Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous cells

Authoritarians and Corporate Psychopaths as Toxic Managers

News Books Recommended Links The psychopath in the corner office

Stoicism

Female Sociopaths The Techniques of a Female Sociopaths

Borderline Psychopath

Surviving a Bad Performance Review Micromanagers Incompetent Managers Narcissists Workplace bullies Films depicting female sociopaths
Female bullies Authoritarians and F-scale Understanding Borderline Rage Negative Politeness Rules of Verbal Self Defense Classic cycle of sociopathic relations (Evaluate-seduce-devalue-discard) Defending Yourself Against Corporate Psychopaths
Machiavellians Manipulators Tricks Office Stockholm Syndrome Insubordination Threat  Learned helplessness  High Demand Cults Leaders Practices Double High Authoritarians Analogy between corporate and psychopathic behavior
Enemy at the Gate: Rules of communication with micromanager Paranoid Managers Divorcing Borderline Psychopath Diplomatic Communication Psychopaths in Movies The Hare Psychopathy Checklist Obsessive compulsive personality
Sociopath attack methods Projection Workplace mobbing Gaslighting Avoiding Anger Trap when dealing with corporate psychopaths Stonewalling Shunning
Love bombing Fake Sexual Harassment Claims Workplace Discrimination and Harassment Isolation as a psychological pressure strategy Demeaning Fraud Caused by Social Pressures The Fiefdom Syndrome
Six ways to say 'No' and mean it Corporate bullshit as a communication method Steps for Decreasing Toxic Worry Large organizations Preventing Burnout Signs that you might be dismissed soon Workagolism and work overload
Groupthink Conformism Lysenkoism Tactful communication Quotes about Psychopaths Humor Videos
  "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark"

From Hamlet (I, iv, 90)

Introduction

Softpanorama Classification of Toxic Managers

Psychopaths are real aliens, "people without conscience"

Warning

Note: This is page devoted to all IT professionals who suffer from psychopathic bosses. Only those who already suffered or still suffering from one of those types can understand the level of pain as well as stakes involved in dealing with such individuals.

Introduction

According to some data sociopaths represent around three to five percent of our population. Most of them belong to so called non-violent, non-criminal type. But they are extremely socially toxic. The term psychopaths should probably be reserved for those sociopaths who are the violent, serial killer, ruthless predator types. The distinction line is fuzzy but still very important. We will mostly be talking about sociopath, while not always adhering to suggested terminology. Sorry about that.

If you are reading this page, you probably have problems with your boss or family member, or co-worker. Now what ? Actually the situation is bad, and you are really trapped, but it is not inescapable situation. You can and should escape. As old saying goes "Knowledge is power" and this is the area where this saying is literally true. Learning the ropes can help to find a way to escape, find way to defend yourself and your dignity, and to lessen the current pain.

It is important to understand that whose managers who produce living hell are not all created equal. But they have a common tendency to project their dissatisfaction with their life and emotional emptiness outward and ascribe it to others. If they succeed it is all them, but if they fail, it's your fault. Such people are organically incapable of trust, because everything they do is a facade, a lie, a Potemkin village.

The same Potemkin village as their family life, where wife and children at best are viewed as desirable possessions. They have utter contempt for other people, although they will use flattery, deceit and other means to create a dependency while they are using them. And after that is done, you will be discarded like an empty cardbox. In other words they are real sharks, endlessly seeking the prey to fill their emotional emptiness with possessions, be they things or other people. And they are literally insatiable in their needs, and are highly focused in their pursuit of them.

There two large group of dangerous managers who typically make the life of subordinates a living hell. We will call them "toxic managers".

Both types are power hungry and have inappropriate, intense anger or difficulty controlling anger e.g., frequent displays of temper, constant anger, etc." (see Understanding Borderline Rage), which serves as a vehicles of intimidation and can be carefully rehearsed. The key differential is the amount of deceit in daily interactions and about personal and family history. Manipulation and deceit are hallmarks of psychopathic personality. They live life as actors acting different roles depending on what is profitable and what helps to achieve their goals. Much like cult leaders (which who they have a lot in common) socialized psychopath are masters of creating an "artificial past" inventing their personal histories (including education, achievements, etc ) and sometimes even relatives as well as keeping victims from escaping. See The psychopath in the corner office for the list of traits that you need to try to match with to confirm this diagnose.

As this is not a psychiatry manual, we will use an umbrella term "toxic managers" for both corporate socialized psychopaths and (more numerous) authoritarian managers. That term actually allow us to avoid nitpicking about whether particular manager is real psychopath/sociopath, or something else and concentrate of patterns of behavior many of which are surprisingly common to "real sociopaths". For our purpose real psychological diagnosis is of secondary importance. It is methods to protect yourself from attack of such class of personalities that are of primary importance. In this sense the most dangerous subtype are female sociopath, as they use their gender as bullet proof vest to deflect any counterattacks. See some information about Hillary Clinton as guide

In this respect, what matter for us is the fact that both authoritarians and psychopath of various "denominations" are really dangerous predators of corporate jungles in general and IT jungles in particular. And they blend extremely well into the current environment within government and mega corporations.

As all of them there is one important encompassing feature: predation. Most individuals in modern societies are caught up in the perpetual struggle of striking a balance between pursuing their own interests and respecting others' rights. When their own pursuits take precedent over others, individuals typically feel some guilt or shame about their greed. But there is no such conflict inside sociopathic managers. They do not need to rationalize their exploitation of other, they simply feel they are entitled. Which makes them perfect predator of corporate jungles. When in power, they typically use their animosity to keep others in line. Often they create kind of cult of personality environment in which, like in Stalinist Russia, in order to survive, employees must identify with their aggressor or become one of the leader's victims (and please note that Joseph Stalin was a pretty charming personality in his narrow Politburo circle).

It goes without saying that presence of such individuals in the role of the manager puts a tremendous stress on his direct reports. Psychopaths are more that rare among general population and by some estimates represent over 1% of population and approximately 4% of managers. Authoritarians are more common and often constitute majority of middle managers in the corporation. So both university students and regular cubicle dwellers should better know your enemy as they might need to deal with them in their first or next "manager-subordinate" relationship. They (especially Authoritarians) might be present among your immediate or extended family too.

Softpanorama Classification of Toxic Managers

With those reservations, we would distinguish the following non-orthogonal types based on a single, dominant behavioral stereotype (for example all psychopath are bullies, but only bullies has this as a predominant feature). That's a crude and unscientific classification but it does has some practical value in dealing with this type of predators because our emphasis is of classifying and describing typical set of behaviors that those people use during "hunt" for prey. It is valuable to knew something about what to expect if you are on the receiving end of such a behavior. We will distinguish:

Authoritarians, quintessential kiss up kick down personalities

Authoritarians are more numerous and and while dangerious and toxic, they are less dangerous category in comparison with "real" phychopaths, especially micromanagers. If you boss fits the description you need to go to the church and light the candle. While your situation is bad and often justifiably can be called simply terrible, believe me it could be much, much worse (see below).

It is not always easy to detect authoritarian manager while not being his/her subordinates. Sometimes, like in romantic relations, it is quote difficult until it's too late. Typically authorititarian kiss up behavior can be polished to perfection and generally emogh equals he is often viewed as "normal" person. Trobles start only when you report to him.

Still there are som indicatins that are usful even when you are reporting to this jerk. In the latter case indications are useless, because you are already cooked :-(.

One of the few good indications of authoritarian personality are extreme right wing views (see Double High Authoritarians). In any case as soon as this guy/nice lady become your boss, "kick down" side of his/her personality will be demonstrated to you in all glory and you will have zero problems with the detection. The only problem is that it's too late ;-).

Also it is not necessary that authoritarian boss should be incompetent. First of all, while there is correlation between authoritarianism and low intelligence it is just a correlation. Some authoritarians are quite bright (for example, Bill O'Reilly -- a Fox News talking head to be more like double high authoritarian rather then a typical psychopath).

Another important trait that can be observed by outsiders and should warn you is that authoritarians tend to exhibit cognitive errors and symptoms of faulty reasoning. Specifically, they are more likely to make incorrect inferences from evidence and to hold ontradictory ideas that result from compartmentalized thinking. Moreover, they are typically unable to acknowledge their own limitations and assume responsibility for errors and blunders. Here is a short but very useful list from Our Church Administration is Critically Infected " Another Voice

1.Illogical Thinking: The lack of independent, critical thinking.

2. Highly Compartmentalized Minds: Authoritarians' ideas are poorly integrated with one another.

3. Double Standards : When your ideas live independent lives from one another it is pretty easy to use double standards in your judgments. You simply call up the idea that will justify (afterwards) what you've decided to do.

4. Hypocrisy: The leaders of authoritarian movements sometimes accuse their opponents of being anti-democratic and anti-free speech when the latter protest
against various books, movies, speakers, teachers and so on.

5. Blindness To Themselves: self-righteousness.

6. A Profound Ethnocentrism: Ethnocentrism means dividing the world up into in-groups and out-groups…….in-groups are holy and good…out-groups are evil and Satanic.

7. Dogmatism: the Authoritarian's Last Ditch Defense: By dogmatism I mean relatively unchangeable, unjustified certainty. Loyal followers obey without questions…..

I would put dogmatism higher as this is valuable test which works when this type of people report to you or are on the same level as you and the personality they present to you is their "fake", Potemkin village facade.

But other then that this is an excellent, simply excellent list. One missing, but important feature is that authoritarians are generally more favorable to punishment and control than personal freedom and diversity. When discussing political preferences, tor example, they are more willing to suspend constitutional guarantees of liberty such as the Bill of Rights. They also are more likely to advocate strict, punitive sentences for criminals, and they admit that they obtain personal satisfaction from punishing such people. See Authoritarians

Bullies or aggressive psychopaths

Aggression in inherent in psychopath as a predator in corporate environment, and to tell that a psychopath is a bully is just to tell that the water is wet. So this is a sure sign that the boss is psychopath, but it does not help in classification of the set of behaviors that distinguish this particular predator from others. But for some sociopaths this pattern of behavior serves is the most favorite tactics that they use systematically. Those psychopaths have a distinct a tendency toward sadism and derive perverse gratification from harming others. They do like to hurt, frighten, tyrannize. They do it for a sense of power and control, and will often only drop subtle hints about what they are up to (this is also typical of authoritarians).

