This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: The Ascendence Of Sociopaths In US Governance

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Doug Casey of Casey Research

The Ascendence Of Sociopaths In US Governance

An International Man lives and does business wherever he finds conditions most advantageous, regardless of arbitrary borders. He's diversified globally, with passports from multiple countries, assets in several jurisdictions and his residence in yet another. He doesn't depend absolutely on any country and regards all of them as competitors for his capital and expertise.

Living as an international man used to be just an interesting possibility. But few Americans opted for it, since the US used to reward those who settled in and put down roots. In fact, it rewarded them better than any other country in the world, so there was nothing pressing about becoming an international man.

Things change, however, and being rooted like a plant, at least if you have a choice, is a suboptimal strategy for surviving and prospering. Throughout history, almost every place has at some point become dangerous for those who were stuck there. It may be America's turn.

For those who can take up the life of an international man, it's no longer just an interesting lifestyle decision. It has become, at a minimum, an asset saver, and it could be a life saver. That said, I understand the hesitation you may feel about taking action; pulling up one's roots (or at least grafting some of them to a new location) can be almost as traumatic to a man as to a vegetable.

As any intelligent observer surveys the world's economic and political landscape, he has to be disturbed – even dismayed and a bit frightened – by the gravity and number of problems that mark the horizon. We're confronted by economic depression, looming financial chaos, serious currency inflation, onerous taxation, crippling regulation, developing police states and, worst of all, the prospect of a major war. It seems almost unbelievable that we are talking of the US – which historically has been the land of the free.

How did we get here? An argument can be made that miscalculation, accident, inattention and the like are why things go bad. Those elements do have a role, but it is minor. Potential catastrophe across the board can't be the result of happenstance. When things go wrong on a grand scale, it's not just bad luck or inadvertence. It's because of serious character flaws in one or many – or even all – of the players.

So is there a root cause of all the problems I've cited? If we can find it, it may tell us how we personally can best respond to the problems.

In this article, I'm going to argue that the US government, in particular, is being overrun by the wrong kind of person. It's a trend that's been in motion for many years but has now reached a point of no return. In other words, a type of moral rot has become so prevalent that it's institutional in nature. There is not going to be, therefore, any serious change in the direction in which the US is headed until a genuine crisis topples the existing order. Until then, the trend will accelerate.

The reason is that a certain class of people – sociopaths – are now fully in control of major American institutions. Their beliefs and attitudes are insinuated throughout the economic, political, intellectual and psychological/spiritual fabric of the US.

What does this mean to the individual? It depends on your character. Are you the kind of person who supports "my country right or wrong," as did most Germans in the 1930s and 1940s, or the kind who dodges the duty to be a helpmate to murderers? The type of passenger who goes down with the ship or the type who puts on his vest and looks for a life boat? The type of individual who supports the merchants who offer the fairest deal or the type who is gulled by splashy TV commercials?

What the ascendancy of sociopaths means isn't an academic question. Throughout history, the question has been a matter of life and death. That's one reason America grew; every American (or any ex-colonial) has forebears who confronted the issue and decided to uproot themselves to go somewhere with better prospects. The losers were those who delayed thinking about the question until the last minute.

I have often described myself, and those I prefer to associate with, as gamma rats. You may recall the ethologist's characterization of the social interaction of rats as being between a few alpha rats and many beta rats, the alpha rats being dominant and the beta rats submissive. In addition, a small percentage are gamma rats that stake out prime territory and mates, like the alphas, but are not interested in dominating the betas. The people most inclined to leave for the wide world outside and seek fortune elsewhere are typically gamma personalities.

You may be thinking that what happened in places like Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia and scores of other countries in recent history could not, for some reason, happen in the US. Actually, there's no reason it won't at this point. All the institutions that made America exceptional – including a belief in capitalism, individualism, self-reliance and the restraints of the Constitution – are now only historical artifacts.

On the other hand, the distribution of sociopaths is completely uniform across both space and time. Per capita, there were no more evil people in Stalin's Russia, Hitler's Germany, Mao's China, Amin's Uganda, Ceausescu's Romania or Pol Pot's Cambodia than there are today in the US. All you need is favorable conditions for them to bloom, much as mushrooms do after a rainstorm.

Conditions for them in the US are becoming quite favorable. Have you ever wondered where the 50,000 people employed by the TSA to inspect and degrade you came from? Most of them are middle-aged. Did they have jobs before they started doing something that any normal person would consider demeaning? Most did, but they were attracted to – not repelled by – a job where they wear a costume and abuse their fellow citizens all day.

Few of them can imagine that they're shepherding in a police state as they play their roles in security theater. (A reinforced door on the pilots' cabin is probably all that's actually needed, although the most effective solution would be to hold each airline responsible for its own security and for the harm done if it fails to protect passengers and third parties.) But the 50,000 newly employed are exactly the same type of people who joined the Gestapo – eager to help in the project of controlling everyone. Nobody was drafted into the Gestapo.

What's going on here is an instance of Pareto's Law. That's the 80-20 rule that tells us, for example, that 80% of your sales come from 20% of your salesmen or that 20% of the population are responsible for 80% of the crime.

As I see it, 80% of people are basically decent; their basic instincts are to live by the Boy Scout virtues. 20% of people, however, are what you might call potential trouble sources, inclined toward doing the wrong thing when the opportunity presents itself. They might now be shoe clerks, mailmen or waitresses – they seem perfectly benign in normal times. They play baseball on weekends and pet the family dog. However, given the chance, they will sign up for the Gestapo, the Stasi, the KGB, the TSA, Homeland Security or whatever. Many are well intentioned but likely to favor force as the solution to any problem.

But it doesn't end there, because 20% of that 20% are really bad actors. They are drawn to government and other positions where they can work their will on other people and, because they're enthusiastic about government, they rise to leadership positions. They remake the culture of the organizations they run in their own image. Gradually, non-sociopaths can no longer stand being there. They leave. Soon the whole barrel is full of bad apples. That's what's happening today in the US.

It's a pity that Bush, when he was in office, made such a big deal of evil. He discredited the concept. He made Boobus americanus think it only existed in a distant axis, in places like North Korea, Iraq and Iran – which were and still are irrelevant backwaters and arbitrarily chosen enemies. Bush trivialized the concept of evil and made it seem banal because he was such a fool. All the while real evil, very immediate and powerful, was growing right around him, and he lacked the awareness to see he was fertilizing it by turning the US into a national security state after 9/11.

Now, I believe, it's out of control. The US is already in a truly major depression and on the edge of financial chaos and a currency meltdown. The sociopaths in government will react by redoubling the pace toward a police state domestically and starting a major war abroad. To me, this is completely predictable. It's what sociopaths do.

There are seven characteristics I can think of that define a sociopath, although I'm sure the list could be extended.

  1. Sociopaths completely lack a conscience or any capacity for real regret about hurting people. Although they pretend the opposite.
  2. Sociopaths put their own desires and wants on a totally different level from those of other people. Their wants are incommensurate. They truly believe their ends justify their means. Although they pretend the opposite.
  3. Sociopaths consider themselves superior to everyone else, because they aren't burdened by the emotions and ethics others have – they're above all that. They're arrogant. Although they pretend the opposite.
  4. Sociopaths never accept the slightest responsibility for anything that goes wrong, even though they're responsible for almost everything that goes wrong. You'll never hear a sincere apology from them.
  5. Sociopaths have a lopsided notion of property rights. What's theirs is theirs, and what's yours is theirs too. They therefore defend currency inflation and taxation as good things.
  6. Sociopaths usually pick the wrong target to attack. If they lose their wallet, they kick the dog. If 16 Saudis fly planes into buildings, they attack Afghanistan.
  7. Sociopaths traffic in disturbing news, they love to pass on destructive rumors and they'll falsify information to damage others.

The fact that they're chronic, extremely convincing and even enthusiastic liars, who often believe their own lies, means they aren't easy to spot, because normal people naturally assume another person is telling the truth. They rarely have handlebar mustaches or chortle like Snidely Whiplash. Instead, they cultivate a social veneer or a mask of sanity that diverts suspicion. You can rely on them to be "politically correct" in public. How could a congressman or senator who avidly supports charities possibly be a bad guy? They're expert at using facades to disguise reality, and they feel no guilt about it.

Political elites are primarily, and sometimes exclusively, composed of sociopaths. It's not just that they aren't normal human beings. They're barely even human, a separate subspecies, differentiated by their psychological qualities. A normal human can mate with them spiritually and psychologically about as fruitfully as a modern human could mate physically with a Neanderthal; it can be done, but the results won't be good.

It's a serious problem when a society becomes highly politicized, as is now the case in the US and Europe. In normal times, a sociopath stays under the radar. Perhaps he'll commit a common crime when he thinks he can get away with it, but social mores keep him reined in. However, once the government changes its emphasis from protecting citizens from force to initiating force with laws and taxes, those social mores break down. Peer pressure, social approbation and moral opprobrium, the forces that keep a healthy society orderly, are replaced by regulations enforced by cops and funded by taxes. Sociopaths sense this, start coming out of the woodwork and are drawn to the State and its bureaucracies and regulatory agencies, where they can get licensed and paid to do what they've always wanted to do.

It's very simple, really. There are two ways people can relate to each other: voluntarily or coercively. The government is pure coercion, and sociopaths are drawn to its power and force.

The majority of Americans will accept the situation for two reasons: One, they have no philosophical anchor to keep them from being washed up onto the rocks. They no longer have any real core beliefs, and most of their opinions – e.g., "We need national health care," "Our brave troops should fight evil over there so we don't have to fight it over here," "The rich should pay their fair share" – are reactive and comforting. The whole point of spin doctors is to produce comforting sound bites that elude testing against reality. And, two, they've become too pampered and comfortable, a nation of overfed losers, mooches and coasters who like the status quo without wondering how long it can possibly last.

It's nonsensical to blather about the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave when reality TV and Walmart riots are much closer to the truth. The majority of Americans are, of course, where the rot originates – the presidential candidates are spending millions taking their pulse in surveys and polls and then regurgitating to them what they seem to want to hear. Once a country buys into the idea that an above-average, privileged lifestyle is everyone's minimum due, when the fortunate few can lobby for special deals to rake something off the table as they squeeze wealth out of others by force, that country is on the decline. Lobbying and taxation rather than production and innovation have never been able to sustain prosperity. The wealth being squeezed took centuries to produce, but it is not inexhaustible.

In that light, it was interesting to hear Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, speak about the lower, middle and upper classes recently. Romney is an empty suit, only marginally better than the last Republican nominee, the hostile and mildly demented John McCain. In any event, Romney is right about the poor, in a way – there is a "safety net," now holding 50 million people on Medicaid and 46 million on food stamps, among many other supposed benefits. And he's right about the rich; there's no need to worry about them at the moment – at least until the revolution starts. He claims to worry about the middle class, not that his worries will do anything to help them. But he's right that the middle class is where the problem lies. It's just a different kind of problem than he thinks.

People generally fall into an economic class because of their psychology and their values. Each of the three classes has a characteristic psychological profile. For the lower class, it's apathy. They have nothing, they're ground down and they don't really care. They're not in the game, and they aren't going to do anything; they're resigned to their fate. For the upper class, it's greed and arrogance. They have everything, and they think they deserve it – whether they do or not. The middle class – at least in today's world – is run by fear. Fear that they're only a paycheck away from falling into the lower class. Fear that they can't pay their debts or borrow more. Fear that they don't have a realistic prospect of improving themselves.

The problem is that fear is a negative, dangerous and potentially explosive emotion. It can easily morph into anger and violence. Exactly where it will lead is unpredictable, but it's not a good place. One thing that exacerbates the situation is that all three classes now rely on the government, albeit in different ways. Bankruptcy of the government will affect them all drastically.

With sociopaths in charge, we could very well see the Milgram experiment reenacted on a national scale. In the experiment, you may recall, researchers asked members of the public to torture subjects (who, unbeknownst to the people being recruited, were paid actors) with electric shocks, all the way up to what they believed were lethal doses. Most of them did as asked, after being assured that it was "alright" and "necessary" by men in authority. The men in authority today are mostly sociopaths.


