (justifying as a Target) an amorphous grouping called "the left"...//
Ehh, not really. Not unless "they" is a small group of less than a dozen researchers using standard terminology.
//Psychology reveals that there are psychopaths of all political persuasions, and that not every politically persuaded person is a psychopath...//
Yes. That is precisely what the authors of the article state.
//Psychologists know that State Enforcer groups aka The police are composed of Humans with psychopathic traits - the State is the existence of social psychopathology...//
No. That is a gross generalization.
//It's a dead certainty that All Billionaires are Psychopaths - or is such a statement Politically Uncorrect ?//
Not a dead certainty at all. Where did you learn statistics and demographics?
I'm always wary whenever someone, especialy those considered an Authority, offers psychological profiles of groups...
Every day in the comments section of online posts one or more commenter labels someone or some group psychopaths...Is there such a person as an Asymptomatic Psychopath ?
https://neurosciencenews.com/corporate-psychopaths-finance-23262/
Did you read the article or the paper on which it was based? It is clearly not profiling a group: it is warning that there is a small number of dangerous individuals who put groups like "the left" in danger.
No, there is no such thing as an asymptomatic psychopath.
Banned for being a low-IQ wignat.