More than Bush: The U.S. on the Couch

Many people rightly decry the obvious pathology of GWB, from his childhood enjoyment of exploding frogs with fireworks, progressing apparently to the personal organzation of "harsh interrogations" in secret prisons around the world. (You honestly didn't think that Abu Grahub and Gitmo were the only ones did you??).

But Bush is only the final expression, the fruit of a long decent into societal sociopathy. Even if you aren't a clinical sociopath, you've had to adopt some of their strategies just to survive. Dr. Lobaczewski's Political Ponerology will go a long way to helping you understand how we got to this terrible place and how, just possibly, we might get out. Comments are courtesy of the ever insightful team at SOTT

Blue Ibis

*************************************************************************
USA: Sociopath Nation

The Daily Burkeman 1
Thu, 15 May 2008 06:23 EDT

In writing yesterday's post on a few basic operating truisms of American foreign policy I was reminded of a blog post that compared the underlying ideas and motivations of US foreign policy to the malignant dementia that laid inside the Virginia Tech killer, Cho Seung-Hui.

Re-reading that post by Arthur Silber (which I highly recommend you read in full) I decided to see if there was any relation between how the US acts abroad and the clinical personality attributes of a sociopath.

I found this bullet list for profiling a sociopath. Let's take a look and see if there are any match ups.

Manipulative and Conning

They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.

Ding. First match. The US does not even recognize defending oneself from US attack as permissible. We are a country that snatches people off the streets in sovereign foreign countries and spirits them out illegally to be tortured and perhaps murdered in the gulags and dungeons of third world client states. Other nations have no rights. Iran's right to nuclear power under signed treaty? Simply ignored by the US as it violates the Nuclear non proliferation treaty with complete impunity and even strong arms the UN to put mild sanctions on Iran for absolutely no justified reason. Afghanistan asks that the US provide evidence of OBL's complicity in 9/11 before they hand him over in accordance with ancient diplomatic protocols? Ignored and America was outraged that we were even asked to comply with such long established standards in diplomacy. What the US does is always permissible.

We recognize no bounds on our actions- even our own laws. Torture? Not torture when the US does it. Geneva convention? Ignored. We are not bound by what the rest of the world must be bound by.

How about the need to dominate and humiliate their victims? One need take no further look than to Saddam Hussein being shabbily humiliated (again- against the Geneva convention) as he was paraded before American Telescreens like a captured ape, humiliated repeatedly in captivity with leaks about his habits and behaviors, and then his disgusting execution at the hands of his political domestic enemies in a circus like atmosphere. But if one needs to look further then see also Slobodan Milosevic and Manuel Noreiga. And then, of course, is the torture regime personally approved by the President's men that has sexual humiliation and degradation as centerpieces and which continues on today unabated and quite illegally (and what the President says in a signing statement doesn't make it legal).

Pathological Lying

Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.

An obvious match that almost deserves no comment. The lies, obvious lies, insulting lies are perhaps the most prominent thing one notices about this adminstration. (Note- when I mean "one" I mean people who are not cool aiding Bushbots. BOTS are too far removed from anything resembling reality to even consider them as sentient humans). They even lie about their lies.

But it isn't just the administration. It is all of the Beltway and our elite and most Americans who have managed to ignore the evidence of experience and still insist on operating from an elaborate complex web of lies in foreign policy that date well back into the 80's. And as all actions taken by the US (especially in Iraq) are based upon these lies- they are DOOMED to yet more failure.

And what is "nation building" itself if not the ultimate form of lying to oneself and attributing to yourself superhero powers?

Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt

In this administration? Remorse? Shame? Guilt? You got to be kidding me. Not a spec. But this isn't just an attribute of the Bush Junta. This is endemic throughout American society. Remorse, shame, and guilt are things to be overcome in therapy in American society. They are emotions to be squelched with happy pills. They are weaknesses. They are "unfair".

But keeping this strictly limited to a discussion of our political class- those are emotions that are only assumed as a last resort and quite disingenuously and only if all other "options" failed first- those other "options" being . . . denial, lying, cries of hypocrisy, and counter accusations (almost always false and always besides the point) against your accusers.

Grandiose Sense of Self

Do any other countries refer to themselves as the "indispensable nation"? As a "Shining city on a Hill?" As the "last best hope of mankind?" Left, Right, liberal, conservative, Republican or Democrat. America is the center of the world. To our elite- America is the culmination of all human societal evolution. We are what was intended by whatever force controls destiny! We judge the actual worth of every other country and culture on Earth to how closely or distantly they are from matching up to American civilization. We are the benchmark for the world.

Comment: As myth goes, actually Israel is the "benchmark for the world", America comes next. Sorry...

Sociopath America doesn't give a turd about the rest of the world. Doesn't care what happens in it and is only dimly aware an outside world exists. And what there is of this slender reed of ignorant knowledge of the outside world is about "enemies" seeking to "kill us".

Events that occur outside this country are only of interest to Americans insofar as they involve us in even a slight way. Burma cyclone? There cannot be a story about it without literally half of it being about us and our reaction to it and how awesome we are to "care".

Comment: The US government goes to great lengths to show it cares!