One practical issue worth thinking about is how you, as someone with libertarian values, will manage in a future increasingly controlled by sociopaths. My guess is poorly, unless you take action to insulate yourself. That's because of the way almost all creatures are programmed by nature. There's one imperative common to all of them: Survive! People obviously want to do that as individuals. And as families. In fact, they want all the groups that they're members of to survive, simply because (everything else being equal) it should help them to survive as individuals. So individual Marines want the Marine Corps to survive. Individual Rotarians want the Rotary Club to prosper. Individual Catholics leap to the defense of the Church of Rome.

That's why individual Germans during World War II were, as has been asserted, "willing executioners" – they were supporting the Reich for the same reasons the Marines, the Rotarians and the Catholics support their groups. Except more so, because the Reich was under attack from all sides. So of course they followed orders and turned in their neighbors who seemed less than enthusiastic. Failing to support the Reich – even if they knew it had some rather unsavory aspects – seemed an invitation to invading armies to come and rape their daughters, steal their property and probably kill them. So of course the Germans closed ranks around their leaders, even though everyone at the top was a sociopath. You can expect Americans to do the same.

Americans have done so before, when the country was far less degraded. During the War Between the States, even saying something against the war was a criminal offense. The same was true during World War I. In World War II, the Japanese were all put in concentration camps on groundless, racially based suspicions of disloyalty. During the early years of the Cold War, McCarthyism was rampant. The examples are legion among humans, and the US was never an exception. It's even true among chickens. If a bird has a feather out of place, the others will peck at it, eventually killing it. That out-of-place feather is deemed a badge of otherness announcing that its owner isn't part of the group. Chicken Autre must die.

Libertarians, who tend to be more intelligent, better informed and very definitely more independent than average, are going to be in a touchy situation as the crisis deepens. Most aren't going to buy into the groupthink that inevitably accompanies war and other major crises. As such, they'll be seen as unreliable, even traitors. As Bush said, "If you're not with us, you're against us." And, he might have added, "the Constitution be damned." But of course that document is no longer even given lip service; it's now a completely dead letter.

It's very hard for an individualist to keep his mouth shut when he sees these things going on. But he'd better keep quiet, as even HL Mencken wisely did during both world wars. In today's world, just keeping quiet won't be enough; the national security state has an extensive, and growing, file on everybody. They believe they know exactly what your beliefs, desires, fears and associations are, or may be. What we're now facing is likely to be more dangerous than past crises. If you're wise, you'll relocate someplace where you're something of an outsider and, by virtue of that fact, are allowed a measure of eccentric opinion. That's why I spend an increasing amount of time in Latin America. In truth, however, security is going to be hard to find anywhere in the years to come. The most you can hope for is to tilt the odds in your favor.

The best way to do that is by diversifying your assets internationally. Allocating your wealth into real assets. Linking up with sound, like-minded people who share your values. And staying alert for the high-potential speculations that inevitably arise during chaotic times.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:18 | 2277449 nope-1004
nope-1004's picture

Jon Corzine

Llyod Blankfein

Jamie Dimon

Tim Geithner

Ben Bernanke

to name a few.  They all have a deep disconnect with reality and truly are sociopaths.


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:21 | 2277462 idea_hamster
idea_hamster's picture

All you need is favorable conditions for them to bloom, much as mushrooms do after a shitstorm.

There -- fixed it for ya!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:58 | 2277597 Surly Bear
Surly Bear's picture

In this article, I'm going to argue that the US government, in particular, is being overrun by the wrong kind of person.

Oh, do tell what is the right kind of person to be elected to a body whose sole purpose is to exercise the legal use of force? Blah blah blah, Bush was dumb, Blah blah blah. What kind of libertarian are you? The kind who likes making people do what you think is right? Hey, Gonzo, you're only a libertarian if you think a government should not perform certain actions rather than a person that thinks those actions should be performed by the right kind of person. The world has enough Republicans.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:32 | 2277699 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

It's really not "government," just a tiny sliver that happens to be able to overrule the others, i.e. the financial regulators and top economic advisors. 

The guts of the psychopathocracy are in the banks and ranks of the global uberrich elites.  The vast majority of government folks would gladly help solve that problem.

But a lot of readers 'click' with the sloppily thought out anti-government rhetoric.  Especially the oh-so-extra-intelligent ones ;*)

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:24 | 2277871 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

financial regulators and top economic advisors.

More than just them. Read on....posted to California Part two thread also.


Small rural village in NW Ohio. Jackboot Police Chief. Gradually infiltrates the entire Village Administration including Finances. Gets a few hapless "entitled" council people in his pocket. Runs off the competent and capable Village Administrator. Gets a puppet promoted in his place. Starts having the Village pay for the Police Department expenses out of different funds to hide the real cost of the wages and the department expenses. Runs off the fiscal officer. Runs the dept whereby no one wants to drive near the very rural Village as many tickets are written every day. Inflates the infraction amount. Speed trap. Signs are ambiguous. Impounds vehicles and charges outrageous amounts to get them out of impound. Self promotes how he is saving the village from "drug dealers". Local businesses verge on bankruptcy. Then he and council stooges get an income tax implemented.

Concerned citizens get a referendum. Concerned citizens get elected. New council starts the work of getting rid of the gestapo. Income tax overturned. Very little funding to run the village properly. Months and months later, some progress has been made. Very difficult to undo what should never have happened in the first place if the system of checks and balances are followed.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:20 | 2278467 comrade pravda
comrade pravda's picture

The US govt is top heavy with sociopaths.

Dick Cheney is sociopath/terrorist #1.

George W. Bush was simply a coward, pushed around by Dick.

Obama is a narcissist, not a sociopath.  He just wants to be loved by sociopaths. 



Thu, 03/22/2012 - 00:52 | 2279345 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

Um, are you forgetting the real Bush, HW?

Tue, 04/17/2012 - 21:56 | 2353328 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

Wrong. Obama is both a narcissist AND a sociopath. You need to pay more attention if you disagree.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:28 | 2277884 Manthong
Manthong's picture

ANONYMOUS posted this earlier today.. worth posting again.


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:06 | 2277802 michael.suede
michael.suede's picture

Doug Casey is an anarchist.

As am I.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:19 | 2277855 Fanatic
Fanatic's picture

You obviously do not know who Doug Casey is. He is an anarcho-capitalist and thinks the nation state should be abolished. He doesn't like politicians period.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 01:34 | 2279433 NeoRandian
NeoRandian's picture

We can all be very thankful to the great Milton Friedman for his advice that we don't need to worry about kicking the bad guys out of office, that we only need to 'get the wrong people to do the right thing'.

What he failed to recognize was that the wrong people tend to corrupt any thing they do, so when they are given incentives to 'do the right thing' they simultaneously pervert the right thing into the wrong thing, they have their cake and eat it too. 

Tue, 04/17/2012 - 21:55 | 2353323 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

You're stupid, clearly you don't know who Doug Casey is, and you also don't understand his point of view. I wonder if you even read the article properly.


The way you talk doesn't remind me of a libertarian, more of a smug liberal.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:28 | 2277484 Clueless Economist
Clueless Economist's picture

Who are those guys?  The Board of Directors of AIPAC?

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:32 | 2277496 Future Tense
Future Tense's picture

David Tice prediction in the next 18 months:

$2,500 gold and 1000 S&P

Great interview with Fox Business news:

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:41 | 2277527 ChrisFromMorningside
ChrisFromMorningside's picture

You ain't seen nothing yet.

I see major war(s) on the horizon. Reasons:

1. The Keynesians have made it clear that they see warfare as aggregate demand stimulus.

2. War, especially one that required a draft, would make a huge dent in the unemployment rate.

3. The major threat to the political and financier elite in an economic collapse would be the domestic unrest that would sweep American cities. Shipping the nation's supply of angry young males to Iran or Syria and allowing them to sublimate the anger that they feel from being economically and politically disenfranchised by killing foreigners would ease domestic tension and reduce the possibility of revolution.

4. If we are going to have a debt "reset" then the U.S. elite will want it to be on their terms, which means re-asserting U.S. power projection globally.

5. The U.S. middle class lifestyle is predicated upon cheap oil. A supply of cheap oil to the U.S. (in volumes that satisfy middle class demand) is no longer a given in a post-reset environment. So there is a strong incentive to consolidate our political control over as much of the earth's oil supplies as possible while we still have the debt-fueled resources to do so.

I fear that this period of 2011/2012 that we are in, as loony as it is, will feel quaint one or two years from now. As of today, much of this economic crisis has been limited to the financial sector and those who depend on it for their wealth. I think 2012 will be the turning point where the crisis becomes "real" for the typical American for a variety of reasons.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:09 | 2277627 10mm
10mm's picture

Popcorn,appitizers,refeshments,party favorits ready for next salvo of bombs,missiles,body bags,etc etc.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:07 | 2277620 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture


“The next time they give you all that civic bullshit about voting, keep in mind that Hitler was elected in a full, free democratic election”"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians. Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here... like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: 'The Public Sucks. Fuck Hope.'"

"I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote -- who did not even leave the house on Election Day -- am in no way responsible for that these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created."

George Carlin

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:26 | 2277881 TheGardener
TheGardener's picture

"that Hitler was elected in a full, free democratic election"

Not that I'll get too excited about all those posts
that have Hit'l and democrank as buzz words but
that meme is not true. Google it for yourself or at least consider that the last so called fair and free election was not the one getting the Austrian to power. He got appointed.

Tue, 04/17/2012 - 22:03 | 2353351 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

Actually both. But is was mostly his popularity with the public that gave him power. Yes, democracy.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:43 | 2277671 Chupacabra-322
Chupacabra-322's picture

@ nope-1004.

Don't you mean Psycopaths?

Three-Factor Model of Psychopathy

Arrogant/Deceitful Interpersonal Style:
- Glibness/superficial charm
- Egocentricity/Grandiose sense of self-worth
- Pathological lying
- Conning/Manipulative

Deficient Affective Experience:
- Lack of remorse or guilt
- Callous/Lack of empathy
- Shallow affect
- Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

Impulsive/Irresponsible Behavioral Style:
- Need for stimulation/Proneness to boredom
- Parasitic lifestyle
- Lack of realistic, long-term goals
- Impulsivity
- Irresponsibility

P.S. Yes, they are VERY SICK. Unfortunately, there are no treatments that have been found to be effective in treating sick individuals. They need to be kept from holding public office or positions of authority at all costs, as that’s where they do the most damage to others around them. What’s worse is that it is that people like this are often the most ambitious seekers of political office or positions of power, and due to their manipulative and deceptive tendencies can be very difficult to detect.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:49 | 2277950 TheGardener
TheGardener's picture

This 3-factor model tries to gives all of human instincts a bad name, by pointing out their respective down side. The destruction of the human soul by means of psychoanalysis.

Yet your description of normal human beings sounds very
believable, so you got up-voted.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 19:57 | 2278365 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

can you perhaps describe your normal human beings, sans the "psychoanalysis" factor?  I'd like to see a list of what is considered valuable in a human, thanks.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 21:04 | 2278525 Dr. Acula
Dr. Acula's picture

-Parasitic lifestyle = 50% of Americans

-Lack of remorse or guilt = Vote themselves into foodstamps and healthcare benefits at others' expense. Enslave men via birth control "accidents".

-Callous/Lack of empathy = "You should pay your fair share of taxes and not complain"

-Pathological lying = One person mugging another on the street is theft, but one million voting to mug someone is a civic duty. It's for the good of society, after all.

-Pathological lying = religion

-Irresponsibility = Zero knowledge of economic science or history. But, put a QR code on the crapper so you can notify everyone on facebook when you are taking a dump.

-Egocentricity/Grandiose sense of self-worth = The invisible sky daddy told me it's my job to stop gay marriage and pot-smoking. Also, my vote is important because I'm making a wise and informed decision.


Sat, 03/24/2012 - 03:19 | 2286153 dimichzh
dimichzh's picture

You tweested the facts.


