Pathocracy: Is Civilization the Creation of Psychopaths?

Clinton Callahan, writing for Dissident Voice back in 2008:

I make the effort to share this information because it gives me, at last, a plausible answer to a long-unanswered question: Why, no matter how much intelligent goodwill exists in the world, is there so much war, suffering and injustice? It doesn’t seem to matter what creative plan, ideology, religion, or philosophy great minds come up with, nothing seems to improve our lot. Since the dawn of civilization, this pattern repeats itself over and over again.

The answer is that civilization, as we know it, is largely the creation of psychopaths. All civilizations, our own included, have been built on slavery and mass murder. Psychopaths have played a disproportionate role in the development of civilization, because they are hard-wired to lie, kill, cheat, steal, torture, manipulate, and generally inflict great suffering on other humans without feeling any remorse, in order to establish their own sense of security through domination. The inventor of civilization — the first tribal chieftain who successfully brainwashed an army of controlled mass murderers — was almost certainly a genetic psychopath. Since that momentous discovery, psychopaths have enjoyed a significant advantage over non-psychopaths in the struggle for power in civilizational hierarchies — especially military hierarchies.

Behind the apparent insanity of contemporary history, is the actual insanity of psychopaths fighting to preserve their disproportionate power. And as their power grows ever-more-threatened, the psychopaths grow ever-more-desperate. We are witnessing the apotheosis of the overworld — the overlapping criminal syndicates that lurk above ordinary society and law just as the underworld lurks below it.

During the past fifty years, psychopaths have gained almost absolute control of all the branches of government. You can notice this if you observe carefully that no matter what illegal thing a modern politician does, no one will really take him to task. All of the so called scandals that have come up, any one of which would have taken down an authentic administration, are just farces played out for the public, to distract them, to make them think that the democracy is still working.

One of the main factors to consider in terms of how a society can be taken over by a group of pathological deviants is that the psychopaths’ only limitation is the participation of susceptible individuals within that given society. Lobaczewski gives an average figure for the most active deviants of approximately 6% of a given population. (1% essential psychopaths and up to 5% other psychopathies and characteropathies.) The essential psychopath is at the center of the web. The others form the first tier of the psychopath’s control system.

The next tier of such a system is composed of individuals who were born normal, but are either already warped by long-term exposure to psychopathic material via familial or social influences, or who, through psychic weakness have chosen to meet the demands of psychopathy for their own selfish ends. Numerically, according to Lobaczewski, this group is about 12% of a given population under normal conditions.

So approximately 18% of any given population is active in the creation and imposition of a Pathocracy. The 6% group constitutes the Pathocratic nobility and the 12% group forms the new bourgeoisie, whose economic situation is the most advantageous.

When you understand the true nature of psychopathic influence, that it is conscienceless, emotionless, selfish, cold and calculating, and devoid of any moral or ethical standards, you are horrified, but at the same time everything suddenly begins to makes sense. Our society is ever more soulless because the people who lead it and who set the example are soulless — they literally have no conscience.

In his book Political Ponerology, Andrej Lobaczewski explains that clinical psychopaths enjoy advantages even in non-violent competitions to climb the ranks of social hierarchies. Because they can lie without remorse (and without the telltale physiological stress that is measured by lie detector tests), psychopaths can always say whatever is necessary to get what they want. In court, for example, psychopaths can tell extreme bald-faced lies in a plausible manner, while their sane opponents are handicapped by an emotional predisposition to remain within hailing distance of the truth. Too often, the judge or jury imagines that the truth must be somewhere in the middle, and then issues decisions that benefit the psychopath. As with judges and juries, so too with those charged with decisions concerning who to promote and who not to promote in corporate, military and governmental hierarchies. The result is that all hierarchies inevitably become top-heavy with psychopaths. Since psychopaths have no limitations on what they can or will do to get to the top, the ones in charge are generally pathological. It is not power that corrupts, it is that corrupt individuals seek power.

Read more here.

,

  • Liam_McGonagle

    I don’t think so.