At the same time they systematically polish their aggressive, domineering manner in such a way to disguise any intimidation as legitimate corporate behavior and avoid coming under HR scrutiny for their behavior. Such pathological personalities always seek out positions of power, such as teacher, bureaucrat, manager, or police officer. You can also distinguish several subtypes:

I would like to stress it again that direct or indirect aggression is inherent in sociopath (a socialized psychopath) and to tell that a psychopath is a bully is just to tell that the water is wet.

US National Center for Education Statistics suggests that bullying can be broken into two categories:

Indirect bullying is more subtle and more likely to be verbal, such as the silent treatment, arguing others into submission, manipulation, gossip, staring, and mocking. While women can be as aggressive or even more aggressive then men they usually are more indirect. I would like to stress that gender differences in aggression are subject to review; human society is too complex and direct projection from animal world, for example, from great apes is of limited value. See important paper by Kaj Bjorkqvist Sex Differences in Physical, Verbal, and Indirect Aggression: A review of recent research

Accordingly, one should not expect women to develop and use exactly the same strategies for attaining their goals as men do. If strategies for aggression and conflict resolution are learned, not innate, then women are likely to learn different methods than men. Important aspects are power and capacity, not only physical, but also verbal, and social.

Human beings have nonphysical powers which are far beyond those of any other animal. Accordingly, human aggression has faces and forms, inconceivable within the realm of animal aggression. Extrapolations from animal studies are, therefore, misleading. Aggressive styles are also subject to developmental change during the life course. As indicated, animal aggression is mostly physical. Also among young children lacking verbal skills, aggression is predominantly physical.

Verbal skills, when they develop, are quickly utilized not only for peaceful communication, but also for aggressive purposes. When social skills develop, even more sophisticated strategies of aggression are made possible, with the aggressor being able to harm a target person without even being identified: Those strategies may be referred to as indirect aggression (Lagerspetz, Bjorkqvist, and Peltonen, 1988; Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, and Kaukiainen, 1992).

There are good reasons to believe that, as far as adult interpersonal conflict is concerned, physical aggression is really the exception, not the rule. Other means are more likely to be used.

Burbank (1987) reviews anthropological research on female aggression. She finds females of different cultures having a large potential of aggressive means to use in order to get even with their husbands, such as, e.g., locking them out of the house for the night: she regards this as an act of aggression. Burbank (1987) found females seldom to resort to physical aggression against their husbands, but they did so, occasionally. The most common reason was that their husbands had committed adultery. Burbank found, however, that women are much more often aggressive towards other women than towards men.

Here is one type from popular literature that fits the pattern:

The Fearmonger Boss. People do what a "fearsome" boss says because they're afraid of him, which actually encourages further intimidation. He always has a threat, and he constantly follows through with that threat in order to keep his employees acquiescent.

Often bulling behavior is combined with paranoia tendencies (paranoiac self-defense). Again this category is fuzzy.

See Bullies or aggressive psychopaths for more information

Paranoids

Paranoid managers are psychopaths for whom continual mistrust and misjudgment of environment dominates other (often no less pathological) personality features. Wikipedia defines paranoia in the following way:

Paranoid personality disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis that denotes a personality disorder with paranoid features. It is characterized by an exaggerated sensitivity to rejection, resentfulness, distrust, as well as the inclination to distort experienced events. Neutral and friendly actions of others are often misinterpreted as being hostile or contemptuous.

Unfounded suspicions regarding the sexual loyalty of partners and loyalty in general as well as the belief that one's rights are not being recognized is stubbornly and argumentatively insisted upon.

Paranoid managers are suspicious, touchy, typically humorless, quick to take offense and slow to forgive, self-righteous (Which makes them remarkably similar to authoritarians and micromanagers). They are often argumentative and litigious. They seldom show tenderness and may avoid intimacy; often they seem tense and brusque.

Paranoid personalities find causal connections everywhere; for them nothing is coincidental.

They are constantly on guard and are hypersensitive to critique. That means that they often take offense where none is intended. Often they have problems with understanding humor. They appear cold and, in fact, often avoid becoming intimate with others. Often pride themselves on their rationality, objectivity and fairness. Paranoid managers rarely come forward to seek help from subordinates.

Often paranoia combines with "toxic incompetence" as they cannot make decision on time (analysis paralysis), insists of creating tons of useless documentation and due to this skip important project milestones, etc. Fear of exposure of paranoid manager is blended into a pattern of pervasive distrust and suspiciousness. An inability to trust, doubts about others' loyalty, distortion and fabrication of personal histories, qualifications and facts, misinterpretation, and bearing grudges unnecessarily are generally hallmarks of the disorder. Pathological and instinctive aggressive counter-attack, the need to control others is also a prominent feature. They like to collect evidence of subordinates. Paranoid managers often can be classified as "raw bullies", as in relations with subordinates they prefer to rely on brute force and direct intimidation.

For more information see Paranoids

Micromanagers

Tendency to micromanage subordinates is often combined with paranoia and bulling in various (but of course lesser then those classified as bullies or as paranoid) degrees. It also pretty often demonstrate itself as a distinct condition close to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OSD).

Micromanagers are remarkably close to authoritarian personalities in patterns of behaviour and demonstrate typical for the latter category bouts of anger (Borderline Rage). Reverse is not true, some authoritarians avoid micromanaging. Micromanagers often have almost pathological neatness; the latter is especially typical for women. Often their hairstyle is distinctly refined.

Especially dangerous are paranoid incompetent micromanagers (PIMM) the type which we will study in more detail on a separate set of pages:

Micromanagers is one of the few areas were gender stereotyping might provide some survival benefits. Women tend to be more detail oriented, and female corporate psychopaths more often tend to behave like micromanagers. Female PIMM can be mean, evil, vindictive and quite petty.

If a female boss is insecure about her skills and abilities she is more likely to exhibit PIMM behavior. Female PIMM are usually more skilled in using indirect aggression, especially isolation.

Level of paranoia is elevated and often micromanagers simultaneously can be classified as paranoid managers. Among common traits are complete absence of trust in the staff, pathological need for control, pathologic dissatisfaction with results, and recurring "tantrums."

Many of PIMM can be also classified as bullies but again they, especially female PIMM, prefer indirect aggression to direct. Usually, female PIMM cultivate spying on subordinates and encourage "little birds" to rest on their shoulders and whisper all forms of gossip. This, these minions believe, ingratiates them to their bosses.

For more information see Micromanagers

Narcissists

The narcissistic bosses are characterized by "a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy," often evidenced as envy, taking advantage of others, an exaggerated sense of self-importance and entitlement, and arrogant or haughty behavior. There is not much hope for the poor shmacs toiling for the narcissistic personality-disordered boss who demands perfection, absolute loyalty, and 24/7 devotion to the job.

Narcissistic managers are not that different from other types and also suffer from compulsive need for control ("control freaks"). Narcissistic behavior is dominated by compulsive desire to project highly positive image resulting in unstable behavior with emotional outbursts caused by insecurity and weakness rather than any real feelings of confidence or self-esteem. One interesting feature of narcissists is that their behaviour in family environment is often more brutal and tyrannical then with subordinates of the office. That makes they close to micromanagers.

Typically they are oversensitive to criticism and do not accept slightest criticism from below. They often can be simultaneously classified both as bullies and micromanagers. As they need to steal all the achievements of subordinates to built their image they are typically "gatekeepers" who try tightly control all the communications channels with the superiors'. Can be quite paranoid and react inadequately on any threat to their projected image.

For more information see Narcissists.

Manipulator bosses or Machiavellian boss ("wolfs in sheep closing")

Manipulative psychopaths are probably the smoothest of corporate psychopaths. Here we will mean a class of corporate psychopath who excels in manipulative behaviors including, but not limited to flattery and seduction. All psychopaths use this to a certain extent, but for this type this is a preferred tactic. Also they are typically talented actors and can wear their fake, "invented personality" with confidence and aplomb typical for great actors in movies and theater.

While manipulative behaviors including, but not limited to flattery and seduction are prominent, other features typical for corporate psychopath are usually present too. They are very similar to paranoid managers in their behavior toward subordinates, but unlike paranoids are capable to create a real smokescreen over their real personality by using flattery and seduction.

Unlike bullies they prefer indirect aggression to direct. They have tendency to play by the rules only as long as it suits them and break rules as soon as this is needed for achieving thier objectives. They are notoriously capable to exploit "grey" area in their favor. This distinguishes them from paranoids. Like narcissists they fear becoming less valued, if their underlings get any recognition for exemplary work. Manipulator bosses are backstabbers who'll go to frightening lengths to look good to their superiors at the expense of denigrating subordinates.

Typically have a dual personality syndrome and behave completely differently with superiors then with subordinates. Here is how they are described in one of Monster career self-help articles:

The Manipulator Boss

Also known as the Machiavellian boss, this type is extremely intelligent and one of the most dangerous. The manipulator boss is highly focused, very motivated, and always has a secret plan. He looks at people as a means to an end. The world is a giant pyramid and the apex is his. People he touches or runs over on the way to the top are casualties he writes off. If you work for a manipulator, watch your back. Your best bet is to be open and honest with him. Volunteer information. Your boss, who has long forgotten what truth is, will be left impressed by it.

For more information see Manipulator bosses or Machiavellian boss ("wolfs in sheep closing")

Empty Suits (Aggressive Incompetent Managers)

We need to distinguish between normal and abnormal incompetence. Normal or institutional incompetence is inherent in large bureaucracies and in reflected on Peter Principle and Parkinson law. In this case the manager was competent on some lower level of hierarchy but became incompetent after promotion or as often happens in IT due to loss of technical qualification in the current position.