-Parasitic lifestyle = 50% of Americans

It is not because they don't want to work, but discoraged to find one, at least we got a lot of those recently.
It better fits politicians.  How is it even possible to accept that some people work as ppoliticians the whole life and we have generation of such. This is crazy. It is similar to Kim Something Ir transition power to his son after his death. It is the same if one take a step back and look at it.

-Lack of remorse or guilt = Vote themselves into foodstamps and healthcare benefits at others' expense. Enslave men via birth control "accidents".
They didn't vote themselves into, it is again politicians did. Why? What if they go out of control when they cannot find a job?
Do you still believe that American control their gov? 

-Callous/Lack of empathy = "You should pay your fair share of taxes and not complain"
This is completely wrong analogy. Better, 1.5 million Iraq dead and politicians do not care. Americans just brainwashed by them and TV.

-Pathological lying = One person mugging another on the street is theft, but one million voting to mug someone is a civic duty. It's for the good of society, after all.
Again, wrong analogy, not even close, and again politicians or those who controls them.

-Pathological lying = religion
No, again, politicians and those who control them. The religion is a tool.

-Irresponsibility = Zero knowledge of economic science or history. But, put a QR code on the crapper so you can notify everyone on facebook when you are taking a dump.
Coomplex laws and manipulativness by most in congress and controllers. It is realy hard to dig in this mess. Easier to be brainwashed by TV

-Egocentricity/Grandiose sense of self-worth = The invisible sky daddy told me it's my job to stop gay marriage and pot-smoking. Also, my vote is important because I'm making a wise and informed decision.
This is just a tool by psychopaths to focus public attention to small issues while pilaging America 


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:07 | 2278412 CompassionateFascist
CompassionateFascist's picture

How did we get here? The selfsame Universalist Nomadic Tribe that's been attempting to destroy the Nations for 3,000 years is now ascendant. Tikkun Olam. 

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 01:47 | 2279461 4horse
4horse's picture

That's why individual Germans during World War II were, as has been asserted, "willing executioners"

asserted by just what jackass besides yourself . . .


a famous phrase, of selkine's, describing bolshevist jews who executed The Red Terror, Holodomor and MassMurder of 20-30-40million Russians --has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Germans -unless, somehow, to account for what they feared most as it came to be reflected in their own weimar


doug casey __buffoon and/or treacherous bastard__ such an egregious error can hardly ever be accidental


if, impossibly, a true nincompoop, perhaps reading someone who can think may, improbably, somehow in an even dimmer future see you asserting the obvious as to the selfsame psychopathocracy of both the ussr/ussa

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:19 | 2277459 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:21 | 2277465 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

Prototypical. Scary stuff.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:26 | 2277477 Sequitur
Sequitur's picture

Hello Steve LIESman -- without the doughnuts, and with hair.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:20 | 2277464 ABG LINE
ABG LINE's picture


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:23 | 2277468 williambanzai7
williambanzai7's picture


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:37 | 2277519 LongSoupLine
LongSoupLine's picture

Holy Crap William...I just soiled myself!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 19:55 | 2278352 piceridu
piceridu's picture

Banzai to the plate...calls time, he digs in, plants his back foot sinking in his cleats...the pitcher delivers...he swings, CRACK! It's deep, deep to dead center field...ladies and gentlemen, it's fucking out of here!!!!!

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 00:56 | 2279356 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

Rock on!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:25 | 2277472 nothing can go wrogn
nothing can go wrogn's picture

In social affairs, I'm an optimist. I really do believe that our military-industrial civilization will soon collapse.  ~Ed Abbey

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:28 | 2277479 barliman
barliman's picture



also known as the Mainstream Media

Why settle for reality TV shows that celebrate neurotic, psychotic and sociopathic behaviors when they can have the REAL THING ????

How do the Obamas differ from the Kardashians?

Newt Gingrich from Sister Wives?

Rick Santorum from the 700 Club?

Mitt Romney from Apprentice?


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 22:41 | 2277653 poor fella
poor fella's picture

It's a shame too many VOTES 'on the sidelines' would be misconstrued as apathy. Meanwhile the NSA's project Lethal Wind or whatever is turning everyone into an alphanumeric code and rating us on the Rebellion Scale (what shade of Soylent we fall into).

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:28 | 2277482 AgShaman
AgShaman's picture

I better fix a cup 'o' tea for this one (lengthy)

....but judging by the title: my pre-conclusion is that nothing will change until the unwashed masses shuck off their normalcy bias and realize that these psychopaths and sociopaths cannot be peacefully dealt with.

The Tree of Liberty is needs to be replenished

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:35 | 2277501 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

The US sheeple flock will keep their normalcy bias until 1 morning soon they'll be suddenly introduced to real fear and panic and discomfort. Then theyll all demand to know why someone didnt warn them.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:05 | 2277616 Melin
Melin's picture

I thought you were going with "Neandersheeple."  I liked that one except that it smears Neanderthals.  They don't complain much tho.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:14 | 2277605 surf0766
surf0766's picture

The tree of liberty is has been replaced with the vine of socialism. Soon to be replaced by pure communism because no matter what the sheep are told, they roll their eyes and don't care. Wait until their food is rationed , all for the greater good.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:28 | 2277485 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Hey you took your sociopath points from studying the CNBC perps.

Steve Leisman couldn't hide his hatred of free markets in that other ZH article today. They're reaching their breaking point. 

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:31 | 2277491 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Libertarians, who tend to be more intelligent, better informed and very definitely more independent than average, are going to be in a touchy situation as the crisis deepens."

WOW! You just stroked my confirmation bias. At least I think that's my confirmation bias.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:52 | 2277570 barliman
barliman's picture


If it is a tingle running up your leg ...

... first make sure Chris Matthews is not under your desk molesting you          ;->


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:04 | 2278395 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

I've yet to see "libertarians" in full agreement with each other as to what a "libertarian" is - which is fine, but hard to feel anything, either positive or negative, towards those who adopt the label.

if one seeks to wear a label, can others ask the ingredients, for clarity?

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:31 | 2277494 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

Don't overlook nihilism.  Socioapths at their extreme become nihilists who are intent on destroying the system. 

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:07 | 2278416 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

"ve believes in nussing, nussing, and tomorrow ve'll come back and cut off yer johnson!"


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:44 | 2277534 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

Nihilism spans an incredible amount of real estate...  not only the political nihilists you're talking about (classical), but also existential, epistomological, etc.  That said, these people are not political nihilists nor will they ever graduate to be such...  they are purely intent on actively molding the system into what benefits them the most, all else be damned...  this is in dire contrast to a political nihilist, who, at least plausibly, may desire to have coincidental benefit with the rest of society post collapse. 

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:18 | 2277654 W10321303
W10321303's picture

The 'Seinfeld Generation'....Nihilistic Sociopaths (if you are lucky)

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:42 | 2277736's picture

Seinfeld had its libertarian side.


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 19:01 | 2278013 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

you mention "these people" and i think you mean "the sociopaths" who will not "graduate" to nihilisms

but their intent (?) is to mold the system; sounds like the fascist elite, to me, but what about the more mundane sociopath, like in the chamber0commerce or the PTA, just "molding" awaaaay?  ok, they're sociopaths too, i see...  b/c they just keep benefitting themselves like, say, public employees and of course, congress and their multi-minions... maybe some early 'learning' about "self"  or "others" makes certain individuals more "archetypal" sociopaths. or they get "stuck" in their understanding, somehow? 

and then we get to  'behavior of coincidental benefit' "society post collapse"

now, is this some mythic DSM-time? could you be more specific, about when this collapse must occur, drCamping?  or is something frightening you from going quite there?

if so, that's some fear you got there, macho-man!   it must be very difficult, sometimes, not knowing exactly when this 'collapse' will come to be, but i don't think it's pathology, it's just you. today. now

maybe everyone has an "inner sociopath" to deal with, develop-mentally

wouldn't that be comforting?

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 09:58 | 2280223 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

Everyone intends to mold the system...  it's just that this intent may be latent or patent...  self interest, inherently, demands that we mold ourselves, which in turn affects the world around us.  As a result, everyone, at least in a latent or tangential way, molds the system.  Self interest is present in every conscious action...  it is one of the fundamental laws of man.

Ultimately, we cannot determine who a sociopath is simply based upon his or her actions...  we would be missing the culpable mental state part of the equation...  in legal speak, the mens rea.  The practical difference for those on the receiving end may be negligible between someone who is greedy and someone who is a sociopath...

The reason why it is important to differentiate between sociopaths and virtually everyone else is the risk they pose...  in short, we can contemplate and limit the possible actions of a greedy person (as a rational actor)...  contemplating the possible actions of a sociopath is a little different ballgame, given the additional actions at the sociopath's disposal...

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 13:26 | 2280921 Bob
Bob's picture

Then there's the dominant "private" social structure of our time . . . which provides the resources to transform psychopaths into Masters of the Universe to whom government answers:

The Corporation.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 00:59 | 2279360 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

Actually, most of them are Luciferians who have been traumatized and controlled since birth or even before, often devoid of actual, rational, free thought, manipulated by "handlers" and, sadly, demonized in childhood.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:32 | 2277495 kralizec
kralizec's picture
  1. Sociopaths completely lack a conscience or any capacity for real regret about hurting people. Although they pretend the opposite.
  2. Sociopaths put their own desires and wants on a totally different level from those of other people. Their wants are incommensurate. They truly believe their ends justify their means. Although they pretend the opposite.
  3. Sociopaths consider themselves superior to everyone else, because they aren't burdened by the emotions and ethics others have – they're above all that. They're arrogant. Although they pretend the opposite.
  4. Sociopaths never accept the slightest responsibility for anything that goes wrong, even though they're responsible for almost everything that goes wrong. You'll never hear a sincere apology from them.
  5. Sociopaths have a lopsided notion of property rights. What's theirs is theirs, and what's yours is theirs too. They therefore defend currency inflation and taxation as good things.
  6. Sociopaths usually pick the wrong target to attack. If they lose their wallet, they kick the dog. If 16 Saudis fly planes into buildings, they attack Afghanistan.
  7. Sociopaths traffic in disturbing news, they love to pass on destructive rumors and they'll falsify information to damage others.

Hey, I think George Soros fits this pretty good too!

That's why I spend an increasing amount of time in Latin America. In truth, however, security is going to be hard to find anywhere in the years to come. The most you can hope for is to tilt the odds in your favor.

They likey gringos down there?  Even if the world goes full tilt?  No place is safe!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:44 | 2277539 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

The list is ridiculous since it is a term of art in the medical profession and there are traits listed in the DSM for it...  lazy authoring.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:56 | 2277589 I Am Ben
I Am Ben's picture

seconded - altough the term has its own life outside the medical nomenclature, as does 'psychopath' since it isn't in IV-TR

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 18:58 | 2277879 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

...even thought the DSM clearly delineates the norm of "community standards" too!  L0L!!!

what fun "medical arts" games around human suffering!  and by the very people who condone and abet torture, too! can't have goobermint-regulated insurance money going to quacks, now, can we?  fun-ny! 

whatever he said or meant, and w/out evaluating it at all, dougCasey did say it was from his own perspective and experience.  right?

hey, thanks for playing!

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 05:36 | 2279701 I Am Ben
I Am Ben's picture

true. for all the 'ethical research training' psychologist recieve , nothing is more abruptly abandoned in the presence of government authority/regulation/statute than said training.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:49 | 2277947 Think for yourself
Think for yourself's picture

the DSM-IV, as its misbegotten little brother the DSM-V, is a travesty put together by insiders of the psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries. It's a joke, worse than a joke, it's a steaming turd designed to facilitate labelling of patients so that different coping mechanisms and statistically outlying particularities are considered as illnesses, leading the patient to internalize the concept that he is sick and enabling the illness to be medicated by the quacks.

You can't medicate someone without having a label in the DSM to point at, so the trick is to fit as many "disorders", however insignificant or misunderstood, into that stupid book.