    I think the ‘evolving collective consciousness’ model has much more to recommend it. For starters, is it even possible that core ‘civilizing’ impulses could be anti-social? For the first principles underlying collective action to essentially be selfish?

    I think it makes much more sense to admit that we have always had an imperfect intellectual understanding of ourselves and the emotive forces that draw us to seek company of one another. And that it takes prolonged discussion, with healthy doses of reference to precedent, as well as individual imagination, to move on to the next stage.

    Kinda like school. No, a third grader is not that guy you go to in order to fix a problem with your car’s emissions regulator chip. But that doesn’t make the third grade as an institution fundamentally sociopathic or useless.

    • Haystack

      “For starters, is it even possible that core ‘civilizing’ impulses could be anti-social? For the first principles underlying collective action to essentially be selfish? ”

      Hunter gatherer societies have been practicing collective action for thousands of years before civilization. Civilization is less about collective action than hierarchy and systems of control.

      I don’t think that the people who run it are “psychopaths,” strictly speaking. Even guys like Himmler were just pushing paper, then going home to their families. The system itself could be called psychopathic or evil based on what it does, while the people running it, even though they are doing indisputably evil things, do not usually experience themselves as hurting people or behaving sadistically.

      • Liam_McGonagle

        Seriously? That’s the choice, between Soviet collective farms and wandering bands of hunter gatherers embroilled in continuous warfare with their neighbours?

        Sorry, I don’t buy the “Beautiful People” myth. I’ve been exposed to too much practical anthropology to believe that one.

        But if you want to make the point that as human polities become larger, the organizing principles become more abstract, they become more suceptible to abuse by those in power, I’ll buy that. That’s one of the themes of my favourite book, “Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond.

        That is not, however, to say that large-scale societies are a moral dead-end, however. The U.S., as disappointingly slow and incomplete as its progress has been, still remains a notable beacon of progress.

        True, we abolished slavery much later than Great Britain (although they were nowhere near as deeply invested economically), but we can fairly claim to be the least racially biased country in the world. We led the way with the Fourteenth Amedment, We were among the first, if not the very first for women’s sufferage in 1920 (i.e., Canada in 1917). Our body of workers’ rights laws was among the first and most robust, even if recent generations of right wingers have chipped away at it.

        How many tribes define their polity other than by racilist doctrines of blood inheritance? Does that or their lack of any pretence to non-sectarian institutions make them better or worse than large scale societies like the United States?

        As for whether Himmler was or was not a “psychopath”, I’m not a licensed practioner, but it’s clear that he had and in spades many of the characteristics listed on the “Hare Psychopathy Checklist”

        -Grandiose sense of self-worth (i.e., his weird role as ‘Grand Master’ of a psuedo-occult order holding secret meetings in Medieval castles)

        -Pathological lying (e.g., “So how did work go today, Heinrich, darling?” “Oh, you know–same as usual–helped some orphans find their way onto the right train.”)

        -Cunning / manipulative (e.g., his sub rosa interventions among Hitler,Artur Greiser and Forster in Poland to implement the most gruesome interpretation of the ‘Final Solution’ possible’)

        -Lack of remorse or guilt (e.g., “So how did work go today, Heinrich, darling?” “Oh, you know–same as usual–visited Lithuania to bully a bunch of Einsatzgruppen pussies into murdering some Jewish widows and children. No biggie.”

        -Shallow affect (e.g., see “Lack of remorse or guilt” above)

        -Callous lack of emptahy (e.g., Did I mention “Lack of remorse or guilt above?)

        -Failure to accept responsibility for own actions – Attempting to physically disguise oneself and outfit oneself with false documents in an effort to evade Allied forces seems to fit the bill. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler#Capture_and_death

        So to date, I still remain convinced that it’s a collective learning process. As time goes on the Himmlers and Talibans are going to become less and less attractive alternatives to Enlightenment Era democracies. I do not think civilization in and of itself can in anyway be considered a ‘psycopathic’ enterprise.

        • Haystack

          Well, I think we both agree with your conclusion that “the Himmlers and Talibans are going to become less and less attractive alternatives to Enlightenment Era democracies.” The arc of history does seem to bend toward justice.