But there is also other, abnormal incompetence, when a person got to his position due to some "institutional lift" (for example being close friend or relative of one of the higher level managers, or a secretary who is a mistress of the upper manager and was promoted to some technical position in IT department). This case is also called pathological incompetence or colloquially "empty suits".

It is usually quite toxic if such a manager is also aggressive. Unfortunately more often then not it is correlated with extreme aggressiveness as well as other personality problems -- most toxically incompetent managers are micromanagers or narcissists or bullies or some combination. No substance and not much style. Just very sharp claws and elbows.

Such managers are more widespread that this is assumed in Harvard Business Scholl publications: in a large organization competence is not the primary value. Politics, connections, and clever tactics can compensate for incompetence. The sad truth that they are pretty typical in large organizations for reasons completely different from The Peter Principle. In "bootlickocracy", the most incompetents are valued for "different reasons" and can easily propel themselves into a supervisory role.

Toxic incompetence is usually correlated with various other personality disorders and is prominent among corporate psychopaths. Common clues include:

For more information see Empty Suits (Aggressive Incompetent Managers).

Psychopaths are real aliens, "people without conscience"

Psychopathic bosses are people that are so different from normal people that they can be truly called aliens. And those dramatic differences cannot be understood in terms of antisocial rearing or development. They operate using different set of assumptions, and it is the latter that makes them the natural "predators" of the corporate world, "criminals without criminal offences".

In corporate environment psychopath is the person who fails to recognize, much less to empathize with, the personal human dignity and rights of subordinates. That's why they are called "people without conscience". They do not feel remorse at lying or manipulating, and they typically lie without limit creating an elaborate edifice of their fake past. This "addiction to lying" (and related inconsistencies in their descriptions of their past) is probably the most telling early warning sign about psychopath. Typically they "invent" their past. They have trouble with teamwork for the same reason. They will say one thing to one person, and something different to someone else.

As psychopaths are addicted to lying, they frequently contradict themselves. Typically they also enjoy harming and bullying others. In young age they are often cruel to animals...

And it is difficult to understand how alien they are from "common people". To a certain extent they are insane. Please note that "sanity" does not mean perfection; it merely means sufficient engagement with the real world and society to allow us to survive both day-by-day and in the long term – thus "sane" individuals usually tend to obey traffic laws, learn from their mistakes and practical experience and, in the case of moral sanity, they recognize in others their worth and their capacity for joy and suffering. Psychopaths are by definition reckless. This actions aren't merely misguided, but often are clinically dysfunctional. That's why they often self-destruct.

Furthermore, sanity implies an ability of introspection: capacity to critically evaluate one's experience, to distinguish fact from fiction, and to tune behavior, to adapt to the real world. Insanity, by implication, suggests a significant level of detachment from reality and inability to change one behavior despite negative feedback from the environment. For example, a psychopath not only can't recognize the human worth and the capacity for pleasure and pain in others, he does not recognize any value of that. For him treating people like objects is "normal" and any empathy is for suckers. In this sense he/she is living in an "unreal", artificial world. Detached for reality world, the world were no empathy exits. It is often correlates with other psychological disorders such as paranoia.

The presence or absence of conscience and related lack of emotions is a deep human division, arguably as significant as intelligence, race, and closer then many would think to gender differences.

We don't know what makes psychopath ticks and how they acquire the set of behavioral patterns they demonstrate. So most of modern literature is limited to "traits based description". For extensive list of traits see The psychopath in the corner office. This "trait classification" method that prevails in the literature is very limited and in general should be considered unscientific. As such, it overlaps with "popular urban mythology". Still even mythology is better then nothing and we do not have any other approach that is really better.

Warning

You need to understand that those description are pretty much ad hoc. Reality is more complex and does not fit well within this rigid scheme. Often traits are intermixed in a unique way that defy classification. That's why you need really put an effort into studying your particular type and documenting his/her behavior to get some real insights into particular beast you are dealing with. One important variable partially omitted is the level of intellect (also low IQ is reflected in Empty Suits (Aggressive Incompetent Managers) type). Often psychopaths have high or very high IQ.

There are probably several more important factors that were omitted. For example, gender differences are also very important and color psychopathic behavior in a unique way. See Female Sociopaths

Methods of attacks used by psychopathic bosses vary but one common is based on performance reviews. There are several traps there you can and should avoid. See Surviving a Bad Performance Review

The simplest way to get some additional insight would be checkpoint list based on typical traits displayed by psychopaths. See The psychopath in the corner office

For psychopaths the office environment is a theatre of war and like in any war ends justify means. So dirty tricks are ok as French proverb A la guerre, comme a la guerre implies. They are typically used by psychopaths without any constrains (spreading dirty rumors is the specialty of female sociopath and those skills are usually polished since childhood to perfection.). The greatest variety is observable from Machiavellians Manipulators but sophistication is typical for psychopath in general. See Machiavellians Manipulators Tricks.

You should remember famous saying that "War is a continuation of policy by other means" and don't overreact.

First of all, like in real war, there is a "fog of war" over the whole situation (i.e., you are facing incomplete, dubious, and often completely erroneous information and high levels of fear, doubt, and excitement). Which complicate rational assessment of the situation so delays with the reaction and keeping your cards close to your chest might in many cases be not detrimental, but advantageous.

Actually studying war tactics which were discussed, for example, in famous Clausewitz On War (available free from clausewitz.com.) and The Art of War is not a bad idea. Among them (cited from Wikipedia):

There are several good books on the subject that you should definitely read. Stakes are so high that any additional ammo worth much more then its nominal cost. See a list of suggestions in Toxic managers: The Problem of Corporate Psychopaths. But again, you should took information provided with a grain of salt.

Watching films that depict psychopath also provide some additional insight and this way of study should not be overlooked. Unlike real events you can watch the film over and over again and that's enhance the understanding of specific tricks and attack methods. See Psychopaths in Movies.

Some behavior patterns are really easier to study via movies. This is especially true about female sociopaths. For example there is certain logic in outbursts of anger used by psychopath. They are not completely spontaneous, but more of a sign that you entered the territory they already staked. Or they want something that you refuse to give. The same is true for authoritarians (authoritarian rage). See Understanding Borderline Rage.

At the same time, being reserved is very important. One of the tactics used is to provoked you into a burst of your own impulsive behavior as this way psychopath can play victim, while being actually an aggressor. See Anger trap

Dr. Nikolai Bezroukov


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010

[Dec 16, 2018] Exploitation of other people as a priority as well as lack on empathy and compassion are two components which make up a psychopathic personality

Neoliberalism as "psychopath-friendly" social system...
Dec 16, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

ShaunNewman -> Mauryan , 23 Aug 2016 20:59

Exploitation is high on the priority list of any Tory government, wealth should be distributed much more fairly than it currently is. The tories only serve the rich, they have no time or empathy for the poor.

Empathy and compassion are vacant in the tory philosophy of the world. These two components make up a psychopathic personality.

[Dec 16, 2018] Sociopaths Live Longer Survival Guide For A Culture In Decline by Frank Tomben

Notable quotes:
"... To cope with that, there is another whole industry of diversion, media, drugs, you name it, and that works very well, I know. But nowadays, there is a certain unease in the air, some people feel like they are led to the slaughterhouse ..."
Dec 16, 2018 | www.amazon.com

Egoistic individuals win against altruistic individuals. Altruistic societies win against egoistic societies. Everything else is commentary.

... ... ...

A friend of mine works for a TV station. When 9/11 hit, he confided in me that champagne corks were hitting the ceiling at his workplace. I wasn't particularly shocked at this revelation, and I don't assume anybody will be, but I think it speaks volumes about the way culture works nowadays. It is no longer a band tying us together for which we feel thankful and are ready to make sacrifices to, because we have been systematically overloaded with unnecessary information to stimulate our desires, and we have been taught that every thing and everybody can be easily replaced, so we tend to think nothing really matters. But things weren't always like this.

The premise of this book is that we live in a declining culture. To me, that is apparent every day. I work with electronic appliances that people depend upon, but nobody wants to know how they function, what is damaging, or how you can repair them. Even official jobs that are advertised as "maintenance" consist of not actually repairing stuff, instead focusing on selling new stuff. This can be safely ascribed to an idea put forth by neo-liberalism: that everybody can be replaced, because it's not important how the work is done as long as it's done at all. People in leading positions want to think like that because it makes their job easier, so they tend to ignore any evidence to the contrary.

And of course that is a way to make money and waste resources, so in our current world it is "successful". But we all know resources are limited, And of course that is a way to make money and waste resources, so in our current world it is "successful". But we all know resources are limited, and if the only way to be successful is by wasting limited resources, that success is, by definition, limited. And it is not only material resources that are wasted, but human resources as well. People think "doesn't matter, there are too many people on this planet anyway", but when people feel wasted, they develop negative feelings.

To cope with that, there is another whole industry of diversion, media, drugs, you name it, and that works very well, I know. But nowadays, there is a certain unease in the air, some people feel like they are led to the slaughterhouse , because we know, about 40% of us are going to be replaced by robots, and we don't know what will happen, other civilizations have tripped over less already. There might be a civil war coming, that's what fascists and Isis are rooting for, or a robot-led police state, that's what the top 1% are rooting for, one thing we do know is: democracy is helplessly taking it in the ass from capitalism.

So some people turn to activism. I will not lie: I value my life too much for that kind of bullshit. And I really think it isn't necessary. But I don't want to deter anybody from engaging in such behavior. Only we have to stay aware of the powers at be, and we can learn from history. When the fascists took over Germany, they made use of census data acquired decades before which listed people who were disabled, gay, which they proceeded to fill their concentration camps with. Now compare that with the data that is collected in our time and imagine a similar regime change. You don't have to look very far; the people of Turkey experienced something in that vein not long ago. Several similar examples can be found throughout history, so you should be aware of the possible consequences of activism.