Citing the DSM as an authority on psychology is like citing a federal reserve press release as an authority on economic theory.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:26 | 2278491 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

same thing with the label "obese" - introduced as an applied label so as to gain access to insured pharma - must have label before reimbursements can happen - Body Mass Index being the supposed parameters.

there used to be a great little slideshow illustrating how ridiculous this label is, and truly points to the underlying reasoning - access to insured pharma, but all that's left is a set of photos - still, mouse over the pics to see the "label" - and know that when you use that word, you're playing by their rules. . .

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 05:59 | 2279713 I Am Ben
I Am Ben's picture

i get the sentiment, overdiagnosticing (overmedication) is a real problem.

but you wouldn't say evasive personality disorder or generalized anxiety disorder for example, are a coping mechanisms.

the hypochondriacal tendencies in western soc. is evident, and I feel too that the consequences are as you describe them - .


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:54 | 2277579 skunzie
skunzie's picture

George Soros?  Heck, substitute the name of ANY and ALL politicians you can think of for as long as you've been able to vote (or care about politics as it relates to our world).  I submit that anyone attracted to politics, whether at the dog catcher level, or the President is a friggin' sociopath--at least according to the definitions provided in the above article. 

How we extricate ourselves from this mess (when one doesn't have the means to become an "international" gentleman or woman) is a perplexing problem.  Myself, I've lived a great life, so when the revolution for sociopathism hits, I'll voluntarily check out:  I don't want to be a part of what's to come.  It's my children, and yet to be born grandchildren, and future generations that I feel for.  Maybe this will be the beginning of the 1,000 year reign of terror spoken about in the bible?

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:14 | 2278144 New World Chaos
New World Chaos's picture

The problem is Biblical all right- the problem is worse than a million sociopathic individuals running everything.  The problem is that they are all neurons in an emergent overmind called Lucifer, whose neurotransmitters are money, bullets, child abuse, fraudulent securities, hate, and propaganda.  The Devil is not supernatural but he is real nonetheless, and he is the Prince of this world.  When one evil deed inspires another, that is one of his synapses firing. Only the Illuminati are smart enough to know what they are a part of a hive mind; most sociopaths are just along for the ride.  But all sociopaths do secretly cooperate with each other because every sociopathic action either creates, inspires, or empowers other sociopaths.  Think low-level crimminals getting good people to empower the police state that will ultimately turn against them.  Also, Lucifer is powerful enough that he shapes the entire culture and gets otherwise good people to see sociopaths and their policies as moral, and he even gets the dimmer bulbs to become sociopaths themselves.  Think "The Law is the Law" robocops, Strauss's Vulgar Many, Snipers for Jesus, etc.  Everyone serves Lucifer these days. We will supposedly get 1000 years of peace when Jesus rules, but if Christians rule, it will be 1000 years of tyranny. 

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 01:10 | 2279383 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

The awful thing is that it's a Luciferian system of mind control that confines the elite first and foremost. SRA is widespread. But it's a basic part of elite culture. Sure, at some level, there are actual people with some sort of decision-making ability. But for most of them (like I'llbombya or Bushmonkey), they are just puppets in a much larger, evil system. Luciferian indoctrination becomes systemic, endemic.


One need not believe in the reality of Lucifer or Jesus to verify that this term is very accurate or to understand how this system works.


It's a great article, but failing to mention Luciferianism is failing to really teach or understand what's actually happening.


WB Yeats, a secret society member who opposed the Irish revolt yet somehow became a Senator afterward (and also a Nobel winner) explains it quite succinctly and poetically:


The best lack all conviction

while the worst are full of passionate intensity.


Or, as my screennamesake coos,

Do you wanna make tea at the BBC? Do you really want to be a cop?

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 06:57 | 2279741 New World Chaos
New World Chaos's picture

When I saw Obama's head and neck scars I figured it was SRA.  Doubt he's smart enough to be the Antichrist.  His CIA mom probably realized he was so easily programmable that he should become president, birth certificate be damned. 

Do you think that when the system crumbles enough we will see a rebellion of the lower and mid-level Illuminati, similar to Svali? (This is a seriously evil and fucked up story, folks.  As badly as they treat us, they treat their own members 1000x worse.  Traumas are the ties that bind Lucifer's children.  The rabbit hole goes very deep:

If Christians offered them safe houses, it would be a serious mindfuck for them.  They might spill everything they know.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 12:58 | 2280799 Ultros88
Ultros88's picture

There are many things the structures of which may in some degree be elucidated by the notion of hierarchocentricity found in the beginning of this essay. The main idea usually in attendance when one speaks of a hierarchy is that of a gradation of power, or control, and a hierarchy is in this sense the relational structure of that gradation. A usual symbol is the pyramid, indicating that the power of many is controlled by the few. This symbol need not be taken as the only one that could represent the notion of hierarchy, although it is the most common form of its existence within human systems as dictatorship/oligarchy. It could just as well be represented by a line, or a pillar, and could take as representation for itself well-near any image so long as it has within it a way of indicating the ideas of being greater than and less than. As an example, the structure of power within a democracy as it is generally considered to have been intended would be two pyramids connected at either their bases or their apices. These forms would indicate, that although the power of the many are controlled by the few, those few are in turn chosen, or controlled, by the power of the many. Centricity is, obviously, the idea of something being central and heierachocentricity is, as would be expected, the structure of control relating to things considered as central. As the apex of control in a system is a sort of center, hierarchocentricty is then a hierarchy of hierarchies. In the initial paragraph, the picture of moons revolving around planets revolving around suns revolving around the galactic centers was used as an illustration. The lower systems compositionally create the center that controls them, and although not the center’s power, per se, are the mechanism through which that power manifests itself. In a similar way the power of the lower centers manifests in their combined center, and from which they have originated. Hierarchocentricity is the natural order of the All, and any deviations therefrom will be subject to a corrective action corresponding to the degree of deviation and the propensity of that deviation to recreate itself.  The whole of nature is a hierarchocentric paradox that cannot be resolved from the spatiotemporal point of view. This comes as no surprise to students of the occult and it is evident in the symbol of the cosmic egg and the related ‘chicken in the egg’ paradox. Paradox, as outside the law, is the source of all phenomenal things subject to law as normally considered. An understanding of the law of paradoxa is necessary to move beyond current limitations and the suggestions for personal development in previous paragraphs arise from, and are a means of, resolving basic paradoxical natures attending the existence of the individual. As regards organizational systems, an interesting example is that based on human relationship triangles often found in occult movements. The structure builds itself off a primary unit of three individuals who are the apex of the hierarchy. The three agree to goal and a course of action necessary to achieve that goal, which is their center and the true apex of the system which concretizes around them. The three then split and each finds two others with whom they will form a new triangle who will remain unknown to the other original two. This process continues for however long is necessary to secure the base necessary to reaching the goal. The power structure within each trine can vary; the most effective in accomplishing the goal for which the structure was established is the demand of complete obedience to those in an order closer to the central, originating trine. In practice it is necessary that those in rings closer to the center have at least a modicum or appearance of having a controlling influence in the organization. The original three will find it necessary to in some way bring the groups they spawn together for collaboration, near the top or center this would have to occur in secret meetings where individuals remain anonymous except to those who had ‘inducted’ them. Further from the center the necessity for anonymity and appearance of having a degree of control becomes less and will evaporate, although the demands of secrecy will remain. This is the basic structure of any ‘secret society’ - independent of any reason for it having to, or deciding to, operate in secret. It is not a structure suited for developing a quick result and the goal will near invariably not be achieved during the lifetimes of its original founders. The fact that the goal and operation of such an organization is secret and only manifests after a wide span of time suggest that the goal, at the very least, is one that cultural conditions prevailing at the time of institution would find anathema. A similar organizational structure with a more benevolent goal need be less concerned with secrecy and anonymity, and would be used by a group of people disseminating knowledge in order to prevent that knowledge from falling into what they consider the wrong hands. The fall of Egypt is thought to have occurred primarily because the visible hierophantic fraternity was infiltrated by hostile agencies: first by people, then more gradually by their ideas.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 13:51 | 2281045 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

Ultros, I'm not sure what to make of this response yet, but I do note this segment of it: You say,

The whole of nature is a hierarchocentric paradox that cannot be resolved from the spatiotemporal point of view. This comes as no surprise to students of the occult and it is evident in the symbol of the cosmic egg and the related ‘chicken in the egg’ paradox. Paradox, as outside the law, is the source of all phenomenal things subject to law as normally considered. An understanding of the law of paradoxa is necessary to move beyond current limitations and the suggestions for personal development in previous paragraphs arise from, and are a means of, resolving basic paradoxical natures attending the existence of the individual.


I call this the "occultist dialectic." My term as far as I know. Some, of course, claim Hegel was a member of or closely associated with the Thule folks.


The Bible is clear on secrecy and light, in my opinion. :) Many of your points in this response, then, are well received here.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 14:58 | 2281324 4horse
4horse's picture

why, it appears no other thing to me than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours . . .



yonder cloud appears a pyramid
very much like a pyramid
methinks more like an easel
it is racked like an easel
yet the erratic quadratic painting of its shapes shift heiroglyphantasmagorically heavenward  .  .  .











wadda piece of work is ultrokrantz!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:02 | 2277606 cossack55
cossack55's picture


What the USSA once was.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:49 | 2278562 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

the people of Iceland freely elected an older woman who is a an out lesbian to be their Prime Minister.

that alone puts Iceland at the opposite spectrum from anything amrka could imagine,

Icelandic culture has its roots in Norse traditions. Icelandic literature is popular, in particular the sagas and eddas which were written during the High and Late Middle Ages. Icelanders place relatively great importance on independence and self-sufficiency; in a European Commission public opinion analysis over 85% of Icelanders found independence to be "very important" contrasted with the EU25 average of 53%, and 47% for the Norwegians, and 49% for the Danes.[116]

Iceland is progressive in terms of lesbian, gay bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) matters. In 1996, the Icelandic parliament passed legislation to create registered partnerships for same-sex couples, covering nearly all the rights and benefits of marriage. In 2006, by unanimous vote of the parliament, further legislation was passed, granting same-sex couples the same rights as different-sex couples in adoption, parenting and assisted insemination treatment. On 11 June 2010, the Icelandic parliament amended the marriage law, making it gender neutral and defining marriage as between two individuals, thereby legalising same-sex marriage. The law took effect on 27 June 2010.[117] The amendment to the law also means registered partnerships for same-sex couples are now no longer possible, and marriage is their only option—identical to the existing situation for opposite-sex couples.[117]

not even remotely similar, at any stage of amrkn "development."

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 01:04 | 2278708 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

so the goodrich case leading to 'gay marraige' in MA in 2004 doesn't count b/c MA is no longer in amrk?

according to wiki, MA was the 6th 'jurisdiction' to go with this, after the netherlands, belgium, ontario, british columbia, and quebec

people are "out" and being whoever they want all over the place here in cali, even tho the fuking mormons beat prop8

hopefully you don't have some "agenda" that makes you an inherently unfair person towards certain "nationalities" or something, b/c i've never heard you be quite so nastily confused about simple facts, before

i applaud iceland myself, but if you need to shit on me for some reason, like for being 'amrkn', while praising iceland, i can deal with a silly, confused, woman...  most men my age have seen them around, ya know,...

trust me

that said, you really don't strike me this way very often or very much, but i get that this is important to you (very) and maybe hence the "oomph" about "amrkn" <center/right?> which doesn't accept the TGBL "agenda" {thankGod4BiLesbians!}

well, i don't have a problem with it

adults can contract for marraige if they are sane,  where "sane" =  sane as slewie or you, ok?  same as any contract, like rent or car loan.  this has consequences and repercussions for "survivor" benefits on pensions and socSecurity too, doesn't it?  legally?  let's name them, face them, accept them, and in this country, ouch! yes, politically, ouch! 

but for me, if that is the "agenda" it doesn't bother me one bit and i'm ok with it, myself

if some "god" doesn't approve, that is a personal thing for the believer, i would say;  but this "agenda" about being "allowed" to sign/enter into the same contract as anybody else in the civil law is worthy of the fight, too

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 04:09 | 2279648 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

dude, seriously, wtf are you on about?  you've acquired a bee-in-yer-bonnet of late with regards my opinons.

for the record I was replying to the post that said:

Iceland. What the USSA once was.

and my point is that at NO time "was" the US(S)A ever going to elect a leader that was an out lesbian - never, ever.

nor would the country - not individual counties where the majority are in favour of letting people choose what they like sexually provided it doesn't involve children or animals, but the "USSA" as a nationstate - ever going to be free enough from their controlling Xtian roots to be comparable to Iceland.

hopefully you don't have some "agenda" that makes you an inherently unfair person towards certain "nationalities" or something, b/c i've never heard you be quite so nastily confused about simple facts, before

i applaud iceland myself, but if you need to shit on me for some reason, like for being 'amrkn', while praising iceland, i can deal with a silly, confused, woman...  most men my age have seen them around, ya know,...