          Also, I’m not trying to say that large-scale civilizations are a moral dead-end. I do think think that, however, that in a strictly *moral* sense that liberal democracies like the US are only a vague approximation of that hunter-gatherer societies experienced. Granted, large-scale societies are able to do things that hunter-gatherers are not, like develop medical science to a degree that you can live past your 30′s and not be considered elderly. At the same time, your individual self-determination as a member of a complex society is severely limited by comparison to what you’d have experienced as a hunter-gatherer.

          Hunter-gatherer societies were, indeed, organized around kinship. At the same time, so has much of European history. In a small-scale society, this takes the shape of an informal affinity between parent and offspring. In a large-scale society, it takes the shape of a feverish, teen-age Princess Victoria bring berated in her sick-bed to sign over monarchical authority to her mother.

          I don’t want to argue over a psychological diagnosis of Heinrich Himmler; suffice it to say that there is a qualitative difference between what he did, sitting at his desk, pushing paper, and the more direct acts of physical brutality committed by his concentration camp guards.Himmler is said to have vomited when he visited one of his own camps, and saw what his own bureaucratic were manifesting. The people who enforce evil policies, like policemen or concentration camp guards, have a different psychological profile than the bureaucrats who create their jobs. In other words, people like Himmler don’t necessarily take pleasure in the suffering of others; they are merely a cog on a system that demands that they think of the best way to do evil things.

          I think that we’re probably in agreement on our major points. I think that modern civilization is a trade-off between hierarchical, brutal and impersonal means of social organization, and the benefits of civilization; like art, medicine, and cumulative learning and achievement. Hunter-gatherer societies are closes to what human psychology has evolved for, but large-scale societies provide benefits that far surpass our genetic programming, as well as deficits that lead us to feel alienated and alone.In other words, I don’t think that we can say that one is unequivocally better than the other, but I do think that the people that run large-scale societies are psychologically “normal,” even if the consequences of their actions are unthinkably evil.

          • Liam_McGonagle

            I, too, think we mostly agree.

            But Himmler didn’t spend all his time around a desk. The bit that I wrote about him brow-beating Einsatzgruppen staff to murder defeneseless Jewish women and children is absolutely true.

            I am in no way trying to set the mental suffering of those Einsatzgruppen with the mental and physical suffering of their victims, but murder, especially on such a massive scale, is a psychologically damaging prospect for the perpetrator as well.

            Those men became derranged, addicted to alcohol and drugs in an attempt to drive from their minds the wickedness of their crimes. Himmler literally had to go out East and berate these men into following their ghastly orders. So Himmler’s hands were quite a bit dirtier than you may have been led to believe elsewhere.

            I think that the only thing our society is lacking is the willingness to believe in anything anymore. We’ve become so cowardly and nihilistic that we disdain the shared institutions of popularly elected government that our ancestors fought and died for, apparently worried more about our own personal comfort than the real on-the-street improvement of the nation.

            It seems to me that there is a lot of rationalising that “we serve some higher, never-existed sense of absolute moral purity”. George Washington and Ben Franklin would be having a great laugh at that.

    • .>>

      That’s a bad analogy because the educational system (all grades) IS fundamentally sociopathic AND useless.

      “It is not power that corrupts, it is that corrupt individuals seek power.” That’s the truth – the paradox is quite clear – who do you trust? Is it even possible a moral person would even want to be a… I don’t know… President?

      • Liam_McGonagle

        Right. And the moral hero / heroine is the guy hiding beneath the bedsheets at home.

        Let’s face it: There IS an important qualitative difference between Mahatmah Gandhi and Adolph Hitler, both political leaders.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think so.

    I think the ‘evolving collective consciousness’ model has much more to recommend it. For starters, is it even possible that core ‘civilizing’ impulses could be anti-social? For the first principles underlying collective action to essentially be selfish?

    I think it makes much more sense to admit that we have always had an imperfect intellectual understanding of ourselves and the emotive forces that draw us to seek company of one another. And that it takes prolonged discussion, with healthy doses of reference to precedent, as well as individual imagination, to move on to the next stage.