Anyway- I digress a bit. Back to the "indispensable nation". Let's use Maddie Albright as an example of standard insano sociopath rhetoric that routinely pours forth from the mouths of our politicians:

If we have to use force, it is because we are America. We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall. We see further into the future.

Yikes. Let's put that into the mouth of a co-worker at the corporate cubby hole slave pen you toil away at? You are eating lunch at the food court and all of a sudden George, the quiet dumpy guy from accounting, says:

"If I have to use force, it is because I am me. I am the indispensable employee. I stand tall. I see further into the future."

I don't know about you but my reaction to George's statement would be to report his demented ass to HR and plan an escape route from the office cube maze for when he goes on a workplace killing spree. But when such insane Cho Hui Seung lines come out of the mouths of our elite Politicians we don't bat an eye and never think for a second how this is viewed by the rest of the world.

And that Albright quote is pretty tame fare actually for a Sociopath America politician. Bush claims God instructs him to attack nations! For a more rabid sociopath performance see this speech by Zell Miller at the 2004 GOP convention. That speech is a perfect synopsis of the American pysche. Fully deranged beyond measure, utterly lacking in empathy, angry, paranoid, grandiose . . . a clinical text book example of a sociopath. By the way I am not saying Albright is a sociopath. Most of our politicians aren't (though there are a far higher percentage of such malignant personalities among them than in the general population.) She wouldn't dream of saying that about herself specifically and I doubt she exhibits in her personal life any of the major warning signs of a sociopath personality disorder.

But when it comes to the collective conscious of many Americans and our national self image- it is cuckoo time. We are stark raving mad. We are criminally insane. We accept statements about ourselves and the country from politicians that go far beyond just garden variety narcissism.

Shallow Emotions

Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person.

Several months ago a security cam tape emerged of a young mother, whose 4 year old had been on a wild tantrum, spraying the child with the low pressure power washer at a "do-it-yourself" carwash. At roughly the same time a peer reviewed academic/medical study placed the number of Iraqi civilian premature deaths since the American invasion at 1 million souls.

The study received almost no MSM coverage. The sprayed child however outraged Americans from coast to coast and was broadcast ad nauseum for over a week.

This is typical. DC's little proxy state in the ME, Israel, murders 1800 Lebanese civilians from the air and the country yawns. Iran's President says "gays" don't exist in his country and it is national talk radio cud for days.

What of government itself and not just society at large in this regard? Well, let's see; while George Bush basically violates entire swaths of laws and provisions of the constitution- while evidence lies exposed on the floor of his myriad crimes and even treason Congressmen and Senators are preening before cameras while badgering baseball players about what sorts power bars they eat and shakes they drink.

I could sit here all day and write lists of the truly monumental trivia Congress finds the time to "investigate" while a President brings us back to an era of legal witch doctorism and concentrations of political power not seen since the Pharaohs. But I won't bore you to death.

There is more, much more! This is just the appetizer of what could end up being a three parter. . . . stay tuned for "USA: Sociopath Nation, Part Two", no later than Monday . . .

USA: Sociopath Nation Part II

I said I would post Part II of "USA: Sociopath Nation" by no later than Monday . . . but forgive me as my sustenance must come before this blog.

Where were we? Ah yes, listing the clinical attributes and behaviors of a text book sociopath to those of the United States federal government and to a lessor extent society at large.

Well, let's jump right back in . . .

Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, [and no concern for the impression on others this attitude produces.]

Does there exist a country more convinced of its brilliance and more sure of its power to achieve literally anything? Our political elite recognizes no limits to its power, no limits to what is within its purview.

What isn't the business of the United States is the question, not {what is?}. I posted recently about how the Pentagon has literally divided up the world into strategic "Commands" and assigned a whole bureaucracy to each one, including a parallel diplomatic division to the civilian State Department. Every square inch of real estate and every cubic meter of water on this planet is covered by one of these "Command" zones.

A cyclone hits Burma {Myanmar} and the junta doesn't grant the US military a free pass in and out of the country for "relief" operations? Why then! It is time for our most serious and respected of pundits to float invasion and nation building plans! Nothing is not our business and nothing - including managing and transforming a country our elite know even less about than Iraq (if that is even possible)- is beyond our capability.

Here we have Robert Kaplan, having learned absolutely nothing clamoring and baying for a nation building war against Iraq, actually toying with the idea of invading and nation building Burma as well. Don't worry though. He appears to have read a whole Wikipedia entry on Burma before he wrote this column.

My favorite all time column that perfectly encapsulates this insanely blithe attitude toward managing distant peoples and nations and cultures though has to be "Exporting Switzerland, The model Iraq needs to follow" by the boy wonder of National Review, Jonah Goldberg. This column, which you must read to believe, written shortly after the formal shooting "war" with Saddam's army had ended in April of 2003 is depressingly perfect for this example of the "all-knowing" and "all-powerful" attributes of the sociopath. Goldberg just announces that now that the war is won he thinks- abra cadabra, presto, that Iraq should be made into Switzerland!