Iceland, and the amazing people that inhabit that space, are near the top of any list I'd make to move to in a heartbeat - I spent over a decade a relatively short flight from there, met many of the people who hail from there, and love the artists, music and otherwise, so drop the name calling - if you have "silly confused" women hanging around you, that's YOUR sadsack story, not mine.

for the record, relationships are between whoever chooses them, and as long as they do no harm, they're no one's business but the parties involved - of whatever sexuality, or gender, or "presentation" - irrespective of the do-gooder meddling types that like to "vote" their righteousness on peoples.

pretty sure we're in agreement as to people's rights to the relationship of their choosing - the "amrkn" thang, perhaps not so much, as I'm not a part of that meme.

chill pi-rat.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 05:44 | 2279703 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

well, thank you for reading my post and responding

if your point was "elect a leader",  i do see where you made that right at the top, but then you never mention it again for the next 80%

i'm not picking on your story or where you'd like to live or what you love, or trying to talk about relationships

i simply thought your main point was the marraige law and that you were being a little unfair about 'amrkns' there

that you won't own that is your choice and i didn't expect you to, b/c as i pointed out in the first place, you are just being a silly and confused woman there, no matter how self-enraptured you get being that way

if you were able to see that, you'd probably stop, but when one just take it for granted that being silly and confused and shitting on people gratuitously is ok, there is nothing to stop, is there?  so now it's because another country will never ever elect an out lesbian for what?  president?  how do you know? 

but i did think (obviously) that you were taking that nice big shit b/c of a 'deficiency' about 'gay marraige' not "lesbian election' in amrka

i honestly thought you were just ragging about the marraige laws, not voting preferences, or tendencies or your certainties about some other "meme's"  lesbian-leadership future-elect

PASTE: but if you need to shit on me for some reason, like for being 'amrkn', while praising iceland, i can deal with a silly, confused, woman

i mean it: i don't care for people who can't understand:  when they shit on somebody the person might not appreciate it

as i said, please don't aim that shit at me!  i don't think that's unreasonable;  and, i do mean it

trust me

if you do come here to shit on people b/c you think you have a reason or a right, and some poor guy chirps up with:  you silly, confused woman!  don't shit on me!

and you come back with:  why!  you don't even understand!  i wasn't shitting in you for that reason!  chill, pi-rat

that's some pretty sick cargo, whether you can see it, or not

maybe your baggage got switched on you? 

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 15:17 | 2281401 4horse
4horse's picture

rosencathartenz and guildenstewie are deadly . . .



billions a day. trillions stolen right from under their nosegay- the bouquet of afflatus -and here they are playing with themselves over whose lbgtg g g g g gggggolly gee whiz is in their faces




wedgie warriors

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 20:39 | 2282216 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

yes, and here YOU are making a comment on it all. . . meanwhile the trillions of pixelated, imaginary wealths are still appearing & dis-appearing. . .

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 20:29 | 2282212 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

aye, you've confirmed that you're just having a conversation with your particular neurosis via my avatar.

if your point was "elect a leader",  i do see where you made that right at the top, but then you never mention it again for the next 80%

if you saw where I made my point, then looked for my point again in the "next 80%", let me help you, the blockquote was a BLOCKQUOTE, illustrating the differences in the majority peoples of Iceland vs. majority peoples amrka.  I can't help you see that.

as to my "not owning" that you feel

that you were being a little unfair about 'amrkns' there

and then you continue to apply your sticky label

you are just being a silly and confused woman there, no matter how self-enraptured you get being that way

that's YOUR game-play, I'm not even going there for you.

I replied to your last finger-pointing anal-ysis of me in another thread - since this thread is dead now, here it is again, a sort of "bookend" for this final attempt to talk with you - my advice is stick with the boys who use female avatars here when you feel like "chatting" with a "girl". . . just for "commonality" and all. . .


Tue, 03/20/2012 - 14:22 | 2274106 Cathartes Aura
Vote up!

Vote down!


not wanting to get in-to what is obviously a *conversation* between you two, but I did want to address the part that "addresses" me,

c_artes_ Aura "interprets" him more safely, but we see her uncertainty, b/c i think A2 is doing his impressionistPsycho-symbology or whatever it is and she is uncomfortable with it on some level, perhaps.  her inner feminist may sense that if he is attacking her early conditioning, symbolically, she is in for a tussle, here!

I'm not taking anything AnAn posts "personally" because he's not addressing anything that I recognise as "me or mine" - end of.   this is what I was trying to point out with the "US citizenism" meme - it doesn't rile me at all, I see his perspective even. . . this is perhaps because I do not identify myself with amrkn-ism, nor with any nationstate - I am me, for better or worse, and I'll argue from me, but not on the behalf of some invisible boundary lines + a flag that someOne else defines AND CONSTANTLY REDEFINES of late - that is not ME.

so if AnAn wants to make his point about US citizenism, I can hear it w/o all the pat-riot non-sense clogging up my hearing receptors. . . this is also why I don't vote, why I lived outside of amrka for years - I don't' see the reality of amrka as anything LIKE the HOLOGRAM projected and imitated by the majority of people who inhabit the space(s).

and, just for the record, I don't have an "inner feminist" that feels "an attack on my early childhood conditioning" - the "feminist" tag is applied by you because you've decided to discard any of the points I raise regarding "gender" or the "conditioning" of those who choose to subscribe to the polarities of "man v. woman" - I don't, so how could I be a "feminist"?  I'm a female human, being.  I am not a "woman" though, that requires certain identifying markers of behaviour that don't interest me.  I spent a lot of time observing the whole duality of "gender" with attention paid to how it is manipulated to serve a greater agenda, and I want nothing of it, thanks.  obviously I had "early conditioning" within an amrkn family, but then I grew up.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:04 | 2277610 I Am Ben
I Am Ben's picture

socipaths DO have a conscience. on a phenomological level, they do know when they are wrong, or hurting other people. They do feel empathy, but also they exhibit the anti-social behaviour we see.

'true' psychopaths don't feel empathy.  

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:18 | 2277656 lotsoffun
lotsoffun's picture

correct.  sociopath and psychopath are NOT the same thing.  psychopath is the one that shoots up x number of people at y location and never feels to have done any wrong.  sociopaths don't think to have done any wrong ever, but don't go as far as shooting.


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:02 | 2277798 I Am Ben
I Am Ben's picture

to be fair, a sociopath is able to do everything a psychopath is, the latter simply just doesnt have the ability to feel empathy.

imaging a psychopath walking down street seeing a car crash. A victim is screaming for help, and instead of helping the psychopath walks off to practice the facial expression on the victim. In the mirror for as long as it takes for him to be able to mimick the feeling he saw.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:44 | 2277932 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

this is why we study the last seinfeld episode so closely, earthlings...

Tue, 04/17/2012 - 22:13 | 2353379 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

No, sociopaths let other people do the shooting.



Wed, 03/21/2012 - 21:09 | 2278613 DosZap
DosZap's picture


Your post on Sociopaths describe to a "T", the entire personna of the DC crew in charge, and Wall Street.


Anyone without this is almost demonic.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:34 | 2277499 LongSoupLine
LongSoupLine's picture

"...when reality TV and Walmart riots are much closer to the truth. The majority of Americans are, of course, where the rot originates..."


What does any of this have to do with Tebow leaving Denv...OUCH, my iPad just burned me...OHHH dancing with the goats is on tonight!!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:35 | 2277503 Tom.the.Bomb
Tom.the.Bomb's picture

The diagnosis includes what may be referred to as amoral, antisocial, asocial, psychopathic, and sociopathic personality (disorder).

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:49 | 2277762 Kali
Kali's picture

Sociopathic, yes, with a big dollop of narcissitic personality disoder and a cherry on top! Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder[1] in which the individual is described as being excessively preoccupied with issues of personal adequacy, power, prestige and vanity. [2] Narcissistic personality disorder is closely linked to egocentrism.

Symptoms of this disorder include, but are not limited to:

  • Reacts to criticism with anger, shame, or humiliation
  • May take advantage of others to reach his or her own goal
  • Tends to exaggerate their own importance, achievements, and talents
  • Imagines unrealistic fantasies of success, beauty, power, intelligence, or romance
  • Requires constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
  • Easily becomes jealous
  • Lacks empathy and disregards the feelings of others
  • Obsessed with oneself
  • Mainly pursues selfish goals
  • Trouble keeping healthy relationships
  • Is easily hurt and rejected
  • Sets unrealistic goals
  • Wants "the best" of everything
  • Appears as tough-minded or unemotional [


The cause of this disorder is unknown, according to Groopman and Cooper. However, they list the following factors identified by various researchers as possibilities:[7]

  • An oversensitive temperament at birth
  • Excessive admiration that is never balanced with realistic feedback
  • Excessive praise for good behaviors or excessive criticism for bad behaviors in childhood
  • Overindulgence and overvaluation by parents
  • Being praised for perceived exceptional looks or abilities by adults
  • Severe emotional abuse in childhood
  • Unpredictable or unreliable caregiving from parents
  • Valued by parents as a means to regulate their own self-esteem

Sounds like how most of our children are being raised now. As Mogambo would say, WFD- we're freaking doomed!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:58 | 2277971 Think for yourself
Think for yourself's picture

the cause of this disorder is quite obvious if you ask any practitionner of the eastern philosophies - NPD is a run-of-the-mill manifestation of being driven by the mind and identification with ego. That's it. These are the symptoms of samsaric experience which we strive to eliminate from within ourselves. There's thousands of years of wise science that treats with this very topic... "cause of this disorder unknown"? Pfshaw!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 20:55 | 2278578 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

indeed, it has been said that amrka is a young country, analogous to say, a two-year old, in the "karmic" scheme of things. . .tantrum/pacifier.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:35 | 2277504 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Sociopaths, another kicking the can.

There might be sociopaths among the US citizen elite.

The rest are just as sane as the other US citizen.

US citizenism happens through the consent of the government. There are many ways to express one's consent.

In the end, the sociopath line ends with claiming US citizens are all sociopaths.

US citizenism will keep using the same approach as it has been using since inception.

The change is only a change in conditions, Indians are going extinct, Negroes are nearing resilience exhaustion and breaking point, Asians are already hamsters in the wheel.

US citizenism needs to be fed. The usual suspects are removed from the pages of times. So new food has to be found.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:55 | 2277584 Fukushima Sam
Fukushima Sam's picture

I'm with China-bot; lets put the "zen" back in US citizenism!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:31 | 2277690 LFMayor
LFMayor's picture

China. The one big chance your Heaven and earth mandate bullshit ever had ended when it self destructed by destroying the largest fleet on the globe.  Your own.  You pissed the chance away, tried to allay your inadequacies in opium and now you're regulated to whining about not calling the shots.  sucks to be you.

Even after the fall, it will still be better here.  Ask your nearest "party" representative if that's true, why don't you?

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:36 | 2277508 lolmao500
lolmao500's picture

Like any country in history... big country are taken over by thugs because the people have become wimps because they have too much to lose and not enough guts to say like the US founders did... pledge everything they had against the tyrants... 