    Kinda like school. No, a third grader is not that guy you go to in order to fix a problem with your car’s emissions regulator chip. But that doesn’t make the third grade as an institution fundamentally sociopathic or useless.

  • Cocomaan

    Deleuze and Guattari, anyone?

  • Cocomaan

    Deleuze and Guattari, anyone?

  • Haystack

    “For starters, is it even possible that core ‘civilizing’ impulses could be anti-social? For the first principles underlying collective action to essentially be selfish? ”

    Hunter gatherer societies have been practicing collective action for thousands of years before civilization. Civilization is less about collective action than hierarchy and systems of control.

    I don’t think that the people who run it are “psychopaths,” strictly speaking. Even guys like Himmler were just pushing paper, then going home to their families. The system itself could be called psychopathic or evil based on what it does, while the people running it, even though they are doing indisputably evil things, do not usually experience themselves as hurting people or behaving sadistically.

  • .>>

    That’s a bad analogy because the educational system (all grades) IS fundamentally sociopathic AND useless.

    “It is not power that corrupts, it is that corrupt individuals seek power.” That’s the truth – the paradox is quite clear – who do you trust? Is it even possible a moral person would even want to be a… I don’t know… President?

  • Liam_McGonagle

    Right. And the moral hero / heroine is the guy hiding beneath the bedsheets at home.

    Let’s face it: There IS an important qualitative difference between Mahatmah Gandhi and Adolph Hitler, both political leaders.

  • Anonymous

    Seriously? That’s the choice, between Soviet collective farms and wandering bands of hunter gatherers embroilled in continuous warfare with their neighbours?

    Sorry, I don’t buy the “Beautiful People” myth. I’ve been exposed to too much practical anthropology to believe that one.

    But if you want to make the point that as human polities become larger, the organizing principles become more abstract, they become more suceptible to abuse by those in power, I’ll buy that. That’s one of the themes of my favourite book, “Guns, Germs and Steel” by Jared Diamond.

    That is not, however, to say that large-scale societies are a moral dead-end, however. The U.S., as disappointingly slow and incomplete as its progress has been, still remains a notable beacon of progress.

    True, we abolished slavery much later than Great Britain (although they were nowhere near as deeply invested economically), but we can fairly claim to be the least racially biased country in the world. We led the way with the Fourteenth Amedment, We were among the first, if not the very first for women’s sufferage in 1920 (i.e., Canada in 1917). Our body of workers’ rights laws was among the first and most robust, even if recent generations of right wingers have chipped away at it.

    How many tribes define their polity other than by racilist doctrines of blood inheritance? Does that or their lack of any pretence to non-sectarian institutions make them better or worse than large scale societies like the United States?

    As for whether Himmler was or was not a “psychopath”, I’m not a licensed practioner, but it’s clear that he had and in spades many of the characteristics listed on the “Hare Psychopathy Checklist”

    -Grandiose sense of self-worth (i.e., his weird role as ‘Grand Master’ of a psuedo-occult order holding secret meetings in Medieval castles)

    -Pathological lying (e.g., “So how did work go today, Heinrich, darling?” “Oh, you know–same as usual–helped some orphans find their way onto the right train.”)

    -Cunning / manipulative (e.g., his sub rosa interventions among Hitler,Artur Greiser and Forster in Poland to implement the most gruesome interpretation of the ‘Final Solution’ possible’)

    -Lack of remorse or guilt (e.g., “So how did work go today, Heinrich, darling?” “Oh, you know–same as usual–visited Lithuania to bully a bunch of Einsatzgruppen pussies into murdering some Jewish widows and children. No biggie.”

    -Shallow affect (e.g., see “Lack of remorse or guilt” above)

    -Callous lack of emptahy (e.g., Did I mention “Lack of remorse or guilt above?)

    -Failure to accept responsibility for own actions – Attempting to physically disguise oneself and outfit oneself with false documents in an effort to evade Allied forces seems to fit the bill. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Himmler#Capture_and_death

    So to date, I still remain convinced that it’s a collective learning process. As time goes on the Himmlers and Talibans are going to become less and less attractive alternatives to Enlightenment Era democracies. I do not think civilization in and of itself can in anyway be considered a ‘psycopathic’ enterprise.