Oh ok Jonah. Why didn't we think of that for Detroit? Yeah. Thank you Jonah. Now sit down. It is finger painting time! Good lord! And I used to read that magazine with relish every two weeks for 15 years.

Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause.

We can find out the names, including middle initial, of every American soldier who has been killed in Iraq in seconds. We can also find out exactly where he was killed, what day, what hour, and the circumstances under which he died. We can find out numerous info about American wounded in Iraq. How many, what types of wound, what sorts of treatment they are receiving . . . the amount of info and data available to us on American casualties in Iraq is staggering.

But Iraqi dead? Nothing. We "don't do body counts" for them. They are so worthless to us we don't even track how many have died. Well- some websites do but not our government officially. Bush once said he thought it was something like 30 thousand had died. That was 2 years ago. And that of course was a laughable underestimation. Iraq has been destroyed. Our government does not keep count and when independent studies come out right wing groups attack them with sophistry and spray rhetorical turd mist around their numbers while offering ludicrous numbers they pulled out of their asses. All this time - our government and military doesn't say anything which tells us all we need to know about who is telling the truth. About Afghanistan civilian dead we know even less. Somalia? Less still. Millions displaced - perhaps as much as 7 million taking Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia in to consideration. And how many dead? A million? Two million? We don't know, don't want to know, and don't care.

But a hundred thousand people get killed in Darfur and a few hundred thousand more refugees? Oh - that our "left wing" actors care about. That is the fraud cause de juor we are supposed to be all concerned about. Oh - and Tibet. A couple protesters were killed in Tibet a month back dontcha know! Sanctions on China!

The US government has stats on the populations of endangered varieties of slugs. But official stats on Iraqis war dead? Nope.

That goes back to the sociopath attribute in the first part of this essay last week . . . "indifference to major traumatic events while becoming enraged at minor matters."

[See the section on "The Hysteriodal Cycle" in Ponerology.]

Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.

Who is responsible for Iraq today? Who made it the way it is today? Well, reading our media and listening to our government the list is a long one. But it doesn't include us. Not for a second. We are blameless . . . for everything. "Blame America First"? We never blame ourselves for anything! That is one of those inane phrases that reich wingers chant in response to any real world analysis of American foreign policy and that is their argument . . . in toto. That stupid phrase.

Why did we invade Iraq? Well Saddam was lying about having WMD. He was lying that he did have them to scare Iran. If only he had told us he didn't have them we would not have invaded! It's Saddam's fault!

That is actually an argument you come across among the more retarded of Bush and Neoconned faithful- that Saddam lied so well about having WMD when he didn't that we were fooled and invaded him. Saddam's fault. Amazing that anyone could believe that crap? Not amazing if your collective conscious is that of a sociopath.

Who else is to blame? Oh yeah- France. France was "paid off" by Saddam in pennies under the "Oil for Food" program so they let his regime survive.

More? Yup. Iran is too blame. And Syria. And Moooslims in general. Even Iraqis themselves are to blame. The US actually accuses Iran of "meddling" in Iraq. The US, which is 6000 miles away for Iraq, which flies in most of its supplies to Iraq for its armies which are squatting there based on lies, has the balls to accuse Iran of "meddling" with its next door freakin neighbor as if it is none of their business!

By the way. The US accuses Iran, without a shred of believable or even coherent evidence, of "undermining" the Iraq government and aiding "terrorists" while at the same time the US passes bills in public that authorize funds for the . . . undermining of Iran's government and the aiding of terrorists in their country! That isn't sick deranged weird behavior? That isn't insane?

Anyone else get the blame? Yep. The Iraqi people. They are to blame. Which leads us to this compliment to the attribute of the sociopath directly above.

Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim's affirmation (respect, gratitude, and love.)

Americans actually expect to be thanked by the occupants of foreign countries we invade spreading death, chaos, misery, and suffering. Our Neocons expected flowers to be thrown at Americans when they entered Baghdad (after 50 years of playing the most cynical and self serving of games with that country that had directly caused untold suffering on just about every family in Iraq). There wasn't a rational reason in the world to believe this would be the case. Even opponents of Saddam who liked Western ways hated the United States for murderous policies of the last half century toward that country. They had to fly in Iraqi ex-pat Quislings to topple Saddam's statue for American TeeVee cameras!

In the 1960's war epic movie The Longest Day there is a scene where a Frenchman is shown cheering on the American invasion of Normandy while bombs explode all around him. I guess he didn't have to worry as they were "liberty bombs". That is how Americans literally expect foreigners to behave when we invade and murder them from the air- cheering on their own deaths and destruction like that fictional Frenchman in some sappy dumb-assed H-wood World War II fantasy movie.

And we are enraged when they don't thank us.

Here is Neocon and an Israel Firsting traitor, Daniel Pipes, in response to a question about the biggest lesson he learned from the Iraq war in April of 2006:

Q: What is the biggest lesson you have learned from the Iraq war?

A: The ingratitude of the Iraqis for the extraordinary favor we gave them -- to release them from the bondage of Saddam Hussein's tyranny. They have rapidly interpreted it as something they did and that we were incidental to it. They've more or less written us out of the picture.