But what's the alternative, you ask? I've given that some serious thought for decades, and this book is just one of several ways to give you an idea...

From the book flap:

I also strongly recommend you learn to trust people. It makes life so much easier and allows you to focus on your own development instead of worrying what other people might think. Even with the occasional disappointment, life is just so much more fun that way than by being paranoid. While we are on the subject of trust, which is obviously a foundation for all relationships, it s also a major perk derived from them. Nowadays, people tend to think that relationships are means to exploit other people to gain money (although we all know it's a bubble), status or to let them do your work for you. And then they wonder and complain why other people do die same shit to them. So let me put it in very basic words: it doesn't matter whether you believe in god.

As long as you are part of society, you might just as well consider the people around you as your collective god, because you aren't able to live without them, especially if shit starts hitting the fan. Our current culture is self- conscious enough to realize it has no long term perspective, that's why we tend to admire the con men and vote them into power. But thinking ahead, it's obvious that this will lead us nowhere. So when the next bubble bursts, people who are revered today might find their heads put on sticks. In this light, it becomes apparent that the true value of relationships is honing your sense who you can trust how much, and that is something you need regardless of what culture you live in, even more when it crumbles beneath your feet.

[Dec 10, 2018] An editorial on Trump's methods

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... I have seen this kind of methodology many times before in the world of sole owner entrepreneurial business. In that world egotism is king and the owner/wheeler dealer stands alone surrounded by underlings and consultants. For him they are nothing. They are expendable assets who exist only to serve his egocentric will and interests. They are there to be useful to him and can be disposed of whenever they are not. Trump operates exactly that way. Subordinates are disposable at will. Institutions mean nothing to such a man. He needs a secretary to run errands for him, not a chief-of-staff who will inevitably wish to be a "player." Anyone who takes the job is a fool. ..."
"... So, why has Trump done this? My present theory is that DJT is displeased with Dunford and wishes to hold over his head the threat of quick dismissal . This is a close analogy of the way people like Trump operate in business where it is routine to undermine subordinates for the purpose of creating insecurity leading to prostrate submission to the throne ..."
"... entrepreneurs are often know-it-all types who would have great difficulty surviving in a business that didn't consistently permit them to have their own way, all the while tolerating their difficult personalities. It seems many entrepreneurs rely on family members to varying degrees. ..."
"... I have no way of knowing if Trump's intuition is based in part on B movies, but it is surely based on his many-decades of experience in real estate development, primarily in cut-throat NYC, which likely accounts for his pugnacity and desire for loyalty. Long ago, someone sagely warned me that the first 3 letters of "contractor" spell CON. ..."
"... Considering the fact that this often goes under the title of intuition (with intuition also defined as educated guess), I am afraid there is very little "educated" in Trump's intuition, or "feel" for that matter. ..."
"... The other descriptive that I like is that these, usually men, wake up in the morning and go to sleep at night thinking of nothing except how to maintain their position. ..."
"... I have fought the notion that his constant creation of insecurity on my part was intentional. I've harbored these thoughts in my own personal wilderness for many years, but have never heard someone else discuss the same issues before. Sometimes a diagnosis has a clarifying value in its own right! ..."
Dec 10, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

IMO Trump has no real use for a chief-of-staff in the White House.

I heard Anthony Scaramucci (the little guy who was in the WH for a couple of days) say on TeeVee yesterday that Donaldo has his own way of doing things that involves establishing a "hub and spokes" system and that he needs people he trusts and who accept his personal judgment, judgment based on his own "feel" for situations.

I have seen this kind of methodology many times before in the world of sole owner entrepreneurial business. In that world egotism is king and the owner/wheeler dealer stands alone surrounded by underlings and consultants. For him they are nothing. They are expendable assets who exist only to serve his egocentric will and interests. They are there to be useful to him and can be disposed of whenever they are not. Trump operates exactly that way. Subordinates are disposable at will. Institutions mean nothing to such a man. He needs a secretary to run errands for him, not a chief-of-staff who will inevitably wish to be a "player." Anyone who takes the job is a fool.

In this context the case of the Trump announcement, a year in advance of his term's end, of a replacement for the CJCS, General Joseph Dunford USMC is interesting. Trump has announced that General Mark Milley, the present US Army Chief-Of-Staff, will succeed. The question is - why announce now? And why announce this now with a "footnote" to the effect that the "transfer" date will be announced at some future unspecified date? Milley is a loquacious, big, and energetic man who is reportedly quite good at the backslapping, locker room chit-chat that Trump is comfortable with. He undoubtedly has made a good impression on Trump in personal contacts and impression is all important in dealing with Trump.

OTOH Milley is really not like Trump. He is an Ivy League product of Princeton and Columbia Universities, is widely read in history, is personally as brave as a lion on the battlefield and has a record of working well within the institutions of the armed forces for systematic re-structuring of the Army. I will guess that the president doesn't really know much about Milley. IMO he will inevitably and quickly be displeased with Milley when he is CJCS.

So, why has Trump done this? My present theory is that DJT is displeased with Dunford and wishes to hold over his head the threat of quick dismissal . This is a close analogy of the way people like Trump operate in business where it is routine to undermine subordinates for the purpose of creating insecurity leading to prostrate submission to the throne. pl

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-looking-at-several-candidates-for-chief-of-staff_us_5c0e5a81e4b0a606a9aae141


Walrus , 8 hours ago

Great analysis. I don't see Trump as malicious in his behaviour (nor perhaps do you), it's just the way he has successfully navigated the property development shark tank. He loves his country and I think he will be forgiven for a lot if he succeeds in perhaps not completely draining the swamp but desiccating and shrinking it a bit.

Trumps is not the only way to do business. There is an Australian property development billionaire (Frank Lowey) who seems to have succeeded in that field by crafting exceedingly subtle "win/win" solutions, not the "win/lose, sturm und drang" Trump productions.

Pat Lang Mod -> Walrus , 6 hours ago
I don't see him as malicious either. He has an occupation induced personality deformity. I agree that if he succeeds in some of these initiatives, a lot of this will be forgiven and forgotten. Yes you can do this on a win-win basis. In my experience the Guggenheims do that.
DianaLC , 11 hours ago
I had never heard of the "hub and spoke" method of business management. Very interesting. You wrote: "He needs a secretary to run errands for him, not a chief-of-staff who will inevitably wish to be a "player." I have worked in that "secretary" position for a very small consulting firm. I can still hear in my head my name being yelled and having to drop everything to run in and figure out what new and important task I had to accomplish.

I had been hired to proofread the consultant's documents because no one nowadays teaches "correct grammar." I did that, but much of my time was spent finding things and information and people that he needed.

BTW, whatever happened to Nixon's secretary?

akaPatience , 5 hours ago
I pretty much agree with this assessment of entrepreneurs. It's been my experience, not only as part of a mid-western mom and pop commercial real estate company, but also as a resident who literally lives on a Main Street lined with small businesses, that entrepreneurs are often know-it-all types who would have great difficulty surviving in a business that didn't consistently permit them to have their own way, all the while tolerating their difficult personalities. It seems many entrepreneurs rely on family members to varying degrees.

I have no way of knowing if Trump's intuition is based in part on B movies, but it is surely based on his many-decades of experience in real estate development, primarily in cut-throat NYC, which likely accounts for his pugnacity and desire for loyalty. Long ago, someone sagely warned me that the first 3 letters of "contractor" spell CON.

I'll never forget the very first time I visited New York as a young girl, and a SoHo shop keeper mocked me for speaking too slowly. It's a different world, lacking in gentility...

smoothieX12 , 6 hours ago
and who accept his personal judgment, judgment based on his own "feel" for situations

Considering the fact that this often goes under the title of intuition (with intuition also defined as educated guess), I am afraid there is very little "educated" in Trump's intuition, or "feel" for that matter.

Pat Lang Mod -> smoothieX12 , 6 hours ago
Yes. Intuition is high speed reasoning based on a massive store of data and experience. "Fingerspitzengefuhl?" The problem with Trump's "feel" is that it is based on B movies and similar quality sources. In the military context this describes someone in whom knowledge has become capability and who understand a battlefield by looking at it.
Bill Herschel , 6 hours ago
As long as you include all organizations under the umbrella term "business" this is exactly accurate. Spend some time in an academic department.

The other descriptive that I like is that these, usually men, wake up in the morning and go to sleep at night thinking of nothing except how to maintain their position. Trump must be a very worried man at this stage. Worried and explosively temperamental. Who can he please? He needs to toady to someone, and thus far the only people he's been able to toady to are VVP and Kim. So, more campaign rallies and appearances on Fox. Not enough to keep him going. Wartime President?

Pat Lang Mod -> Bill Herschel , 6 hours ago
I was the Professor of the Arabic Language and Middle East Studies at West Point. That is the oldest college of engineering in the US. It is not the same. There, my colleagues were trying to screw me. It was not the bosses, head of department, dean, etc. In the entrepreneurial sole owner setup the owner seeks to intimidate you to hold power over you.
MP98 , 7 hours ago
You're right about the technique for getting rid of subordinates. I worked for many, many years in a piranha tank and saw this behavior up close.

It was explained thusly: "He was sold to the board and has a friend on the board, so I'll make his life miserable until he gets the message." Outright firing (except for cause) can get messy

Pat Lang Mod -> MP98 , 6 hours ago
I understand but I am talking about companies where there is no board, i.e., private companies which choose not to have an executive board.
MP98 -> Pat Lang , 6 hours ago
Sole proprietorships usually have another dark side - family members. Your analysis of Trump's "style" seems spot on. Every day (sometimes every hour) is a new "adventure."
Walrus , 8 hours ago
BTW, according to his autobiography, Herman Neumann, (Herman the German) VP for aircraft engines at GE, had a sign on the office wall behind his desk: "Feel Insecure".
widowson , 11 hours ago
Col. Lang:

I appreciate all the insights this site provides, but none maybe greater, personally, than your comments above: I've spent the last 15 years working at single proprietor consultancies in a sales capacity, and my current boss treats me exactly as you pointed out above.