Only a few percentage of people make a difference in the world. The majority just sits on the sidelines and goes with whoever is in power.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:36 | 2277514 chunga
chunga's picture


Nice clean head-shot Mr. Casey.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:47 | 2277516 JustObserving
JustObserving's picture

Unless the laws of physics mutated on that fateful day, and 3 steel-framed buildings fell as fast as grand pianos into their footprints and submicron dust, you severly underestimate the psychopathy of our psychopaths.  Many people do not know that the Patriot Act was ready long before 9/11.  And senators who were likely to slow its passage got anthrax in the mail (Daschle and Leahy).

Ous psychopaths are the best in the world - even after they have won Nobel prizes.

Praise the lord and pass the ammunition. God, like Superman, is an American

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:50 | 2277558 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

'God, like Superman, is an American'

                flag as poo-poo (1)

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:16 | 2277599 JustObserving
JustObserving's picture

Yes, just slightly over the top.  But then, we were talking about psychopaths who always have God on their side.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 22:55 | 2278067 New World Chaos
New World Chaos's picture

And before 9/11 there was JFK, RFK, Grandpappy Bush's fascist coup attempt, Waco, Oklahoma City, USS Liberty, Gulf of Tonkin, Ford pardoning Nixon, foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor, Iran-Contra, CIA drug smuggling, Operation Paperclip, MK-Ultra, etc, etc.  All of it served the sociopaths' agenda of control, none of it was punished, sociopaths see this, therefore the horror show gets worse over time.  Not punishing sociopaths is like kicking the can until the final blowup:  Nuclear 9/11 and WWIII.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 21:12 | 2278629 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

no idea why you're getting flak for claiming "God. . . is an American."

ask any amrkn, ask the troops who fight for "God". . . I'm doubtful you'll hear otherwise.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 13:54 | 2281058 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

JO, not to mention nanothermite in the rubble.

People who can't see that 911 was an inside job are seriously part of the problem, period.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:37 | 2277518 MrBinkeyWhat
MrBinkeyWhat's picture

Dear Mr. Casey,

I have followed your work and advice as best I can for some time now. (Mostly from  JFC! This is the plainest warning I have heard from anybody (except Tyler) on this for a long time.

I just read "Atlas Shrugged", and am now reading "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire".

I was always too busy "working" to read anything other than tech stuff before.

You are appreciated Sir!  Sorry I can't move to your gulch in Argentina. Family stuff. Loyal to the end.


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:04 | 2277613 cossack55
cossack55's picture

"No one leaves the escarpment alive"

                   Col ?      Cdr, 2nd ACR 1975  Hof, FRG

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 19:30 | 2278253 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

is that where jimJones got it from?

ok, ok, i'm running outa time:  uhnn...who is valKilmer?

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:39 | 2277523 tony bonn
tony bonn's picture

" I'm going to argue that the US government, in particular, is being overrun by the wrong kind of person..."

my god did you say a mouth full but it's a mouth full of golden truth.....the menace to which you refer is the bush crime syndicate, a foul conglomeration of vicious fiends who have been responsible for the murder of john kennedy all the way to 9/11 - see smartknowledgeu's posting of lars schall's article on insider trading on 9/11 and its connection with the bush criminals....

the real tragedy is the pervasive involvement of wall street trading on foreknowledge of the event.....juicy anecdote by catherine austin fitts highlights with the radiation the psychopathic behavior of wall street....

pay special attention to wirt walker iii and his wife sally - truly monster people and related to the bush's who gave them the foreknowledge - they probably helped plan 9/11...

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 13:57 | 2281064 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

Tony, let's not forget Marvin and the sad death of Bertha Champagne.


I'm just not sure that this type of sociopath hasn't been in charge here all along, frankly.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:45 | 2277540 EndTheMedia
EndTheMedia's picture

Western decline can be summed up in one sentence.

"If God does not exist, everything is permitted" -Dostoevsky's

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:49 | 2277760's picture

Reality makes its own rules. Hiding behind parables which inadequately interpret reality doesn't do anyone any good.

But Dostoyevsky was a fine novelist.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 18:03 | 2277985 Think for yourself
Think for yourself's picture

Maybe instead of saying that parables inadequately interpret reality, you should consider that you have inadequately interpreted the parable thus far? He's pretty much facing reality from my viewpoint.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 22:28 | 2278834's picture

Reality?  There is no invisible man who flies in the sky forever.

Most Christian morality can be supported through rational exposition. Ethical behavior does not require the promise of heaven or the threat of hell to back it up. These are examples of the flawed parables of which I spoke.

If one can rationally explain why theft and killing are disadvantageous, for example, why instead resort to the argument that morality progresses from an invisible supreme being?

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 01:30 | 2279408 Think for yourself
Think for yourself's picture

Hmmm. Your answer itself shows the failure to interpret that I talk about. Not that I even mentioned a christian god - I mean, I love Jesus, or at least, the words and attitudes which are attributed to him, but I'm no fan of the Church or any institutionalized religion for that matter.

There is no invisible man who flies in the sky forever.

Of course not (although to be fair we can't be sure). This concept of an individuated god is what I shirked from in my youth as a budding atheist - not because there is no more than that to spirituality, but because my understanding of religion was so limited that this is all I could conceive of religious beliefs. I saw the alternative as understanding how the universe could make sense by itself, rationally, hence I went to study physics.

Something that you seemed to have missed is that ethics can not be justified through rational exposition. Absolute rationalism becomes nihilistic. It suffers from Hegel's incompleteness theorem. If there is no supreme being, where does values, truth come from? Either there are none, or you define them yourself. If they come from yourself, every being has its own truth, its own values without any need for consistency and every other being might very well go fuck itself. You decide from your experience that life is not worth living and that you should terminate other beings to save them the trouble - if there is no common ground between us, how could I argue with you and try to convince you that I prefer living, so there is no need to exterminate me, thank you very much?

Under those circumstances everything falls in a relativist/existential nightmare, and there is no way for the universe to make sense.

By the way, tell me of anything you conceive as a rational value and I'll expose at which point you made an unspoken irrational assumption.

So I was studying the universe and wanted to find how it could make innate sense. And as a rational atheist who started to understand the null hypothesis, my first step towards a greater understanding was to redefine myself as an agnostic. The affirmation that god exists requires just as much proof as the affirmation that It doesn't.

But without a supreme being, it is impossible to define absolute references that can be used to establish a common ground. So I asked myself, as a physicist, what is the closest thing to a god that I could define? Something which is shared by all and could establish a meaningful link? I would have said the universe, spacetime, the rules that administrate it and all that, but even then there's no way to know whether that exists or not. Figment of the imagination and all that.

So I had to dig deeper for the root, and I ended up defining my working hypothesis for God. I perceive, therefore I am. That's before even thinking. Therefore I am consciousness, not mind, and this is the deepest I could go at the time - so let us say, Consciousness is God. My understanding of an holographic universe, spacetime computing itself in every single moment of its creation, was of the ultimate Consciousness, and in its deliciously fractal nature it was to be found at infinitely smaller levels, such as human scales. I saw that, according to my own definition, it was present in different intensities in every sentient being that I met, I grasped that it might be everywhere else as well, in ways I couldn't identify yet.

This was my first meeting with pantheism. I suddenly realized that religion could not simply be summarized by demeaning them and saying, oh, these guys believe in this superhero, those guys believe in that one, but it's all fiction anyway.

Wasn't it Aristotle who said, "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ? Once you do that you might start realizing that there are infinitely more subtle nuances than the vulgar generalizations you entertain.


Thu, 03/22/2012 - 01:49 | 2279452's picture

If there is no supreme being, where does values, truth come from?...But without a supreme being, it is impossible to define absolute references that can be used to establish a common ground.

Viable moral values progress from the realities of human existence. Just as a man must eat or sleep he must be free. Do you ask where hunger or weariness come from? They are part and parcel of the human condition. One does not need to imagine a God in order to explain hunger for food or a desire for sleep. Neither is it necessary to imagine a God to explain hunger for freedom and security.

This hunger for freedom and security is a shared condition. Each man's need is duplicated in his fellows and his natural rights are validated and reinforced by that shared condition. Therefore we rationally arrive at the natural laws: No man has a right to harm another person or his property. And any man has a right to protect his person or property with means which are in proportion to any threat made against them.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 04:13 | 2279650 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

fine.  we agree.  you postulate that as given at the beginning.  we agree to this, so this is what it means and we agree to that, too  GIVEN.  check

to say this is "naturalLaw"?  why?  it's just a standard covenantal agreement about property rights that "we" agree to, imo.  why go to "mumbo-jumbo"? 

if "no man has a right to harm another person or his property" AND we agree to that, then why would anyone make a "threat against another person or his property"?

he would not, unless he "broke the covenant"

and why would a person need a right to protect himself?

b/c another guy "broke the covenant", that's why!

so!  thank you!

i hadn't seen this when i responded below and asked to hear about this very thing

perhaps when you get calmed down about the property and/or person stuff you will someday wonder:

  1. what if the property is a corporation?
  2. and what if someone threatens the market share of the property/corporation?  or the profitabilty, "god" forbid?  would that be actionable? 
  3. and what if "we" disagreed about some of this natLaw, and some thought it "good" to threaten market share, while others thought it "bad" and then we couldn't agree  whether the response was proportional to the threat, or not, and then people have a lot of other stuff going on, too
  4. what if someone formed a corporation to market a "belief in god"?  and claimed it as "property", too?

maybe you should fuking pay him every time you get up on the soapbox and say: 

One does not need to imagine a God...
Neither is it necessary to imagine a God...

really, how much would you be willing to pay him for threatening his corporate "property" like that? "God" is clearly not your property!  what does naturalLaw demand?  we would call this:  NA LAW  Hahaha!

if people are uncomfortable with theological symbols, why not just play exactly the same "covenant game"  but instead of "new" and "old" covenants, have natLaw covenant-symbols and give crockett the pulpit? 

fuk!  i don't care, crockett!  go for it!  just don't forget to finish with the triple-lindy, ok? 

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 11:49 | 2280558's picture

Dude, you're the one who isn't calm. Go back and read what I wrote. Natural law is based on the physical conditions of human existence. It's founded in observable aspects of human necessity and interaction.

Corporations are simply collections of people. The same natural law applies to people interacting as corporations or with corporation as in any other case. It's not that difficult. For example, no one , not even a corporation, could claim a right to market share so there is nothing to protect in a manner that involves use of force. Market share of an individual, partnership or corporation can only be protected through innovation and elbow grease.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 13:50 | 2281036 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

i think i did read what you wrote!

this isn;t too difficult for me, crockett  Hahaha

it is pretty simple and straightforward and it isn't something you discovered except by reading locke and those who follow him

it doesn't matter what you "name" your observations oir what you say/pretend they are "based on":  you "agree" to what you see and a "covenant of rights and responsibilities" and this is no longer NA LAW, it is a community covenant based on (X) where (X) = NA LAW

as i've already said, what you are doing is nowhere near as "unique" and wtf you think you are doing!

you are making a social contract/covenant

corporations are NOT "simply" collections of people,  they are legal structures, with byLAWs and rules of private governance

if you don't wanna have "protecting my market share" different from "protecting my sleeping bag and cheetos" i really don't care

as i said, go ahead and have fun!  this isn't bad stuff, it is good stuff, and if it is important to you, i respect that

i'm glad you're working with these ideas; rationalism and theEnlightenment are fine subjects for learning about humanity and its prospects for self-governance

however, no matter what pinnacle of enlightenedRationalism you reach, you will still not be able to jump over your own knees

if you know that at the beginning of your journey, you may be able to learn something, maybe even see something "new", at least for yourself

if you don't learn this till the end, it will be about the only thing you learn, but at least it is not nothing

neither are theParables, of course, but i doubt if you'll ever have a "reason" why they would interest you, especially if you've never actually tried to let them address you

ain't it funny how the night moves?

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 14:17 | 2281182's picture

Why do you believe that I have a desperate desire to suggest that my observations are unique and why would such a desire invalidate my arguments?

My position is obviously not unique because it is based on man's natural desire for freedom and security. These are universal concerns which when viewed and discussed rationally form the basis for an easily agreed on set of natural laws.