Yes. He said that. Let's repeat that:

Q: What is the biggest lesson you have learned from the Iraq war?

A:The ingratitude of the Iraqis for the extraordinary favor we gave them . . .

Three years after the invasion of Iraq and the "biggest lesson" Daniel, "Middle East Expert", Pipes learned was that the Iraqi people are ingrates? And with that ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you my diagnosis . . .

Are you one of the Wannabe's??

Another in a continuing series of essays by Henry See featured on Signs of the Times. Here is discussed the personality type that keep the Cheneys and Bushes of the world in power. Enjoy!

Blue Ibis
*************************************
The Insider Wannabes

Henry See
Signs of the Times
Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:15 EDT

We have seen in the first two articles in this series on insiders and outsiders that the insiders are a small minority, around 5 percent of the population, while the outsiders are the vast majority. So how is it that this small clique can maintain their power?

They have a support base. Let's call them the insider wannabes.

The insider wannabes are comprised of people who look to others for their values. They need to be told what to do, what to think, what to believe in, what type of clothes to wear, what food to eat and TV to watch. They don't develop their ideas themselves, they absorb them from their environment: their family, their friends and co-workers, from media proclaimed experts whose 'talking heads' appear nightly on the mainstream media. The insider wannabes repeat the sound bites they hear on the radio or from the TV. In short, they need an authority to tell them what is ok and what is not. The existence of this group is why so-called "talking points", that is, the list of pat phrases sent down the media hierarchy on what topics need to be addressed and how they should be framed, are so effective. When many people hear the same phrase or idea repeated over and over, they eventually come to accept it and eventually to parrot it as their own opinion. Whether the talking point is true or not doesn't matter. You have no doubt had the experience of hearing colleagues or friends repeating almost word for word arguments picked up from talk radio jockeys or the resident "experts" on Fox News. Jon Stewart makes fun of this quite regularly on his show when he edits all these pundits together repeating the same phrase over and over again.

Today in the United States, the insider wannabes support the Bush administration, support Israel's genocide of the Palestinians, support the dismemberment of Iraq, support the official story on 911, and many of them believe that Jesus will be returning in their lifetime, in spite of all of the suffering and horror, or, in the case of the return of Jesus, the fairy tale absurdity of the idea. Facts don't matter; authority does.

The funny thing is, a similar group of insider wannabes also existed in the former Communist states where the insiders were members of the Communist Party, and a good many of them have now found a comfortable home in the post-communist, capitalist world. For the insider wannabe, ideology isn't important. The insider wannabe is a personality type. If the insiders are communists, the insider wannabes are communists. If the insiders are capitalists, then the insider wannabes are capitalists. The shape or color of the authority the wannabes seek doesn't matter so much as the fact the authority is "the authority", is in power and gives the orders. Insider wannabes need orders. They don't like to think for themselves.

Bob Altemeyer, who spent his career studying what he calls the Authoritarian personality type, noted that:

...the most cock-sure belligerents in the populations on each side of the Cold War, the ones who hated and blamed each other the most, were in fact the same people, psychologically. If they had grown up on the other side of the Iron Curtain, they probably would have believed the leaders they presently despised, and despised the leaders they now trusted. They'd have been certain the side they presently thought was in the right was in the wrong, and instead embraced the beliefs they currently held in contempt. [The Authoritarians, emphasis ours.]

So it is important to understand that the issue of insiders and their supporters is not tied to political beliefs. We are dealing with a personality type, the psychological make-up of individuals that make them open to certain influences. According to Altemeyer, the personality type shares the following three traits:

• Hierarchical Submission
• Conventionalism, and
• Aggression.

He discusses each in his book and suggests that they form approximately 20% of the population.(1)

Andrew Lobaczewski, in his book Political Ponerology, A science on the nature of evil adjusted for political purposes, proposes a complex structure of different pathological types whose different pathologies fit together to form a system of governance he calls the pathocracy, based upon studies carried out in secret under the communist governments in Eastern Europe. He notes that the insiders in Poland during the Communist period made up about 6% of the population, while double that figure, 12%, formed the support class. About this second group, he writes:

This second group consists of individuals who are, on the average, weaker, more sickly, and less vital. The frequency of known mental diseases in this group is at twice the rate of the national average. We can thus assume that the genesis of their submissive attitude toward the regime, their greater susceptibility to pathological effects, and their skittish opportunism includes various relatively impalpable anomalies. We observe not only physiological anomalies, but also the kinds described above at the lowest intensity, with the exception of essential psychopathy.

It is not yet possible to map Altmeyer's authoritarians directly to the group Lobaczewski called the "new bourgeoisie", however I think it would be interesting to pursue the research and see what overlapping might be found. It is possible that the group Altemeyer has defined as "Double Highs" or "Social Dominators", that is, individuals who score high on the Authoritarian scale and the Social Dominator scale would include individuals that would fall into Lobaczewski's 6% deviant category. Altemeyer himself writes:

There even seems to be a whiff of the sociopath about the social dominator. Somebody do the studies and see if any of these hunches is right. [The Authoritarians, p. 180]

In reading and comparing the descriptions of the types outlined by the two authors, there are certainly significant similarities.(2) Both models present us with a picture of a small deviant group with influence over a larger, highly influenceable support base. Both models suggest that the loyalty of the support base to their leaders is based upon qualities that are not permanent and have nothing to do with ideology or fundamental beliefs in one system or another. It is a question of opportunism, not principles. Shift the people in power and the support base could also shift.