I have fought the notion that his constant creation of insecurity on my part was intentional. I've harbored these thoughts in my own personal wilderness for many years, but have never heard someone else discuss the same issues before. Sometimes a diagnosis has a clarifying value in its own right!

[Dec 09, 2018] Unintended consequences #MeToo movement causing 'gender segregation' on Wall Street

Female psychopath are especially dangerous as "reverse sexual predators". Assumption that all women are honest in their accusations is extremely naive. Revenge and other inferior motives are pretty common, especially in academic setting.
"A sense of walking on eggshells" is a sure sign of unhealthy psychopath dominated environment.
Notable quotes:
"... Two female reporters for Bloomberg interviewed 30 Wall Street executives and found that while it's true that women might be afraid to speak up for fear of losing their careers, men are also so afraid of being falsely accused that they won't even have dinner, or even one-to-one business meetings with a female colleague. They worry that a simple comment or gesture could be misinterpreted. "It's creating a sense of walking on eggshells," one Morgan Stanley executive said. ..."
"... All these extreme strategies being adopted by men to avoid falling victim to an unjust #MeToo scandal are creating a kind of "gender segregation" on Wall Street, the reporters say. ..."
"... "unknown risk," ..."
"... "If men avoid working or traveling with women alone, or stop mentoring women for fear of being accused of sexual harassment, those men are going to back out of a sexual harassment complaint and right into a sex discrimination complaint," ..."
"... "Just try not to be an asshole," ..."
"... "It's really not that hard." ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The #MeToo movement was supposed to make life easier for women in the workplace. It was all about respect and making real abusers pay a price for their behavior. But is it possible to have too much of a good thing?

One of the aims of the movement was to force a change in the conduct of men who said and did sexually inappropriate things in the workplace -- a concept which few people could quibble with. A year on from its beginnings, however, it seems the movement has morphed into something else entirely -- and ironically, it's hurting both men and women.

The 'Pence Effect' and 'gender segregation'

The #MeToo movement has taken down men across a wide spectrum of industries -- but so far, Wall Street has avoided a huge public scandal -- despite its reputation for being, well, a fairly sexist and male-oriented environment. So why has it escaped the #MeToo spotlight?

Two female reporters for Bloomberg interviewed 30 Wall Street executives and found that while it's true that women might be afraid to speak up for fear of losing their careers, men are also so afraid of being falsely accused that they won't even have dinner, or even one-to-one business meetings with a female colleague. They worry that a simple comment or gesture could be misinterpreted. "It's creating a sense of walking on eggshells," one Morgan Stanley executive said.

Bloomberg dubbed the phenomenon the 'Pence Effect' after the US vice president who previously admitted that he would never dine alone with any woman other than his wife. British actor Taron Egerton recently also said he now avoided being alone with women for fear of finding himself in #MeToo's crosshairs.

I remember when a woman I was friendly/kind with perceived me as someone who wanted "more." She wrote me a message about how she was uncomfortable. I'm gay. https://t.co/7z0X7Dwzkp

-- Andy C. Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) December 4, 2018

All these extreme strategies being adopted by men to avoid falling victim to an unjust #MeToo scandal are creating a kind of "gender segregation" on Wall Street, the reporters say.

Hurting women's progress?

The most ironic outcome of a movement that was supposed to be about women's empowerment is that now, even hiring a woman on Wall Street has become an "unknown risk," according to one wealth advisor, who said there is always a concern that a woman might take something said to her in the wrong way.

With men occupying the most senior positions on Wall Street, women need male mentors who can teach them the ropes and help them advance their careers, but what happens when men are afraid to play that role with their younger female colleagues? The unintended consequence of the #MeToo movement on Wall Street could be the stifling of women's progress and a sanitization of the workplace to the point of not even being able to have a private meeting with the door closed.

Another irony is that while men may think they are avoiding one type of scandal, could find themselves facing another: Discrimination complaints.

"A Wall Street rule for the #MeToo era: Avoid women at all cost." https://t.co/TCGk9UzT4R "Secular sharia" has arrived, as I predicted here: https://t.co/TTrWY6ML34 pic.twitter.com/YpEz78iamJ

-- Niall Ferguson (@nfergus) December 3, 2018

"If men avoid working or traveling with women alone, or stop mentoring women for fear of being accused of sexual harassment, those men are going to back out of a sexual harassment complaint and right into a sex discrimination complaint," Stephen Zweig, an employment attorney with FordHarrison told Bloomberg.

Not all men are responding to the #MeToo movement by fearfully cutting themselves off from women, however. "Just try not to be an asshole," one said, while another added: "It's really not that hard."

It might not be that simple, however. It seems there is no escape from the grip of the #MeToo movement. One of the movements most recent victims of the viral hashtag movement is not a man, but a song -- the time-honored classic 'Baby It's Cold Outside' -- which is being banished from American radio stations because it has a "rapey" vibe.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Nov 22, 2018] Political Ponerology (A Science on the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes) by Andrew M. Lobaczewski

I do not recommend the book, but the foreword looks interesting and educational with some very relevant quotes ... Some of her ideas are very questionable and it looks like she does not understand the nature of neoliberal rationality well and thus is trying to create alternative explanations, but still she writes well and covers a lot of ground on her foreword.
You just need to take it with a grain of salt
Notable quotes:
"... Provided you are not forcibly stopped, you can do anything at all. If you are born at the right time, with some access to family fortune, and you have a special talent for whipping up other people's hatred and sense of deprivation, you can arrange to kill large numbers of unsuspecting people. With enough money, you can accomplish this from far away, and you can sit back safely and watch in satisfaction.... ..."
"... Crazy and frightening - and real, in about 4 percent of the population. ..."
"... The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth. ..."
"... In the past several years, there are many more psychologists and psychiatrists and other mental health workers beginning to look at these issues in new ways in response to the questions about the state of our world and the possibility that there is some essential difference between such individuals as George W. Bush and many so-called Neocons, and the rest of us. ..."
"... Current day statistics tell us that there are more psychologically sick people than healthy ones. If you take a sampling of individuals in any given field, you are likely to find that a significant number of them display pathological symptoms to one extent or another. Politics is no exception, and, by its very nature, would tend to attract more of the pathological "dominator types" than other fields. ..."
"... If an individual with a highly contagious illness works in a job that puts them in contact with the public, an epidemic is the result. In the same way, if an individual in a position of political power is a psychopath, he or she can create an epidemic of psychopathology in people who are not, essentially, psychopathic. ..."
Nov 22, 2018 | www.amazon.com
Foreword to the book by Laura Knight-Jadczyk

... ... ...

Nowadays the word "psychopath" generally evokes images of the barely restrained - yet surprisingly urbane - mad-dog serial killer, Dr. Hannibal Lecter, of Silence of the Lambs fame. I will admit that this was the image that came to my mind whenever I heard the word; almost, that is. The big difference was that I never thought of a psychopath as possibly being so cultured or so capable of passing as "normal". But I was wrong, and I was to learn this lesson quite painfully by direct experience. The exact details are chronicled elsewhere; what is important is that this experience was probably one of the most painful and instructive episodes of my life, and it enabled me to overcome a block in my awareness of the world around me and those who inhabit it.

... ... ...

If there is a psychological theory that can explain vicious and harmful behavior, it helps very much for the victim of such acts to have this information so that they do not have to spend all their time feeling hurt or angry. And certainly, if there is a psychological theory that helps a person to find what kind of words or deeds can bridge the chasm between people, to heal misunderstandings, that is also a worthy goal. It was from such a perspective that we began our extensive work on the subjects of narcissism, which then led to the study of psychopathy.

Of course, we didn't start out with such any such "diagnosis" or label for what we were witnessing. We started out with observations and searched the literature for clues, for profiles, for anything that would help us to understand the inner world of a human being - actually a group of human beings - who seemed to be utterly depraved and unlike anything we had ever encountered before. We found that this kind of human is all too common, and that, according to some of the latest research, they cause more damage in human society than any other single so-called "mental illness". Martha Stout, who has worked extensively with victims of psychopaths, writes:

Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken. And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools. Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless. You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition.

In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world. You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered. How will you live your life? What will you do with your huge and secret advantage, and with the corresponding handicap of other people (conscience)? The answer will depend largely on just what your desires happen to be, because people are not all the same. Even the profoundly unscrupulous are not all the same. Some people - whether they have a conscience or not - favor the ease of inertia, while others are filled with dreams and wild ambitions. Some human beings are brilliant and talented, some are dull-witted, and most, conscience or not, are somewhere in between. There are violent people and nonviolent ones, individuals who are motivated by blood lust and those who have no such appetites.

... Provided you are not forcibly stopped, you can do anything at all. If you are born at the right time, with some access to family fortune, and you have a special talent for whipping up other people's hatred and sense of deprivation, you can arrange to kill large numbers of unsuspecting people. With enough money, you can accomplish this from far away, and you can sit back safely and watch in satisfaction....

Crazy and frightening - and real, in about 4 percent of the population.

... The prevalence rate for anorexic eating disorders is estimated a 3.43 percent, deemed to be nearly epidemic, and yet this figure is a fraction lower than the rate for antisocial personality. The high-profile disorders classed as schizophrenia occur in only about 1 percent of [the population] - a mere quarter of the rate of antisocial personality - and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that the rate of colon cancer in the United States, considered "alarmingly high," is about 40 per 100,000 - one hundred times lower than the rate of antisocial personality....

The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth. Yet surprisingly, many people know nothing about this disorder, or if they do, they think only in terms of violent psychopathy - murderers, serial killers, mass murderers - people who have conspicuously broken the law many times over, and who, if caught, will be imprisoned, maybe even put to death by our legal system. We are not commonly aware of, nor do we usually identify, the larger number of nonviolent sociopaths among us, people who often are not blatant lawbreakers, and against whom our formal legal system provides little defense.