Parables can not be a foundation for peaceful interaction because every group has their own parables which usually involve god given rights to kill and steal from other groups. This is pure fantasy. If some people insist on adhering to theological constructs to justify their existence and actions that's fine with me. But beyond that Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc must be able to agree on a basic set of natural principles which are dependent on rational observation with which all can agree in order to promote peaceful interaction not only between individuals but also across cultures.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 11:59 | 2280569 Think for yourself
Think for yourself's picture

I told you that from any so-called rational value I could underline your unspoken assumptions. It isn't hard to do with the way you present them.

 "Viable moral values progress from the realities of human existence." What, pray tell me, constitutes the realities of human existence? The reality of human existence is that each of us has a unique experience, bringing specific lessons and challenges that are different to everyone. Previously acquired lessons tint the color of the glasses that each wear and every new page of their life story in interpreted according to person-specific understanding of their existence. So the reality of existence, seen from a rational standpoint, is that every existence is unique. You might be able to extrapolate values from your personal experience, but any other being will extract other, not-necessarily consistent values from his. You have to look for a common ground deeper than that.

"Just as a man must eat or sleep he must be free." I don't see any justification for this. You didn't even try. This sentence in itself is an assumption and not rational at all.

"They are part and parcel of the human condition. One does not need to imagine a God in order to explain hunger for food or a desire for sleep." Indeed. Man's existence as a biological machine requires maintenance according to its mechanisms. Life being self-assembling/reproducing local complexity, it must feed itself on external sources of low entropy to maintain its artificially-induced local concentration of low entropy. This is where hunger comes in. Just a machine needing its gasoline and oil.

But to say that "Neither is it necessary to imagine a God to explain hunger for freedom and security"? If it isn't, please demonstrate. This sentence in itself is again an unjustified assumption. I see very little rationalism in your whole argument.

I've seen many little machines that were cheerily moving along just fine without freedom or security. Homeless dudes who did not know when their next meal would be or whether they would be jumped by other bums during the night because they found a warm jacket in a trash can. Still cheery as fuck. Men who decided to submit to the dictates of the system, or that of a wife, or that of their friends, and are perfectly little happy robots living the life that other dictate for them. Who are you to say that these values are shared if every experience and therefore understanding is unique and being-specific? Can you speak for others?

You say "Therefore we rationally arrive at the natural laws". But that is false. You build your conclusion on unjustified assumptions that necessarily lead you to the end of a cycle in your circular reasoning.

This is not to say that I disdain  your "natural laws". It's only that I get at them in a different way, and coming from somewhere different, the implied meanings of the words are different.

You have to rationally try to identify an absolute common ground. Since you cannot do that, rationality ultimately defeats itself; this is the incompleteness theorem which I was mentioning in my earlier post (you might want to check it out). No consistent system of logical axioms can prove all truths nor prove its own internal consistency. There are necessarily unspoken assumptions.

What you need to realize is that you have to make the judgment call of which unspoken assumptions you shall build your mental edifice on, and the whole building shifts accordingly. My working hypothesis was that the way we are related is that we are all consciousness, the seer of all experiences, sharing a common seemingly causal reality-verse. This is my Absolute (working hypothesis, I don't pretend to say I know) and, once you can entertain more subtle ideas of God than what you demonstrated so far, you might say that I therefore see consciousness as God. This drives me to fundamentally different conclusions than your assumption of a shared physical condition. 

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 14:09 | 2281149 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

he hasn't yet seen the mechanicalities, imo

his 'excalibur is still stuck in the rock':  the symbols are concrete;  but he is choosing his symbols and working them

so, we've all put ourselves out here, and i say:  grrreat! 

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 22:59 | 2278447 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

what parable? 

fyodor is just talking about what he and everyone around him sees every day, and commenting on it  [ike an old blogger, L0L]

even in translation, the idea of:  does god "exist"?  yes or no?  while seemingly the "bottom line, here" may have already been provincial to him when he said this, if you can imagine a 'fine novelist' being able to put something that complexly ironic into a short, little, "russian" epigram

or, even if you can't, actually

but fine points aside, this is just a simple:  if no, then, uhnn, by the way,... uhnn,...

freud tackled the psychological aspects of this dynamic, as he understood it, in 1929 [cililizationAndItsDiscontents] and later, in '37 [mosesAndMonotheism] develops the psych-historicity that moses was murdered in an uprising of the very egyptian men he, also an egyptian, had led to freedom, and that their offspring "inherited the guilt" and assuaged that guilt by believing moses would be back as the messiah, and it is the guilt of killing moses which drives jews to religion, to this very day...

...i think ole siggy he may have been into the bag pretty deep there...  but his stuff was widely read at the time by all, i'm sure!  it was trans. to english in '39 (!)

he probably coulda bought lichtenstein for what he paid for the coke he shot up to figure that one out, BiCheZ!  L0L!!!  but at least he wasn't a fuking degenerate gambler like fyodorD, eh?

this early coke-as-rationalism phase in europe also gives us sherlock,  shooting up the 7% solution around his various adventures such as hanging out in yeOldeOpiumDen disguised as a pirate, m/l, gathering intel, ..., ..., ... trying to perceive  that insaneMoriarty in the sign along the trail..., ..., because everything is not permitted and some "rules" are much more reliable than others, such a gravity...,  self-defense,...  having fun,...  certain death,...  L0L,...

thins go better with _____ <zeroHedge> !

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 23:28 | 2279077 EndTheMedia
EndTheMedia's picture

moses was murdered in an uprising of the very egyptian men he, also an egyptian, had led to freedom, and that their offspring "inherited the guilt" and assuaged that guilt by believing moses would be back as the messiah, and it is the guilt of killing moses which drives jews to religion, to this very day...

Sounds like a drug induced delusion. This only makes sense if you’re on enough cocaine to kill a small horse.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 02:37 | 2279541 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

my point exactly

if you read civilization and then moses from 8 years later, you will have drFreud's clinical record of pretty much that? 

sounds like you've not been "on coke"

dude!  get some peruvian flake and go out and have some drinks and dance to papa's got a brand new bag...  check back in about six months from now and let us know how it's goin, ok?

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 00:51 | 2279340's picture

what parable?


The parables of the New Testament. Dostoevsky was a Christian and so when he mentions God he is talking about the Christian God. Those parables are not necessary and in fact are a distraction from any analysis of essential moral principles. I therefore disagree with Dostoevsky's assertion as quoted above.

A shared moral code is necessary for a society but God is not necessary when reason and natural law fully inform morality even (or especially) in the absence of any God.

For what's it's worth I thoroughly enjoyed Crime and Punishment, The Brother's Karamazov and The Idiot. I never finished The Possessed but as I have acquired a better understanding of socialism since my last attempt perhaps I'll give it another go.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 02:05 | 2279492 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

"If God does not exist, everything is permitted" -Dostoevsky's

i thought you meant this was a parable;  of course, that isn't so

no one had mentioned the parables of the NT that i saw;  you have been misinformed, and possibly even brainwashed about them, b/c most of them make no mention of "god";  or hadn't you noticed?

the fact thay many fools interpret them that way, theologically, should not effect a person who has a sense of what they mean and how and why they are there, at all, really

no, they are not necessary for moral principles b/c they are not about moral principles in the standard "religious" or even "secular" sense

and dostoevsky neither mentioned them nor alluded to them, here

obviously, if the parables could be understood theologically, they would make "sense" but that is neither their purpose nor function, imo

that fact that you don't understand them doesn't really matter

the fact that you pretend to undertand a lot about them only serves as your own barrier, really: b/c you seem to think they are "about a christian god" it seems you may have been fed some extreme bullshit about them, and believed it too!  but people throw out the baby with the bathwater all the time, or we wouldn't even have the expression, right? 

next time you happen to be reading luke's gospel, for example, read all the parables with two ideas in mind:

  1. slewie sez these are not about a theological "beliefs" or 'faith' in any "god" [at least try reading them 1_time when they don't hafta be about that, ok?]
  2. slewie sez they are not given in the right order [ most of the NT "teachings" are not given in the proper 'order';  but they are at least "given"]

but a lot of people were fed a lot of theological bullshit;  and they were indoctrinated that this'n'that is what this here stuff and parables means

of those who recognized the B.S. as such, virtually all of that sub-group decided the parables were bullshit and especially as moral teachings: how fuking styooopid is that stuff?  but then a few hung around and filtered thru the patterns there for other possible "meanings" and who knows what they came up with? 

well, they do, i'll bet, but for them to think that either the "faithful" who "stayed" or those who heard the bullshit and "left" would give a shit about "non-theological meanings" is pretty fuking funny, and yet one never knows, really, who is gonna "get" what at the end of the day, but no matter wtf anybody believes, few means few

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 02:35 | 2279545's picture

Your post is a great example of the superiority of my position. Practical morality can be explained in a few short sentences. Why would anyone want to get distracted by thousands of pages of moldy religious texts and another hundred million pages of interpretations of those texts when natural law can be expressed clearly and concisely without resorting to supernatural mumbo jumbo?

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 03:00 | 2279560 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

c'mon crockett!

i didn't say anything about "practical morality"!  stop that shit!  something else, now that you've learned, but is "good"?

nor 1000s of pages of anything;  my only "reading" was just the parables in one short book;  you mentioned parables, first, not me, L0L!!!  you seemed so brainwashed about them, i just thought you might try looking at 1/2 hours' worth of them without buying into whatever it is you carry that you have you have "learned";  but i didn't think that would be ok with you, as i said, that there would be anything there of interest to someone writing here like you are is just fuking funny

now you wanna go "supernatural mumbo-jumbo"?  i just spent a long time telling you that wasn't there, for me, but why not get even funnier?

from the superiority of my position.?  what a farce you are! 

no one would want to be "distracted" from expressing natural law clearly and concisely!  who is gonna be expressing that?  you?  when?  you can't be fuking serious!  hilarious!

gimme a coupla paras of "natural law...expressed clearly and concisely";  let me give you the floor for your debut! 

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 11:42 | 2280538's picture

I'm talking about practical morality as opposed to morality based on imagination. I am allowed to make my own argument, you know.

If you question the ability of humans to discuss natural law or any other topic in a rational manner then I don't know what to tell you.

Thu, 03/22/2012 - 14:51 | 2281302 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

yes, i know and i have no problem w/ what you are doing here, crockett, b/c i recognize a sincere effort from you

however, i do question your ability to discuss theParables in a rational manner

i told you @ point 1:  they didn't hafta be interpreted theologically and they do not hafta be seen as  a "system of morality based of theology" or even as a morality system

if you did not come to terms with those facts today: a day is just a day;  you had a different agenda

it is certainly important to develop the 'rational' aspect, but  it can be tyrannical, and even insanely, sociopathically, so



Tue, 04/17/2012 - 22:17 | 2353389 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:46 | 2277546 Dragline
Dragline's picture

While he makes some interesting and valid points, it is clear that the author does not know what he is talking about when it comes to psychopathy and its various forms.  Thus, he falls into the trap of taking a label "sociopath" -- a very popular word right now -- and redefining it to apply to things he opposes, some of which fit the definition and some that don't.  This is pop psychology at its poppiest.

Does he know that libertarian icon Ayn Rand thought that a psychopath represented the perfect man? See I bet he would not like that conception -- it fights with his world view.  In reality, there is probably no positive or negative correlation between psychopaths and libertarians. You could be both or neither as easily as one or the other.  Grabbing 80/20 from Pareto and applying is blindly to this subject is just wrong as well.  The percentage is fortunately much lower, even if more destructive.

The research in this area is well-known and the Hare test named after Robert Hare is also well-known and worth studying.  See The documentary "Fishead" is becoming a modern classic in this area -- link is on that page.  Watch it if you really want to understand what psychopathy and sociopaths are and what they do.  The permeate both the governemental and non-governmental world.

The author would do better to consult experts before he pretends to be one.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:55 | 2277769's picture

Rand did not exalt Hickman. His story simply presented an idea to her which she developed in a way completely unrelated to the killer. Intelligent people do this kind of thing all the time. One hears a story and the mind wonders and in time new ideas are developed which have no relation to the triggering mechanism other than the happy accident of inspiration. For example, Newton did not profess that planetary bodies were in fact apples.