This analysis suggests as a conclusion that the problem is the small deviant group in power. As long as they remain in power, the support base will be firm. Moreover, the real problem is not only individuals but rather the particular forms of deviancy among the insiders -- deviancy in the sense of how their thinking and emotions deviate from healthy forms, that is, from an objective perception and understanding of reality. The trouble is, these forms of deviant thinking occur everywhere, not only in the halls of power. That has been the problem historically: one group of deviants gets replaced by another and so the situation of the majority never changes.

This revolving door of pathological power happens because the pathological infection spreads throughout society and affects all of us to one degree or another, even in opposition groups. Deviance is not always clear-cut. There is a continuum spanning a wide range of variations from the pole of deviant thought to the other pole of healthy thought. If we think of each pole as a center of gravity exercising a pull over the individuals between them, you might imagine that the power of each would be about equal. However, what happens when the principal sources of information, the media, the institutions that form and educate children, our schools and universities, are themselves heavily influenced by the pathological minority? The pathological influence then vastly outweighs that of those who function normally. Add to that the influence of fundamentalist strains of the monotheistic religions and the pull coming from the deviant pole is clearly much stronger than the pull towards empathy and conscience.

The struggle against this deviancy comes down to a struggle against deviant behaviors. We do not need a clinical diagnosis of an individual in order to learn to avoid being manipulated by him or her. It doesn't matter whether or not someone is a born deviant or simply acting out because of being brought up in and immersed in a sick society; deviant behavior is deviant behavior whether it is acted out by someone who is pathological or is only under the influence.

The insider wannabes pretty well ensure that they will be manipulated by placing so much faith in authorities. Rather than thinking through problems themselves, they look to others for ready-made solutions, or worse, ready-made sound bites that replace solutions. If those in power change but are replaced by individuals contaminated with the same pathological modes of thought, the insider wannabes will once again fall under the sway of a deviant group.

Our job is to spot the manipulative behaviors and learn how to avoid the manipulations, as well as root out such manipulative behavior in ourselves. That is the only way to begin reinforcing the pole of conscience so that its influence can spread and a healthy alternative can become a reality.

(1) Altemeyer's research influenced John Dean when Dean wrote his book Conservatives Without Conscience.

(2) The question is how much time remains for us to continue and further this research? It feels to me as if things are speeding up, as if the vehicle of society is careening towards the wall of reality at an ever-increasing speed. We do not have much time.

Shrub: Walking Like a Duck

If you haven't yet read the works of Lobaczewski (Political Ponerology), Stout (The Sociopath Next Door) and Hare (Without Conscience) on psychopathy, get busy now, before these books become mysteriously unavailable. (Don't scoff. It's happened before.) It will make the events to come a bit more comprehensible. Knowledge protects.

Blue Ibis

*****************************************
Is George Bush a Sociopath?

Scott O'Reilly
opednews.com
Sat, 29 Sep 2007 21:59 EDT

A growing number of historians believe George W. Bush will go down as the worst president in American history. Bush's penchant for secrecy, extending executive power, and holding himself above the law remind many observers of another failed president, Richard Nixon, a man now widely regarded as a pathological personality. No doubt, Watergate reflected Nixon's paranoia, vindictiveness, and pettiness. Can the same be said for America's disastrous war in Iraq, namely that it reflects the disturbed psyche of George W. Bush?

Perusing the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV- TR) the characteristics associated Anti-Social Personality Disorder (more colloquially, the sociopath) seem as if they could apply Bush's presidency. The symptoms include:

1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;

2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;

3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;

4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;

5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain steady work or honor financial obligations;

7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.

To be diagnosed with Anti-Social Personality Disorder and individual would need to exhibit three or more of the above symptoms.

Bush's behavior arguably fits the Anti-Social Personality Disorder profile to a tee. He has consistently flouted legal norms and conventions: 1) making a mockery of the law during the Bush vs. Gore recount, 2) unilaterally scrapping the START treaty, 3) defying international law in regards to the invasion of Iraq, 4) ignoring the Geneva Convention in regards to the treatment of prisoners and detainees, 4) and flouting Congressional statutes regarding domestic eavesdropping.

Bush's deceitfulness has known virtually no bounds. He deliberately conflated Osama with Saddam in order to mislead the public. He claimed war with Iraq was a last resort, but the evidence indicates it was a fait acompli. Bush continues to claim that Saddam kicked the weapons inspectors out, but the historical record shows that Bush ordered them out. At times, Bush has claimed that we found Saddam's WMD or that the U.S. doesn't torture, suggesting that he doesn't know or even care about the truth.

In retrospect, it is clear that the invasion of Iraq was needlessly impulsive. The Bush administration claimed Saddam was an imminent threat and that the United States had no choice but to invade immediately. Both claims have proven false. Further, the Bush administration had virtually no coherent plan for occupying Iraq once Saddam fell. Put simply, everything about the invasion and the occupation has been reckless and poorly planned.