Most of us would not imagine any correspondence between concerting an ethnic genocide and, say, guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish. Most of us feel mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another person. Those who have no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.

The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more significant than intelligence, race, or even gender. What differentiates a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what makes the difference between an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer - is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple opportunity. What distinguishes all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche, where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions. [2]

We did not have the advantage of Dr. Stout's book at the beginning of our research project. We did, of course, have Robert Hare and Hervey Cleckley and Guggenbuhl-Craig and others. But they were only approaching the subject of the possibly large numbers of psychopaths that live among us who never get caught breaking laws, who don't murder - or if they do, they don't get caught - and who still do untold damage to the lives of family, acquaintances, and strangers.

Most mental health experts, for a very long time, have operated on the premise that psychopaths come from impoverished backgrounds and have experienced abuse of one sort or another in childhood, so it is easy to spot them, or at least, they certainly don't move in society except as interlopers. This idea seems to be coming under some serious revision lately. As Lobaczewski points out in this book, there is some confusion between Psychopathy and Antisocial Personality Disorder and Sociopathy. As Robert Hare points out, yes, there are many psychopaths who are also "anti-socials", but there seem to be far more of them that would never be classified as anti- social or sociopathic! In other words, they can be doctors, lawyers, judges, policemen, congressmen, presidents of corporations that rob from the poor t< give to the rich, and even presidents.

In a recent paper, it is suggested that psychopathy may exist in ordinary society in even greater numbers than anyone has thus far considered:

Psychopathy, as originally conceived by Cleckley (1941), is not limited to engagement in illegal activities, but rather encompasses such personality characteristics as manipulativeness, insincerity, egocentricity, and lack of guilt - characteristics clearly present in criminals but also in spouses, parents, bosses, attorneys, politicians, and CEOs, to name but a few (Bursten, 1973; Stewart, 1991). Our own examination of the prevalence of psychopathy within a university population suggested that perhaps 5% or more of this sample might be deemed psychopathic, although the vast majority of those will be male (more than 1/10 males versus approximately 1/100 females).

As such, psychopathy may be characterized ... as involving a tendency towards both dominance and coldness. Wiggins (1995) in summarizing numerous previous findings ... indicates that such individuals are prone to anger and irritation and are willing to exploit others. The)' are arrogant, manipulative, cynical, exhibitionistic, sensation-seeking, Machiavellian, vindictive, and out for their own gain. With respect to their patterns of social exchange (Foa & Foa, 1974), they attribute love and status to themselves, seeing themselves as highly worthy and important, but prescribe neither love nor status to others, seeing them as unworthy and insignificant. This characterization is clearly consistent with the essence of psychopathy as commonly described.

The present investigation sought to answer some basic questions regarding the construct of psychopathy in non forensic settings ... In so doing we have returned to Cleckley's (1941) original emphasis on psychopathy as a personality style not only among criminals, but also among successful individuals within the community.

What is clear from our findings is that (a) psychopathy measures have converged on a prototype of psychopathy that involves a combination of dominant and cold interpersonal characteristics; (b) psychopathy does occur in the community and at what might be a higher than expected rate; and (c) psychopathy appears to have little overlap with personality disorders aside from Antisocial Personality Disorder....

Clearly, where much more work is needed is in understanding what factors differentiate the abiding (although perhaps not moral-abiding) psychopath from the law-breaking psychopath; such research surely needs to make greater use of non forensic samples than has been customary in the past. [3]

Lobaczewski discusses the fact that there are different types of psychopaths. One type, in particular, is the most deadly of all: the Essential Psychopath. He doesn't give us a "checklist" but rather discusses what is inside the psychopath. His description meshes very well with items in the paper quoted above.

Martha Stout also discusses the fact that psychopaths, like anyone else, are born with different basic likes and dislikes and desires, which is why some of them are doctors and presidents and others are petty thieves or rapists. "Likeable", "Charming", "Intelligent", "Alert", "Impressive", "Confidence- inspiring," and "A great success with the ladies". This is how Hervey Cleckley described most of his subjects in The Mask of Sanity. It seems that, in spite of the fact that their actions prove them to be "irresponsible" and "self- destructive", psychopaths seem to have in abundance the very traits most desired by normal persons. The smooth self-assurance acts as an almost supernatural magnet to normal people who have to read self-help books or go to counseling to be able to interact with others in an untroubled way. The psychopath, on the contrary, never has any neuroses, no self-doubts, never experiences angst, and is what "normal" people seek to be. What's more, even if they aren't that attractive, they are "babe magnets".

Cleckley s seminal hypothesis is that the psychopath suffers from profound and incurable affective deficit. If he really feels anything at all, they are emotions of only the shallowest kind. He is able to do whatever he wants, based on whatever whim strikes him, because consequences that would fill the ordinary man with shame, self-loathing, and embarrassment simply do not affect the psychopath at all. What to others would be a horror or a disaster is to him merely a fleeting inconvenience.

Cleckley posits that psychopathy is quite common in the community at large. His cases include examples of psychopaths who generally function normally in the community as businessmen, doctors, and even psychiatrists. Nowadays, some of the more astute researchers see criminal psychopathy - often referred to as anti-social personality disorder - as an extreme of a particular personality type. I think it is more helpful to characterize criminal psychopaths as "unsuccessful psychopaths".

One researcher, Alan Harrington, goes so far as to say that the psychopath is the new man being produced by the evolutionary pressures of modern life. Certainly, there have always been shysters and crooks, but past concern was focused on ferreting out incompetents rather than psychopaths. Unfortunately, all that has changed. We now need to fear the super- sophisticated modern crook who does know what he is doing - and does it so well that no one else knows. Yes, psychopaths love the business world.

"Uninvolved with others, he coolly saw into their fears and desires, and maneuvered them as he wished. Such a man might not, after all, be doomed to a life of scrapes and escapades ending ignominiously in the jailhouse. Instead of murdering others, he might become a corporate raider and murder companies, firing people instead of killing them, and chopping up their functions rather than their bodies." (Harrington)...

... [T]he consequences to the average citizen from business crimes are staggering. As criminologist Georgette Bennett says, "They account for nearly 30% of case filings in U.S. District Courts - more than any other category of crime. The combined burglar)7, mugging and other property7 losses induced by the country's street punks come to about $4 billion a year. However, the seemingly upstanding citizens in our corporate board rooms and the humble clerks in our retail stores bilk us out of between $40 and $200 billion a year."

Concern here is that the costume for the new masked sanity of a psychopath is just as likely to be a three-piece suit as a ski mask and a gun. As Harrington says, "We also have the psychopath in respectable circles, no longer assumed to be a loser." He quotes William Krasner as saying, "They - psychopath and part psychopath - do well in the more unscrupulous types of sales work, because they take such delight in 'putting it over on them', getting away with it - and have so little conscience about defrauding their customers." Our society is fast becoming more materialistic, and success at any cost is the credo of many businessmen. The typical psychopath thrives in this kind of environment and is seen as a business "hero". [4]

The study of "ambulatory" psychopaths - what we call "The Garden Variety Psychopath" - has, however, hardly begun. Very little is known about subcriminal psychopathy. Some researchers have begun to seriously consider the idea that it is important to study psychopathy not as a pathological category but as a general personality trait in the community at large. In other words, psychopathy is being recognized as a more or less different type of human.

Hervey Cleckley actually comes very close to suggesting that psychopaths are human in every respect - but that they lack a soul. This lack of "soul quality" makes them very efficient "machines". They can write scholarly works, imitate the words of emotion, but over time, it becomes clear that their words do not match their actions. They are the type of person who can claim that they are devastated by grief who then attend a party "to forget". The problem is: they really do forget.

Being very efficient machines, like a computer, they are able to execute very complex routines designed to elicit from others support for what they want. In this way, many psychopaths are able to reach very high positions in life. It is only over time that their associates become aware of the fact that their climb up the ladder of success is predicated on violating the rights of others. "Even when they are indifferent to the rights of their associates, they are often able to inspire feelings of trust and confidence."

The psychopath recognizes no flaw in his psyche, no need for change. Andrew Lobaczewski addresses the problem of the psychopath and their extremely significant contribution to our macrosocial evils, their ability to act as the eminence grise behind the very structure of our society. It is very important to keep in mind that this influence comes from a relatively small segment of humanity. The other 90-some percent of human beings are not psychopaths.

But that 90-some percent of normal people know that something is wrong! They just can't quite identify it; can't quite put their finger on it; and because they can't, they tend to think that there is nothing they can do about it, or maybe it is just God punishing people.

What is actually the case is that when that 90-some percent of human beings fall into a certain state, as Lobaczewski will describe, the psychopaths, like a virulent pathogen in a body, strike at the weaknesses, and the entire society is plunged into conditions that always and inevitably lead to horror and tragedy on a very large scale.

The movie, The Matrix, touched a deep chord in society because it exemplified this mechanistic trap in which so many people find their lives enmeshed, and from which they are unable to extricate themselves because they believe that everyone around them who "looks human" is, in fact, just like them - emotionally, spiritually, and otherwise.

Take an example of how psychopaths can directly affect society at large: the "legal argument" as explicated by Robert Canup in his work on the "socially adept psychopath". The legal argument seems to be at the foundation of our society. We believe that the legal argument is an advanced system of justice. This is a very cunning trick that has been foisted on normal people by psychopaths in order to have an advantage over them. Just think about it for a moment: the legal argument amounts to little more than the one who is the slickest at using the structure for convincing a group of people of something, is the one who is believed. Because this "legal argument" system has been slowly installed as part of our culture, when it invades our personal lives, we normally do not recognize it immediately. But here's how it works.