  • Haystack

    Well, I think we both agree with your conclusion that “the Himmlers and Talibans are going to become less and less attractive alternatives to Enlightenment Era democracies.” The arc of history does seem to bend toward justice.

    Also, I’m not trying to say that large-scale civilizations are a moral dead-end. I do think think that, however, that in a strictly *moral* sense that liberal democracies like the US are only a vague approximation of that hunter-gatherer societies experienced. Granted, large-scale societies are able to do things that hunter-gatherers are not, like develop medical science to a degree that you can live past your 30′s and not be considered elderly. At the same time, your individual self-determination as a member of a complex society is severely limited by comparison to what you’d have experienced as a hunter-gatherer.

    Hunter-gatherer societies were, indeed, organized around kinship. At the same time, so has much of European history. In a small-scale society, this takes the shape of an informal affinity between parent and offspring. In a large-scale society, it takes the shape of a feverish, teen-age Princess Victoria bring berated in her sick-bed to sign over monarchical authority to her mother.

    I don’t want to argue over a psychological diagnosis of Heinrich Himmler; suffice it to say that there is a qualitative difference between what he did, sitting at his desk, pushing paper, and the more direct acts of physical brutality committed by his concentration camp guards.Himmler is said to have vomited when he visited one of his own camps, and saw what his own bureaucratic were manifesting. The people who enforce evil policies, like policemen or concentration camp guards, have a different psychological profile than the bureaucrats who create their jobs. In other words, people like Himmler don’t necessarily take pleasure in the suffering of others; they are merely a cog on a system that demands that they think of the best way to do evil things.

    I think that we’re probably in agreement on our major points. I think that modern civilization is a trade-off between hierarchical, brutal and impersonal means of social organization, and the benefits of civilization; like art, medicine, and cumulative learning and achievement. Hunter-gatherer societies are closes to what human psychology has evolved for, but large-scale societies provide benefits that far surpass our genetic programming, as well as deficits that lead us to feel alienated and alone.In other words, I don’t think that we can say that one is unequivocally better than the other, but I do think that the people that run large-scale societies are psychologically “normal,” even if the consequences of their actions are unthinkably evil.

  • Liam_McGonagle

    I, too, think we mostly agree.

    But Himmler didn’t spend all his time around a desk. The bit that I wrote about him brow-beating Einsatzgruppen staff to murder defeneseless Jewish women and children is absolutely true.

    I am in no way trying to set the mental suffering of those Einsatzgruppen with the mental and physical suffering of their victims, but murder, especially on such a massive scale, is a psychologically damaging prospect for the perpetrator as well.

    Those men became derranged, addicted to alcohol and drugs in an attempt to drive from their minds the wickedness of their crimes. Himmler literally had to go out East and berate these men into following their ghastly orders. So Himmler’s hands were quite a bit dirtier than you may have been led to believe elsewhere.

    I think that the only thing our society is lacking is the willingness to believe in anything anymore. We’ve become so cowardly and nihilistic that we disdain the shared institutions of popularly elected government that our ancestors fought and died for, apparently worried more about our own personal comfort than the real on-the-street improvement of the nation.

    It seems to me that there is a lot of rationalising that “we serve some higher, never-existed sense of absolute moral purity”. George Washington and Ben Franklin would be having a great laugh at that.

  • rtb61

    Better to say certain types of civilisations are the creation of psychopaths and narcissists. Obviously the violent aggressive conquering nations, where slavery was instituted and supported. More democratic socially sound nations often became the victims and future slaves of psychopathically driven nations whose own citizens lived in fear of their leadership.
    Hint, prison labour gangs are just another form of slavery. So the US Christianised army is ironically closely aligned to Romes Legions and represent the same threat to democracy and the same desire to enforce slavery upon others (who is feeding whom to the lions now).
    So rule by tribal elders (social democracy) versus monarchy (psychopathy) a right to rule via breeding and violence and it’s distributed extension capitalism.
    The big driver for psychopathic civilisations, ice ages, the coming (when darkness falls) and going (the great flood) drive societal clashes as environmental resources shift due to climate and sea level change, coupled with the age old religious blame game for the unexplainable planetary chaos.
    So man has achieved much more in the past than is currently documented, is was largely destroyed in conflicts for access to diminished resources or buried beneath the waves (around a 400 to 500 foot change in sea level and cities thrived where resources abound, the place where rivers meet the sea).