" '[My hero is] very far from him, of course. The outside of Hickman, but not the inside. Much deeper and much more. A Hickman with a purpose. And without the degeneracy. It is more exact to say that the model is not Hickman, but what Hickman suggested to me.' "

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:47 | 2277547 BandGap
BandGap's picture

It is what the non-sociopathic people will do once the SHTF that concerns me.  What this (long) article points out is that sociopaths are in places of control of the system.  Scary shit, the system is big and secret. There is a justification, or law, or rule or regulation for almost anything to be allowed by those in control. This is here and now.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:48 | 2277549 i_call_you_my_base
i_call_you_my_base's picture

I've always said if you really want to be a police man or a politician you shouldn't be one.

In US politics, one of the big issues is that you have to play the game to win. Playing the game these days means pandering, engaging in quid pro quo deals, graft, etc. Those that have some form of moral compass cannot play the game, because they cannot stomach engaging in such practices. Same in finance occupations in general. If you have principles you're immediately filtered out.

Another big issue is the rise of the professional manager. People who have never worked in the fields in which they manage. They don't relate to actualy people, they don't understand them, and the certainly don't empathize. To them people are widgets, to be manipulated and controlled, like a business process. This is taught in business school environments and then reinforced in the workplace.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:52 | 2277572 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Experiments on the public have already been conducted on the public through Rockfellar Foundations, etc. for decades on propaganda and mass opinion-making in local markets like Chicago.


In that case, they confirmed that repetitive emotional arguments and messaging works best for propaganda -- that's why we don't get factual arguments for global warming propaganda, we get pictures of iceberg stranded Polar Bears with demonstrably false claims they are dying off.

Due to the "Potzel Effect" people will eventually fade out facts and reason. Instead, they will tend to retain the images and arguments with the emotional content.

"Enemies of the state" and future targets in the current context are easily spotted from afar. They are the ones being demonized which makes it acceptable to do unspeakable things to them when the time comes. The evil 1% will become the evil 10%, and then the evil 25%  -- because there will never be enough.  

In the Soviet Union only 10% were communist party members in good standing running the whole show. Everybody else was fair game.  

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 15:54 | 2277577 Pairadimes
Pairadimes's picture

Systems are always perfectly designed for the results they obtain. The state of affairs today reveals the flaws in our system, if any care to make at least a half-hearted attempt to look for them. A strong case can be made for the observation that some in government roles are sociopaths, but this is symptomatic, not root cause.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:02 | 2277607 skunzie
skunzie's picture

This reminds me of the Book/Movie Fahrenheit 451, where, when they couldn't catch Montag, the state simply showed an enacted scene of him being gunned down.  The state declared victory and the masses were suitably warned.

·         “Alea iacta est”—The die is cast.— a Latin phrase attributed by Suetonius  on January 10, 49 BC as he led his army across the River Rubicon in northern Italy. With this step, he entered Italy at the head of his army in defiance and began his long civil war against Pompey and the Optimates.


·         “Mundus vult decipi – ergo decipiatur.”  The world wants to be deceived, therefore let it be deceived. – Petronius, a Roman satirist from the first century, A.D.


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:04 | 2277611 rosiescenario
rosiescenario's picture

Wow...Casey chooses 'mushrooms' just as Adolf did in Mein Kampf..." "the eternal mushroom

of humanity - Jews"...


Aside from that, perhaps, Freudian slip, the article certainly rings all too true.


911 has very much served to catalyze what was already the creeping take over of our government by a few special interest groups who finance the election of our sciopaths and their minions.


And just as in Germany when Hitler ascended, it can certainly happen here. The Ku Klux Klan was a major political force in the U.S. during that period of time.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:08 | 2277624 rosiescenario
rosiescenario's picture

.fyi...."During the early 1920s, the Klan helped elect 16 U.S. Senators and many Representatives and local officials. By 1924, when the Klan had reached its peak in numbers and influence, it claimed to control 24 of the nation's 48 state legislatures"

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:07 | 2277615 W10321303
W10321303's picture


[© Copyright 2001. From The Wilderness Publications, All Rights Reserved. May be recopied, distributed or posted on the worldwide web for non-profit purposes only.]

FTW, December 6, 2001 -- On October 9th, FTW broke a story on insider trading connected to the 9-11 attacks on the World Trade Center that sparked worldwide controversy. In that story we reported how the Israeli Herzliyya Institute for Counterterrorism had documented that unknown individuals -- with accurate foreknowledge of the attacks -- had purchased an obvious and unusually large number of "put" options on United and American Airlines shortly before the attacks.

 Additional companies hit hard by the insider trading included Axa Re(insurance) and Munich Re as well as American investment giants Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley.

 Put options are essentially a bet that a stock's price will fall abruptly. The seller, having entered into a time-specific contract with a buyer, does not need to own the actual shares at the time the contract is purchased. Therefore, if a holder of the put option has a contract to sell a stock such as American Airlines for (e.g.) $100 a share on a Friday and the stock falls to $50 on Wednesday, they can purchase the stock, sell it on Friday and double their money. The person on the other end of the contract (the call) has an obligation to buy the shares at the agreed upon price. The bank handling the transaction as a broker is the only entity knowing the identities of both parties.

FTW also revealed that the A.B. Brown (Alex Brown) investment arm of the banking giant Deutschebank/A.B. Brown had been headed until 1998 by the man who is now the Executive Director of the Central Intelligence Agency - A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard. In fact, Krongard is but one name in a long history of CIA interconnections to stock trading and the world's financial markets. We also discussed, in detail, the evidence indicating that the CIA and other intelligence agencies monitor stock trading in real time for the purpose of identifying potential attacks of any nature that might damage the U.S. economy.

 The original FTW story is located at:

 Critics of FTW's initial story - not having read any of five related stories dating back to an October 2000 piece on PROMIS software - claimed that we had not made the links to establish culpability. But we knew that the links were there, that our case was solid, and that new evidence would not go undiscovered for long.

 Now, investigative reporter Tom Flocco digs deep and strikes pay dirt in a three-part series that reveals not only deeper links between the CIA, Wall Street and the insider trades of 9-11, but also discloses that a key executive at Deutschebank - an American - became, just weeks before the attacks, a convicted felon. His crime: conspiracy to launder drug money to arrange the purchase of U.S. weapons - in association with two Pakistanis who also attempted to acquire nuclear bomb components - for use by Islamic fundamentalist terrorists. - MCR

This is one of the best, if not the BEST places to look, only for those unafraid, who want to know the TRUTH!

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:43 | 2277929 smiler03
smiler03's picture

This Zerohedge article from today (March 21st 2012) concerns the same events....

"Below, please find a fascinating excerpt from the book “Mordanschlag 9/11. Eine kriminalistische Recherche zu Finanzen, Öl und Drogen” ("Assassination 9/11: A criminalistic research on finance, oil and drugs", Schild Verlag publishing house), by my friend, German journalist Lars Schall. Mr. Schall has been kind enough to allow my to reprint this excerpt here via Scribd.

Is there any truth in the allegations that informed circles made profits in the financial markets in connection to the attacks of September 11, 2001? More than a decade later, the German financial journalist Lars Schall examines and sheds some light on this still unresolved and unanswered mystery."


Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:07 | 2277619 JR
JR's picture

What’s next? Will the war-mongering, Zionist, bloodthirsty, pretend Christians defame the name of Christ in the name of Israel?  Now comes the tissue of lies from political Zionist activist, once a campaigner for Christian values, Gary Bauer, donning the black apparel of the deceiver and the leader of the sheep to the slaughter.

Says author of Marching Toward Hell, Michael Scheuer, who recently resigned after 22 years at the CIA, on Lew Rockwell today: I watched a television commercial paid for by the "Emergency Committee for Israel" in which Mr. Gary Bauer spends a minute or so defaming Dr. Paul as: a spinner of 9/11 conspiracies, an America-hater, an opponent of the U.S. military, a friend of Iran, and – that most lethal of all sins – a foe of "our ally Israel." Now, that is a lot of lies to pack into a minute, but as a crazed-Christian one cannot expect the war-mongering Mr. Bauer to know that one of God’s commandments is "Thou shall not lie.”

If you can stomach the commercial, here it is >

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:59 | 2277790's picture

I read the article earlier but could not bring myself to watch the video.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:14 | 2277640 JustObserving
JustObserving's picture

Please,the right word is Pyschopath not Sociopath.  Sociopaths never get power over others - they are generally failures on the fringes of society:

"Sociopathy and psychopathy share many traits, which is the main source of confusion for differentiating them in psychology. Traits that sociopaths and psychopaths share include:

  • a disregard for the rights of others
  • a failure to feel remorse or guilt
  • a disregard for laws and social mores
  • a tendency to display violent behavior and emotional outbursts

Though not all psychology professionals agree on what exactly differentiates sociopaths from psychopaths, among those who believe each are separate disorders there is a list of definite differences. Sociopaths tend to be nervous and easily agitated. They are likely to be uneducated and live on the fringes of society, unable to hold down a steady job or stay in one place. Some sociopaths form attachments to an individual or group, though they have no regard for society in general. In the eyes of others, sociopaths appear clearly disturbed. Any crimes committed by a sociopath tend to be disorganized and spontaneous.

Psychopaths, on the other hand, often have charming personalities. They are manipulative and easily gain people’s trust. They have learned to mimic emotion and so appear “normal” to other people. Psychopaths are often educated and hold steady jobs. Some are so good at manipulation and mimicry that they can have families and other long-term relationships without those around them ever suspecting their true nature."

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:15 | 2277641 W10321303
W10321303's picture 21, 2007 - 54 min - Uploaded by talkingsticktv
Interview with John Perkins author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" Part II of this interview at ...

It's Worse! You can buy the book, used, at Amazon for $5.68. (Deflation)

Corporate Malfeasance and Why It Corrupts

I hope you’ll take time to read my piece on corporate malfeasance and how it corrupts our system. Below is an excerpt from the full article: “Our government continues to stay in step with the corporations whose names are often synonymous with predatory capitalism, while our nation’s citizens bear the weight of the continued malfeasance.” To... [Read more of this review]

John Perkins Official Web Site

1 day ago – Yoko Ono Cites “Confessions of An Economic Hitman” In OMagazine. What a great honor to have Yoko Ono cite “Confessions of An Economic ...

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:18 | 2277657 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

"Libertarians, who tend to be more intelligent, better informed and very definitely more independent than average, are going to be in a touchy situation as the crisis deepens."

Clearly, to achieve the status of ideologue, you need some extraordinary talent. I'm pretty sure it's not emotional intelligence or powers of observation, logical coherence etc. It seems to be a talent for building platonic "tall fences" in your mind that never have and never will exist for a planet crawling with the intrinsically social, collective, homo sapiens.

A two-legged dog trying to protect a bone believing it's food.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 17:03 | 2277801's picture

Libertarians are the most social of creatures as we interact only on a voluntary basis. Only a libertarian will honestly agree to disagree. Those who believe that they are more gregarious because they want to injure those with whom they disagree suffer from a false sense of entitlement. They are the truly selfish ones in the spirit in which the word is most often interpreted.

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:18 | 2277659 Atlantis Consigliore
Atlantis Consigliore's picture

Las Vegas gaming industry calls them COCKROACHES


ARE cockroaches.... 

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:25 | 2277675 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

Just the other day this idea struck me:  Pass a bill in Congress that requires testing for psychopathic tendencies and ban anyone who fails from employment in government, finance, or law enforcement/security.


There.  Fixed. 

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:47 | 2277754 onebir
onebir's picture

Even if the sociopaths could be persuaded to legislate themselves out of their 'careers', the (psycho/sociopathic) psychiatrists would eventually change the definition of sociopathy to let them  back in.

(Otherwise, it would be the end of 'history'...)

Wed, 03/21/2012 - 16:25 | 2277680 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

I have also been tossing the term PSYCHOPATHOCRACY around for almost a year.  So, please, steal this look.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!