Bush gives every indication of being fidgety, anxious, and intemperate. Many observers have described him as a bully who insists on getting his way. His foreign policy has been bellicose and arrogant in the extreme. Restlessness and competitiveness are to be expected in politics, but Bush seems on bent on asserting dominance at every turn. He is the epitome of the hyper-aggressive Alpha male, but with a penchant for acting without thinking.

Bush's lack of foresight is responsible for countless deaths. His failure, for instance, to allow the U.N. inspectors to complete their mission in Iraq, which would have revealed that Saddam did not possess WMD, is a decision that has exposed hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to unnecessary risks. Put simply, Bush is gambler, but there is little evidence that he weighs the costs others will bear for his decisions.

Perhaps the most striking aspect of Bush's presidency is his complete unwillingness to accept responsibility for his mistakes and bad judgment. Bush drove the country to war against Iraq, but he has deftly blamed Democrats for authorizing the war, suggesting that he was nothing more than a passive victim of bad intelligence (when in fact he was hyping intelligence most experts knew was inconclusive at best). Further, Bush's fiscal irresponsibility - slashing taxes for the wealthiest while presiding over the largest increase in the growth of Federal spending - will effectively bury future generations under a mountain of debt.

Despite abundant evidence that the decision to invade Iraq has been a disaster, Bush steadfastly refuses to acknowledge even an iota of remorse. Four million Iraqis have been displaced from their homes, hundreds of thousands have died, and the U.S. military has been pushed to the breaking point. Yet Bush, without an ounce of humility, has the gall to suggest he will be vindicated by history.

If you are a sociopath, there's probably no more ideal job than the presidency to reinforce your delusions of grandeur. The only problem, of course, is how many lives, civil liberties, and national resources must be sacrificed in order to sustain a grandiose sense of self. It is problematic - and unethical - to diagnose Bush the individual from a distance. To be fair, Bush probably displays characteristics one would not expect a sociopath to exhibit - he almost certainly grieves over the loss of U.S. troops, his moral idealism about spreading democracy is almost certainly genuine, and he has shown tremendous loyalty to close aides.

Comment: Iwas all going so well until the author started projecting his own world-view onto Bush, completely missing the whole "mask of sanity" issue. Either Bush is convincingly mimicking normal human grieving behaviour, and feels nothing; or he feels some lower-instinctive emotion that relates to his selfish pathological drives.

His ideal about spreading democracy speaks for itself: this administration has turned America into a fascist nation. As he said himself: "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator".

Tremendous loyalty can also be a psychopathic characteristic; protecting your own kind.

Undoubtedly, Bush is a complex character and any attempt to diagnose him from afar should be treated with some skepticism. Nevertheless, his presidency is another matter; it gives every indication of being psychologically deviant, particularly in so far as denial of reality and the truth has been at its core.

Comment: If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and does "duck things", you can be reasonably sure it is a duck.

The Fruits of 9-11

Do you feel safer?

Blue Ibis
*****************************

Hannibal is the Least of Your Worries

A lovely article by an editor of Signs of the Times. Sometimes a complex concepts can be illuminated with the the simplest of stories. Many thanks to Keit for sharing her insights into the nature of the Sociopath Next Door.

For further reading on this this subject see here.

Blue Ibis
******************************************
If The Sociopath Is Next Door - Move Upstairs

by Keit, SOTT editor
SOTT
Sun, 24 Jun 2007 04:22 EDT


©PA Game Commission

I recently finished reading "The Sociopath Next Door" by Martha Stout Ph.D. and wanted to share with you some realizations. I hope they are helpful.

Before reading the final pages of the book, I was sure that the idea that psychopaths are NOT like most of other people was pretty much "accepted" in my mind. I was sure that I "understood" it intellectually, even if I did not "believe" it 100% yet. Well, somehow, those few final pages organized everything in my mind, and the realization is profound and shocking: psychopaths ARE different. I'll try to explain what I've understood.

First, some words from Laura Knight-Jadczyk about the importance of "believing":

"Today it came to me: The biggest problem most of us have (yours truly included) is BELIEVING that there can be human looking beings that are simply not human inside, or are deviant from normal humans, or cannot be fixed, or whatever.

We keep wanting to try this or that or the other thing because in our heart of hearts, we do not WANT to believe it. We do not want to acknowledge that our reality is that cruel, that human beings are not at the top of the food chain, that there ARE different sub-species of human beings that prey on other sub-species.

It's just too damn far out.

And that is because we have been taught something entirely different from infancy, and so we can't BELIEVE it.

What is so important about understanding it this way?

What I notice is that many of you still do not "believe" it and you have not reached that point where you have nothing to lose to try a different hypothesis of reality. You continue on every day in low-level interactions with teensy tinesy petty tyrants and don't really believe that quite a number of them could, just possibly, be intra-species predators... It's all theoretical and interesting and all that, but not really real. It is not part of your BELIEF.