Human beings have been accustomed to assume that other human beings are - at the very least - trying to "do right" and "be good" and fair and honest. And so, very often, we do not take the time to use due diligence in order to determine if a person who has entered our life is, in fact, a "good person". When a conflict ensues, we automatically fall into the legal argument assumption that in any conflict, one side is partly right one way, and the other is partly right the other, and that we can form opinions about which side is mostly right or wrong. Because of our exposure to the "legal argument" norms, when any dispute arises, we automatically think that the truth will lie somewhere between two extremes. In this case, application of a little mathematical logic to the problem of the legal argument might be helpful.

Let us assume that in a dispute, one side is innocent, honest, and tells the truth. It is obvious that lying does an innocent person no good; what lie can he tell? If he is innocent, the only lie he can tell is to falsely confess "I did it". But lying is nothing but good for the liar. He can declare that "I didn't do it", and accuse another of doing it, all the while the innocent person he has accused is saying "I didn't do it" and is actually telling the truth.

The truth, when twisted by good liars, can always make an innocent person look bad, especially if the innocent person is honest and admits his mistakes.

The basic assumption that the truth lies between the testimony of the two sides always shifts the advantage to the lying side and away from the side telling the truth. Under most circumstances, this shift put together with the fact that the truth is going to also be twisted in such a way as to bring detriment to the innocent person, results in the advantage always resting in the hands of liars - psychopaths. Even the simple act of giving testimony under oath is a useless farce. If a person is a liar, swearing an oath means nothing to that person. However, swearing an oath acts strongly on a serious, strongly on a serious, truthful witness. Again, the advantage is placed on the side of the liar.

It has often been noted that psychopaths have a distinct advantage over human beings with conscience and feelings because the psychopath does not have conscience and feelings. What seems to be so is that conscience and feelings are related to the abstract concepts of "future" and "others". It is "spatio-temporal". We can feel fear, sympathy, empathy, sadness, and so on because we can imagine in an abstract way, the future based on our own experiences in the past, or even just "concepts of experiences" in myriad variations. We can "see ourselves" in them even though they are "out there" and this evokes feelings in us. We can't do something hurtful because we can imagine it being done to us and how it would feel. In other words, we can not only identify with others spatially - so to say - but also temporally - in time.

The psychopath does not seem to have this capacity.

They are unable to "imagine" in the sense of being able to really connect to images in a direct "self connecting to another self' sort of way.

Oh, indeed, they can imitate feelings, but the only real feelings they seem to have - the thing that drives them and causes them to act out different dramas for the effect - is a sort of "predatorial hunger" for what they want. That is to say, they "feel" need/want as love, and not having their needs/wants met is described by them as "not being loved". What is more, this "need/want" perspective posits that only the "hunger" of the psychopath is valid, and anything, and everything "out there", outside of the psychopath, is not real except insofar as it has the capability of being assimilated to the psychopath as a sort of "food". "Can it be used or can it provide something?" is the only issue about which the psychopath seems to be concerned. All else - all activity - is subsumed to this drive.

In short, the psychopath is a predator. If we think about the interactions of predators with their prey in the animal kingdom, we can come to some idea of what is behind the "mask of sanity" of the psychopath. Just as an animal predator will adopt all kinds of stealthy functions in order to stalk their prey, cut them out of the herd, get close to them, and reduce their resistance, so does the psychopath construct all kinds of elaborate camouflage composed of words and appearances - lies and manipulations - in order to "assimilate" their prey.

This leads us to an important question: what does the psychopath really get from their victims? It's easy to see what they are after when they lie and manipulate for money or material goods or power. But in many instances, such as love relationships or faked friendships, it is not so easy to see what the psychopath is after. Without wandering too far afield into spiritual speculations - a problem Cleckley also faced - we can only say that it seems to be that the psychopath enjoys making others suffer. Just as normal humans enjoy seeing other people happy, or doing things that make other people smile, the psychopath enjoys the exact opposite.

Anyone who has ever observed a cat playing with a mouse before killing and eating it has probably explained to themselves that the cat is just "entertained" by the antics of the mouse and is unable to conceive of the terror and pain being experienced by the mouse. The cat, therefore, is innocent of any evil intent. The mouse dies, the cat is fed, and that is nature. Psychopaths don't generally eat their victims.

Yes, in extreme cases of psychopathy, the entire cat and mouse dynamic is carried out. Cannibalism has a long history wherein it was assumed that certain powers of the victim could be assimilated by eating some particular part of them. But in ordinary life, psychopaths don't normally go all the way, so to say. This causes us to look at the cat and mouse scenario again with different eyes. Now we ask: is it too simplistic to think that the innocent cat is merely entertained by the mouse running about and frantically trying to escape? Is there something more to this dynamic than meets the eye? Is there something more than being "entertained" by the antics of the mouse trying to flee? After all, in terms of evolution, why would such behavior be hard-wired into the cat? Is the mouse tastier because of the chemicals of fear that flood his little body? Is a mouse frozen with terror more of a "gourmet" meal?

This suggests that we ought to revisit our ideas about psychopaths with a slightly different perspective. One thing we do know is this: many people who experience interactions with psychopaths and narcissists report feeling "drained" and confused and often subsequently experience deteriorating health. Does this mean that part of the dynamic, part of the explanation for why psychopaths will pursue "love relationships" and "friendships" that ostensibly can result in no observable material gain, is because there is an actual energy consumption?

This suggests that we ought to revisit our ideas about psychopaths with a slightly different perspective. One thing we do know is this: many people who experience interactions with psychopaths and narcissists report feeling "drained" and confused and often subsequently experience deteriorating health. Does this mean that part of the dynamic, part of the explanation for why psychopaths will pursue "love relationships" and "friendships" that ostensibly can result in no observable material gain, is because there is an actual energy consumption?

We do not know the answer to this question. We observe, we theorize, we speculate and hypothesize. But in the end, only the individual victim can determine what they have lost in the dynamic - and it is often far more than material goods. In a certain sense, it seems that psychopaths are soul eaters or "Psychophagic".

In the past several years, there are many more psychologists and psychiatrists and other mental health workers beginning to look at these issues in new ways in response to the questions about the state of our world and the possibility that there is some essential difference between such individuals as George W. Bush and many so-called Neocons, and the rest of us.

Dr. Stout's book has one of the longest explanations as to why none of her examples resemble any actual persons that I have ever read. And then, in a very early chapter, she describes a "composite" case where the subject spent his childhood blowing up frogs with fire-crackers. It is widely known that George W. Bush did this. The subject is also described as graduating college with a С average - which Bush did at Yale - so one naturally wonders ...

In any event, even without Dr. Stout's work, at the time we were studying the matter, we realized that what we were learning was very important to everyone because as the data was assembled, we saw that the clues, the profiles, revealed that the issues we were facing were faced by everyone at one time or another, to one extent or another. We also began to realize that the profiles that emerged also describe rather accurately many individuals who seek positions of power in fields of authority, most particularly politics and commerce. That's really not so surprising an idea, but it honestly hadn't occurred to us until we saw the patterns and recognized them in the behaviors of numerous historical figures and, lately, including George W. Bush and members of his administration.

Current day statistics tell us that there are more psychologically sick people than healthy ones. If you take a sampling of individuals in any given field, you are likely to find that a significant number of them display pathological symptoms to one extent or another. Politics is no exception, and, by its very nature, would tend to attract more of the pathological "dominator types" than other fields. That is only logical, and we began to realize that it was not only logical, it was horrifyingly accurate; horrifying because pathology among people in power can have disastrous effects on all of the people under the control of such pathological individuals. And so, we decided to write about this subject and publish it on the Internet.

As the material went up, letters from our readers began to come in thanking us for putting a name to what was happening to them in their personal lives as well as helping them to understand what was happening in a world that seems to have gone completely mad. We began to think that it was an epidemic, and, in a certain sense, we were right. If an individual with a highly contagious illness works in a job that puts them in contact with the public, an epidemic is the result. In the same way, if an individual in a position of political power is a psychopath, he or she can create an epidemic of psychopathology in people who are not, essentially, psychopathic. Our ideas along this line were soon to receive confirmation from an unexpected source: Andrew Lobaczewski, the author of the book you are about to read.

I received an email as follows:

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen.

I have got your Special Research Project on psychopathy by my computer. You are doing a most important and valuable work for the future of nations ...

I am a very aged clinical psychologist. Forty years ago I took part in a secret investigation of the real nature and psychopathology of the macro-social phenomenon called "Communism". The other researchers were the scientists of the previous generation who are now passed away.

The profound study of the nature of psychopathy, which played the essential and inspirational part in this macro- social psychopathologic phenomenon, and distinguishing it from other mental anomalies, appeared to be the necessary preparation for understanding the entire nature of the phenomenon. The profound study of the nature of psychopathy, which played the essential and inspirational part in this macro- social psychopathologic phenomenon, and distinguishing it from other mental anomalies, appeared to be the necessary preparation for understanding the entire nature of the phenomenon.

The large part of the work, you are doing now, was done in those times ... I am able to provide you with a most valuable scientific document, useful for your purposes. It is my book "Political Ponerology - A science on the nature of evil adjusted for political purposes". You may also find copy of this book in the Library of Congress and in some university and public libraries in the USA.

Be so kind and contact me so that I may mail a copy to you.

Very truly yours!

Andrew M. Lobaczewski

I promptly wrote a reply saying yes, I would very much like to read his book. A couple of weeks later the manuscript arrived in the mail.

As I read, I realized that what I was holding in my hand was essentially a chronicle of a descent into hell, transformation, and triumphant return to the world with knowledge of that hell that was priceless for the rest of us, particularly in this day and time when it seems evident that a similar hell is enveloping the planet. The risks that were taken by the group of scientists that did the research on which this book is based are beyond the comprehension of most of us.