  • Anonymous

    Better to say certain types of civilisations are the creation of psychopaths and narcissists. Obviously the violent aggressive conquering nations, where slavery was instituted and supported. More democratic socially sound nations often became the victims and future slaves of psychopathically driven nations whose own citizens lived in fear of their leadership.
    Hint, prison labour gangs are just another form of slavery. So the US Christianised army is ironically closely aligned to Romes Legions and represent the same threat to democracy and the same desire to enforce slavery upon others (who is feeding whom to the lions now).
    So rule by tribal elders (social democracy) versus monarchy (psychopathy) a right to rule via breeding and violence and it’s distributed extension capitalism.
    The big driver for psychopathic civilisations, ice ages, the coming (when darkness falls) and going (the great flood) drive societal clashes as environmental resources shift due to climate and sea level change, coupled with the age old religious blame game for the unexplainable planetary chaos.
    So man has achieved much more in the past than is currently documented, is was largely destroyed in conflicts for access to diminished resources or buried beneath the waves (around a 400 to 500 foot change in sea level and cities thrived where resources abound, the place where rivers meet the sea).

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bruce-Miller/100000952005408 Bruce Miller

    What indignities will we suffer under our new Chinese – communist economic overlords? Will they include us as part of their proletariat and treat us as equals or will they enslave and abuse us as racially inferior, lesser that Chinese serfs? Be aware, that Timmy Geithner, this day, goes hat in hand, begging China for loans to put off the ‘Second Dip” in the American economy – the great depression it means for us, and economic ruin for the U.S.A.? He trades our dignity for one more chance at the bat, one more round with the world, one more attempt at producing more than we consume! He gambles with our last collateral, our very souls to buy this chance at change, from communist China, who now hold the high cards in the world’s economy and are not begging at our doorstep for anything, let alone basic dignities! Are the Chinese leaders dangerous psychopaths or just logical boards of well educated decision makers? Is there a difference? Can humankind do collectively, without guilt, that which would be considered psychopathic if committed by and individual? Why can soldiers kill without conscience? Can soldiers kill without conscience? Will the Chinese give us money and a chance to avoid the great depression our corporatists have evoked upon our souls? What about the Corporatists? Will they be allowed to exist by the Chinese economists? Why? Is that psychopathic? Will America ever lead the world in automotive manufacturing again? Will the Chinese financiers pay for it? Are we propagandized fools to believe that they might? Are the forces that give answer to these questions psychopathic or just logical beings on boards in China? Is there a great God or alien- force who will swoop down and give sustenance to the American corporatist system for a while, for altruism’s sake or will this system reach its inevitable end and crash with a defeated dollar and gold amassed by the richest corporatists of all? Have the great, fat-assed, American proletariat, stretched the envelope beyond repair, or will China’s communists see benefit in sustaining them for one more round? Is it psychotic to suggest that the Chinese will suffer personal losses to support the U.S.A. for humanitarian reasons? would they be psychopathic to do so? Is this typical of communism? Is the great American propaganda machine so powerful as to be able to dupe Americans away from realizing the truth in the world today? Misguiding them into a false sense of Superiority? Invincibility? Entitlement? Is the machine psychotic?Are the people who run it sick? Can the Feds continue printing money and fooling and manipulating the Chinese and the rest the world forever? Without penalties? Is it psychotic to believe this? The myth of American military superiority is another psychosis suffered by American proletariat! Is it psychotic to propagate this myth? Anti-social to believe it? Not believe it?Can we stop Nuclear proliferation or is the genie out of the bag? Is it psychotic to try? Remember: China has the bomb, and many more reactors and experience with them that the U.S.A.! Do Chinese intellectuals suddenly become enlightened when they come to the U.S.A. to live, or were they superior before they came? Does China have the brain-power to exceed the U.S.A., or is intelligence exclusively American? Is our propaganda machine our of tune? Is it psychotic to believe that we can maintain our wild notions of superiority even when we do not design the very cars we drive but rely on Asian engineers for them? Is our population pool too small to produce enough geniuses to save our asses from the great red dragon?Does the dragon have the advantage? Are we psychotic in feeling we have a hope in Hell for our present state of affairs? Does the U.S.A. import food from China today? Is this a safe state of affairs? Good business practice? Is this a sane situation? When will the Chinese automobiles arrive on American shores? Who will buy them? Chinese cars are sold in Mexico today! is this psychotic? Does China represent and Asian super-power? Will China encompass, by economic warfare all of Asia? Will the psychotics of America ever believe they are in jeopardy? Are billions of Chinese wrong, and a couple of hundred thousand Americans right at everything on earth? Is it psychotic to believe this? Are we all psychopaths?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Bruce-Miller/100000952005408 Bruce Miller