And your belief about reality which is shaped by psychopaths seeking to conceal their existence and reality and control is still a LIE. And as long as you continue to believe a lie, you are blocked from the cascade of events that can transpire if the "truth" binds to your psychic receptors.

When I first read the above comments, I hadn't yet read the book, and I have to admit that my understanding of psychopaths being "different" was mainly theoretical, even if I had lot of opportunities to observe their nature and experience it in the flesh. But it didn't "click" until I finished "The Sociopath Next Door".

Here is a quote from the book that made all the difference. It is a story about Tillie - the female psychopath next door. Notice her thinking processes.

Fred takes the light out of his pocket, holds it close to the ground, and turns it on. After a few moments, they find the melon-size rock, somewhat more easily than they could have hoped, because the rock is smooth and white and the surrounding earth is dark. Catherine exhales and pushes a loose strand of hair behind her left ear. She and Fred bend down and lift the rock together, revealing a surprisingly small hole in the ground, considering it is used by a fat little groundhog.

Catherine has an impulse to shine the penlight into the hole to check on its occupant. But then she realizes that she will not see much and that she may scare the animal.

Arm in arm, whispering and containing their laughter, she and Fred stumble home.

Tillie does not see them. As they return from their mission, she has already been drinking and sulking for several hours, as usual. She sits on a sofa in her living room and pours herself glasses of Glenlivet, trying to drown out the monotony of her life and the idiots she continually has to deal with. The only thing that makes this evening different from any other is the accumulation of packing boxes now stacked around her.

Inside her drunken fog, she congratulates herself on her brilliant idea not to put up a "FOR SALE" sign this time. She thinks, "I'll take those cretins by surprise. Their stupid mouths will gape."

The good-for-nothing real estate agent keeps telling her that not using a sign is shooting herself in the foot, and that he really thinks she should wait for a higher offer. This buyer came in under her price. But Tillie cannot wait. She has never liked waiting. She will have her moment, and her moment will be tomorrow morning. And then everyone in this whole horrible neighborhood will be in complete shock about her move. She is sure of it. The agent does not understand why secrecy matters, but he is a fool, so why listen to him? She has taken losses before when she wanted to get out of the house fast. "It's all in the game", she thinks to herself, "All in the game. You can't stay in a place where people won't listen to you. And giving them a parting shot is extremely important."

Nothing is very interesting, really. Suffocating the rodent [by placing a rock over the burrow opening] was okay for a few minutes, and she hopes Catherine was watching. Catherine would have a stroke. But then that project was over, and there was nothing else to do. She cannot imagine what these absurd people on all sides of her do that seems to occupy them so completely as they scurry about their little lives. They must have brains the size of peas.

In the house up the hill, Greta has the weekend off, and she and Jerry sleep late. When they slowly rouse themselves and go out to the sunroom to drink their coffee, they notice a big moving truck in Tillie's driveway.

"Does that mean what I think it means?" Jerry asks, staring at the truck. "Or are we in bed, dreaming?" "Got to be dreaming," says Greta, also staring. "I never saw a sign. Did you ever see a sign over there?" "Nope"

Just now, two men wearing canvas coveralls come out of Tillie's house, each carrying one end of a sofa. Greta and Jerry look at each other and begin to laugh. Jerry laughs so hard, he spills some of his coffee.

Greta asks him, "Why do you suppose she kept it a secret?" "Why does she do anything? But it doesn't matter anymore, does it? Unbelievable."

Greta is thoughtful for a moment, and then says, "How old do you suppose she is?" "I don't know. Not young." "I wonder whether she ever had any children. Oh wow. Can you imagine being one of her children?" "Worse yet, can you imagine being her?" "So do you think we should feel sorry for her?" Greta asks.

Jerry grins and waves his hand dismissively at the furniture-moving scene in the distance, "Well, I am not sure sweetheart. But if we're going to feel sorry for her, let's do it over breakfast, okay? Remember that strudel?"

"Yes!" says Greta, smacking her lips. She picks up both coffee mugs, and they abandon the view from the sunroom, for the pastry in the kitchen.

Since they are in the house next door to Tillie's, Catherine and Fred also notice the activities of the men from the moving truck, and wonder why they never saw a FOR SALE sign or heard from Tillie that she was moving. Fred rolls his eyes again, and Catherine shakes her head. But then they are distracted by another phone call, this one from their daughter and son-in-law, who say that in two weeks they and four-year-old Katie are flying out for another visit. Catherine is beside herself with excitement, and Tillie's moving day, still in progress outside is forgotten.

As Tillie said: it is "all in the game". All thinking capabilities are busy observing and calculating the outcome. There are no disruptions from those silly and foreign "things" called emotions. Tillie saw emotions as buffers, interferences, something her stupid neighbors didn't know how to get rid off. Tillie's thinking process is so drastically different from her neighbors, the only thing they can do afterwards is shake their heads while witnessing such absurdity.

But for Tillie this thinking is not absurd. It is crystal clear and obvious. She sees everything around her as a game, chess maybe. And all the people are chess pieces, and her life goal is to win the game and gain the maximum power she can gain. There is nothing above this goal.