    What indignities will we suffer under our new Chinese – communist economic overlords? Will they include us as part of their proletariat and treat us as equals or will they enslave and abuse us as racially inferior, lesser that Chinese serfs? Be aware, that Timmy Geithner, this day, goes hat in hand, begging China for loans to put off the ‘Second Dip” in the American economy – the great depression it means for us, and economic ruin for the U.S.A.? He trades our dignity for one more chance at the bat, one more round with the world, one more attempt at producing more than we consume! He gambles with our last collateral, our very souls to buy this chance at change, from communist China, who now hold the high cards in the world’s economy and are not begging at our doorstep for anything, let alone basic dignities! Are the Chinese leaders dangerous psychopaths or just logical boards of well educated decision makers? Is there a difference? Can humankind do collectively, without guilt, that which would be considered psychopathic if committed by and individual? Why can soldiers kill without conscience? Can soldiers kill without conscience? Will the Chinese give us money and a chance to avoid the great depression our corporatists have evoked upon our souls? What about the Corporatists? Will they be allowed to exist by the Chinese economists? Why? Is that psychopathic? Will America ever lead the world in automotive manufacturing again? Will the Chinese financiers pay for it? Are we propagandized fools to believe that they might? Are the forces that give answer to these questions psychopathic or just logical beings on boards in China? Is there a great God or alien- force who will swoop down and give sustenance to the American corporatist system for a while, for altruism’s sake or will this system reach its inevitable end and crash with a defeated dollar and gold amassed by the richest corporatists of all? Have the great, fat-assed, American proletariat, stretched the envelope beyond repair, or will China’s communists see benefit in sustaining them for one more round? Is it psychotic to suggest that the Chinese will suffer personal losses to support the U.S.A. for humanitarian reasons? would they be psychopathic to do so? Is this typical of communism? Is the great American propaganda machine so powerful as to be able to dupe Americans away from realizing the truth in the world today? Misguiding them into a false sense of Superiority? Invincibility? Entitlement? Is the machine psychotic?Are the people who run it sick? Can the Feds continue printing money and fooling and manipulating the Chinese and the rest the world forever? Without penalties? Is it psychotic to believe this? The myth of American military superiority is another psychosis suffered by American proletariat! Is it psychotic to propagate this myth? Anti-social to believe it? Not believe it?Can we stop Nuclear proliferation or is the genie out of the bag? Is it psychotic to try? Remember: China has the bomb, and many more reactors and experience with them that the U.S.A.! Do Chinese intellectuals suddenly become enlightened when they come to the U.S.A. to live, or were they superior before they came? Does China have the brain-power to exceed the U.S.A., or is intelligence exclusively American? Is our propaganda machine our of tune? Is it psychotic to believe that we can maintain our wild notions of superiority even when we do not design the very cars we drive but rely on Asian engineers for them? Is our population pool too small to produce enough geniuses to save our asses from the great red dragon?Does the dragon have the advantage? Are we psychotic in feeling we have a hope in Hell for our present state of affairs? Does the U.S.A. import food from China today? Is this a safe state of affairs? Good business practice? Is this a sane situation? When will the Chinese automobiles arrive on American shores? Who will buy them? Chinese cars are sold in Mexico today! is this psychotic? Does China represent and Asian super-power? Will China encompass, by economic warfare all of Asia? Will the psychotics of America ever believe they are in jeopardy? Are billions of Chinese wrong, and a couple of hundred thousand Americans right at everything on earth? Is it psychotic to believe this? Are we all psychopaths?