And there is this boredom. Tillie must be so frustrated that those stupid neighbors don't "dance" to her tune, and she gets only short pleasure from time to time.

But what does she do, and how does she see it?

Imagine a very strange and lazy person sitting near an ant hill. He has been sitting there for a very long time and is extremely bored (too lazy to get up and go somewhere else). He takes a small tree branch and sticks it into the middle of the ant hill and thinks: "Oh, cool! Those tiny creatures started to move. Not boring! Lets see what will happen if I do this", and he disrupts the hill structure a little bit more. "Oh, this is just great! All this action, and I am the one who controls it. Definitely not boring. What a great way to spend time". And he continues to play with the ants, each time inventing new ways to torture them and entertain himself. After a while all the ants are either dead or have left the place. It is boring again.

Luckily for this person, some tourists just happen to be in the area, and this strange person decides to see if he can play with them as with the ants. Apparently it is so easy, they don't have a clue! Not boring again.

So from Tillie's point of view it was very important that Catherine would watch Tillie throwing the stone onto the groundhogs burrow door, without it there is no fun, only boredom. Catherine's strong reaction is fun, because Tillie is the one who makes her squirm and feel this emotional chaos inside. "Oh, this is so invigorating!" It is the game, and Tillie is the master player. She knows exactly what makes people tick. This is easy for her, and she cannot understand how stupid others can be for not getting it. The thrill of winning is all that counts.

So after realizing this, it is very easy to understand why she decided to keep her moving as a secret.

She wanted to poke the human ant hill one last time. She wanted to make them run frantically, with confusion in their minds. And Tillie as a "game master" is the reason for this chaos. She introduced this unexpected event into their lives, and now she will enjoy seeing them coping with the consequences.

If Tillie was less lazy, she could be some municipal clerk, making decisions on who will get registration papers and who will not. Oh, it could be a thrill. To see people crying after telling them that their papers are lost and the date for appeal is expired! What chaos, what fun! She could hold the control keys to their lives in her hands. She could do even so much more if she could be president.

And this in fact is what is happening. We are those ants, at the mercy of strange bored creatures, who are not able to grasp the thing called "emotion" or "conscience" or "empathy". This is who they are - soulless game masters. We cannot outsmart them in direct confrontation, because all their thinking capabilities go into calculating and analyzing our natures - we just will make them more thrilled from an opportunity to play the game with engaging ants. But we can fight them still, by learning their natures and avoiding being their "ants" - learning not to play the game. We must learn how to be above the game, a concept that they simply cannot grasp.

Maybe that is why psychopaths have an ability to "sense" wounded souls, people who were hurt in childhood and are generally more susceptible to manipulation. They are much more fun than "healthy" ants! Every tiny suggestion creates chaos in a wounded mind, they can be shaped so easily - a rich source of "fun".

All of this reminded me of a dialog from a great movie "The Fifth Element", between the psychopathic character of Zorg, and the Priest:

Zorg: It's nice to see you again, Father.

Priest Vito Cornelius: Ah, I remember you now. The so-called art dealer.

Zorg: I'm glad you got your memory back. Because you're gonna need it.

[directs his men out of the office]

Zorg: Where are the stones?

Priest Vito Cornelius: I don't know. And even if I did know, I wouldn't tell somebody like you.

Zorg: Why? What's wrong with me?

Priest Vito Cornelius: I try to serve life. But you only... seem to want to destroy it.

Zorg: Oh, Father, you're so wrong. Let me explain.

[closes office door, places an empty glass on desk]

Zorg: Life, which you so nobly serve, comes from destruction, disorder and chaos. Take this empty glass. Here it is, peaceful, serene and boring. But if it is...

[pushes glass off table]

Zorg: destroyed...

[robot cleaners move to clean broken glass]

Zorg: Look at all these little things. So busy now. Notice how each one is useful. What a lovely ballet ensues so full of form and color. Now, think about all those people that created them. Technicians, engineers, hundreds of people who'll be able to feed their children tonight so those children can grow up big and strong and have little teeny weeny children of their own, and so on and so forth. Thus, adding to the great chain... of life.

[Desk prepares a glass of water and a bowl of fruit]

Zorg: You see, Father, by creating a little destruction, I'm actually encouraging life. In reality, you and I are in the same business. Cheers.

[drinks water with cherry, only to choke on cherry stuck in throat. Zorg frantically presses all buttons on his desk in an attempt to get something to clear his throat]

Priest Vito Cornelius: Where's the robot to pat you in the back? Or the engineer? Or their children, maybe?

[Desk brings out Zorg's pet Picasso; Zorg motions it to try and help him]

Priest Vito Cornelius: There, you see how all your so-called power counts for absolutely nothing? How your entire empire of destruction comes crashing down. All because of one little... cherry.

[Slaps Zorg in the back, causing him to spit the cherry at Picasso]

Zorg: [opens doors, throws Cornelius to guards] You saved my life, and in return, I'll spare yours... for now.

Priest Vito Cornelius: You're a monster, Zorg.

Zorg: I know.

[directs guards to take Cornelius away]

Zorg: [snaps fingers] Torture who you have to. The President, I don't care. Just bring me those stones. You have one hour.