  • Pingback: Climate Change and the 4000 BCE Origins of Child Abuse, Sex-Repression, Warfare and Social Violence | Disinformation

  • http://deekoo.myopenid.com/ Deekoo

    While the initial premise that psychopaths (or that behaviour we now consider psychopathic) played a major part in the structuring of civilization is plausible, Callahan’s interpretation is very flawed. On an internal level: his ‘psychopaths’ are devoid of even the capacity for empathy, yet tend to automatically cooperate to benefit other psychopaths; they built our civilization from the beginning, yet it was in the last fifty years that they gained control over our government; their control is at a fifty-year peak, yet they are finally becoming desperate because their power is more threatened than ever; brainscans show that they cannot feel emotions, because the parts of the brain activated when emotions are experienced does not activate when they read emotionally charged words; brainscans show that they fake the emotions we think they should feel, because the parts of the brain activated when emotions are experienced activates after they read emotionally charged words. This is self-contradictory!

    On an external level, I’m highly suspicious of anyone who comes up with a vast conspiracy of superhuman manipulators who are secretly running the world and responsible for all the important evils in it. All too often the next thing on the agenda is extermination of whoever the author decides the manipulators are. Or, to quote one of Callahan’s sources, “As long as there is some idea of compromise, the people of conscience will always lose. These psychological deviants have to be removed from any position of power over people of conscience, period. People must be made aware that such individuals exist and must learn how to spot them and their manipulations. The hard part is that one must also struggle against those tendencies to mercy and kindness in oneself in order not to become prey.”

    And Callahan’s interpretation of recent US history strikes me as very odd – slavery, female disenfranchisement, a miles-long list of broken Indian treaties, segregation enforced by terrorist groups, japanese internment camps, mines that had separate entrance and exit roads because the new employees would run away if they saw what mercury poisoning had done to the last batch of workers, and it’s only RECENTLY that the psychopaths took over?

  • http://deekoo.myopenid.com/ Deekoo

    While the initial premise that psychopaths (or that behaviour we now consider psychopathic) played a major part in the structuring of civilization is plausible, Callahan’s interpretation is very flawed. On an internal level: his ‘psychopaths’ are devoid of even the capacity for empathy, yet tend to automatically cooperate to benefit other psychopaths; they built our civilization from the beginning, yet it was in the last fifty years that they gained control over our government; their control is at a fifty-year peak, yet they are finally becoming desperate because their power is more threatened than ever; brainscans show that they cannot feel emotions, because the parts of the brain activated when emotions are experienced does not activate when they read emotionally charged words; brainscans show that they fake the emotions we think they should feel, because the parts of the brain activated when emotions are experienced activates after they read emotionally charged words. This is self-contradictory!

    On an external level, I’m highly suspicious of anyone who comes up with a vast conspiracy of superhuman manipulators who are secretly running the world and responsible for all the important evils in it. All too often the next thing on the agenda is extermination of whoever the author decides the manipulators are. Or, to quote one of Callahan’s sources, “As long as there is some idea of compromise, the people of conscience will always lose. These psychological deviants have to be removed from any position of power over people of conscience, period. People must be made aware that such individuals exist and must learn how to spot them and their manipulations. The hard part is that one must also struggle against those tendencies to mercy and kindness in oneself in order not to become prey.”

    And Callahan’s interpretation of recent US history strikes me as very odd – slavery, female disenfranchisement, a miles-long list of broken Indian treaties, segregation enforced by terrorist groups, japanese internment camps, mines that had separate entrance and exit roads because the new employees would run away if they saw what mercury poisoning had done to the last batch of workers, and it’s only RECENTLY that the psychopaths took over?

21