As I read, I realized that what I was holding in my hand was essentially a chronicle of a descent into hell, transformation, and triumphant return to the world with knowledge of that hell that was priceless for the rest of us, particularly in this day and time when it seems evident that a similar hell is enveloping the planet. The risks that were taken by the group of scientists that did the research on which this book is based are beyond the comprehension of most of us. Many of them were young, just starting in their careers when the Nazis began to stride in their hundred league jackboots across Europe. These researchers lived through that, and then when the Nazis were driven out and replaced by the Communists under the heel of Stalin, they faced years of oppression the likes of which those of us today who are choosing to take a stand against the Bush Reich cannot even imagine. But, based on the syndrome that describes the onset of the disease, it seems that the United States, in particular, and perhaps the entire world, will soon enter into "bad times" of such horror and despair that the Holocaust of World War II will seem like just a practice run.

And so, since they were there, and they lived through it and brought back information to the rest of us, it may well save our lives to have a map to guide us in the falling darkness.

Laura Knight-Jadczyk

[Nov 19, 2018] Surviving The Woke Workplace

Notable quotes:
"... I am currently reading "The Gulag Archipelago", and there are some very obvious common threads between what happened in the early Soviet days and what we see today: freedom of speech being attacked, publications shut down completely because the editor published material written by people who were out of favor with the party, people put on trial and their past associations ..."
"... Most of these "nothing to see here" commenters are [neo]liberals that approve of and support these social changes. They are just trying to gaslight the rest of us into not noticing what is right in front of our noses. ..."
"... Leaving out personally identifiable information. My current employer has the following groups: Women & Allies, Pan-Asian & Allies, African American & Allies, Hispanic & Allies, and finally LGBT & Allies. Does anyone notice a group who's missing? I'll give you a hint, it's the only other possible category of race/gender/sexual orientation not already listed. These groups are constantly pushed as THE networking opportunity within the company. Managers and executives run the groups and make it clear that if you want to be recognized in the organization you need to put yourself out there through one of these groups. ..."
"... A lot of your commenters laugh at this kind of wacky corporate signaling, while others react with fear for the future. I can only speak for myself and a few other straight white men when I say our reaction is anger. ..."
"... At the end of his presentation they opened the floor to questions, and the very first question was: "Do we have a social justice mission?" From the tone of the commenter, you could tell immediately she thought we should indeed have a "social justice mission." The CEO fumbled through a few sentences about diversity and opportunity, he was clearly caught off guard. ..."
"... Why bother with the hassle? Make your policies as strict as possible so that someone with a petty grudge has no grounds should they decide to sue. ..."
Nov 19, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

... ... ...

I wanted to bring this to your attention. My husband had a conversation with a young friend of ours who is a recent college grad. He has been working at [a major retailer] for the last year. I'm not sure what his title is, but we have encountered him at the store. He is a great worker and has earned a number of company awards for his performance. He related to my husband that he had had a conversation with a friend at work about the use or non-use of transgender pronouns. He took the position that he would not feel comfortable doing this.

He was later called into his manager's office and reprimanded. The manager told him that someone had overheard his conversation (manager wouldn't say who), and that he had made this person feel "unsafe". Our friend was written up for this, transferred to another store a long distance away, and suffered other severe sanctions! He was a bit naive to have engaged in this conversation at work, but good grief!

Yes, under communism, the slightest infraction was met with overwhelming punitive force. People were taught that they had better be afraid at all times, because one mistaken word, said in front of the wrong person, could mean their lives would change forever.

The reader goes on:

I am currently reading "The Gulag Archipelago", and there are some very obvious common threads between what happened in the early Soviet days and what we see today: freedom of speech being attacked, publications shut down completely because the editor published material written by people who were out of favor with the party, people put on trial and their past associations (before the revolution) and families of origins being used against them, defense lawyers being threatened with prison for the very act of defending those whom the state had deemed its enemies, etc, etc. The major difference that I see is that, in this age, it is mostly the corporations (along with schools and smaller government entities) who are acting in the place of the state to force people to toe the line in their thoughts and speech.

Yes, I'm working on a book proposal now about this very thing. You cannot trust anybody in these workplaces. Companies are forever wanting to do "team-building," but everything about the woke workplace compels those with any common sense to consider everyone around them a potential threat.

The reader went on to talk about her husband's experience in his workplace at a major international corporation. I can't speak in any detail about that, at her request, but she talked about how the Human Resources Department conducted a survey of all employees to find out their viewpoints on LGBT issues and allyship -- which have nothing at all to do with the company's business. Employees weren't compelled to respond, but if you did not respond, HR took note. It all goes in your file. I've heard this from other readers too, about their companies.

The reader said that her husband knows how to work around all this, and will probably be okay, at least until retirement. It's their children that she worries about:

We talk about these issues. Every time something new a happens, I tell them to ask, "What's next?", because something is always coming next. Even still, I believe it will take a miracle for them to resist this relentless indoctrination. I sometimes laugh to myself (not without sadness) when I see those commenters on your blog who still insist that there is "nothing to see here", and things aren't as bad as you're making it out to be. I am amazed that these people continue to say this in the midst of very fast social changes that are affecting real people every single day in ways that would not have happened even three years ago. We're heading for very dangerous times.

I'm going to start a new category of blog posts: "The Woke Workplace". Send me your accounts of political correctness run amok in your office. If you want me to edit any details out for privacy's sake, say so.


RinTX November 19, 2018 at 6:06 pm

"Employees weren't compelled to respond, but if you did not respond, HR took note. It all goes in your file."

It is imperative that no one be allowed to refuse to wear the ribbon. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iV8X8ubGCc

"I sometimes laugh to myself (not without sadness) when I see those commenters on your blog who still insist that there is "nothing to see here", and things aren't as bad as you're making it out to be. I am amazed that these people continue to say this in the midst of very fast social changes that are affecting real people every single day in ways that would not have happened even three years ago. "

Most of these "nothing to see here" commenters are [neo]liberals that approve of and support these social changes. They are just trying to gaslight the rest of us into not noticing what is right in front of our noses.

SMK , says: November 19, 2018 at 6:28 pm
I believe it will take a miracle for them to resist this relentless indoctrination.

Homeschool or die.

SMK , says: November 19, 2018 at 6:33 pm
I sometimes laugh when I see those commenters on your blog who still insist that there is "nothing to see here"

Look, many of us lived this many decades ago, so don't see anything new.

Many of us have held our tongues our entire careers. There have been taboos about many subjects that are obviously true, but you just don't say anything. Just like an entrepreneur keeps his political opinions to himself to not offend is customers, I can keep my mouth shut to make a buck. I've worked totalitarian companies for decades so none of this crap even raises my blood pressure.

In fact, I kind of enjoy watching middle-class women freak out when their ox is finally gored. Why? They've been a large part of the political force that has led to this situation as women entered the workforce. I'm always careful not to denigrate woman's sports, or abortion, or gays, or incompetent female bosses. Welcome to jungle, ladies, when you try to keep trans out of your bathrooms.

I look at the silver lining: there is so much incompetence due to this homosexual/feminist/political crap it's actually a great opportunity for competent guys (who live in the real world, natch) to keep the lights on for an expensive price. Good help is now very hard to find everywhere.

MikeS , says: November 19, 2018 at 6:50 pm
The Left made a brilliant insight when it realized it could implement the dictatorship via good old all-American institutions like Corporations, Schools, and Churches (all much respected, at one time, by conservatives and most normal people) instead of the bad old State. Even today, naïve conservatives think the country will get better if anti-normal Corporations (which is about all of them now) get reduced regulations and taxes. This has got to be one of the most brilliant political jiu-jitsus in history.
William Dalton , says: November 19, 2018 at 6:58 pm
He is great worker who has earned a number of awards for his performance. Well, why on Earth didn't he tell his manager that he would not accept the transfer and that the manager must either rescind the order or lose him as an employee. Moreover, he should make it clear that he does not feel "safe" in a working environment which seeks to police its employees for their political and social opinions.

If Christians and other sane workers in America do not push back, and support one another in doing so, when accosted by workplace stupidity and caviling groupthink they will surely be subjected to it more and more. Stop telling America this is a battle we have lost. If there are companies which are committed to the policies of absurdity there are still certainly others that are not. It won't take more than a few years of such episodes of repression making headlines for Americans to discern for what companies they will choose to work and those they will not. Christians will find safe havens enough, and they will find politicians enough to elect to office who will guarantee them legal protection.

Brendan , says: November 19, 2018 at 7:05 pm
This is an escalation of a trend that has been ongoing for some time. Not that it isn't a meaningful escalation, but it's also part of a larger and longer trend towards overt politicization of workspaces.

I am not unused to it. My policy for many years has been to offer no opinions at work on any topic that could in any way be controversial socially, culturally or politically -- I just don't participate in those conversations, or, if I can't manage that, I simply nod and smile and don't really contribute to the conversation. Of course I will share my opinions about things that aren't touching one of those areas, but inside those areas I just steer clear and keep my opinions to myself.

The escalation here is in having to affirm things (even if it isn't technically mandatory) in order to avoid being branded as a dissenter from social orthodoxy. That is a serious escalation, I agree. It has not happened in my workplace yet. If it were to happen, I would probably grit my teeth and fill the thing out the way the company would prefer, and that would be that. Let them think they have more support than they really do.

Johnathan F , says: November 19, 2018 at 7:07 pm
Looks like my comment was deleted I'll repost:

Leaving out personally identifiable information. My current employer has the following groups: Women & Allies, Pan-Asian & Allies, African American & Allies, Hispanic & Allies, and finally LGBT & Allies. Does anyone notice a group who's missing? I'll give you a hint, it's the only other possible category of race/gender/sexual orientation not already listed. These groups are constantly pushed as THE networking opportunity within the company. Managers and executives run the groups and make it clear that if you want to be recognized in the organization you need to put yourself out there through one of these groups.

As a (TRIGGER WARNING) straight white man, it appears my only option is to attach myself to one of the above groups as a groveling ally. Maybe if I did that I would be able to signal to my peers that I am part of their "class".

However I am not part of their class; while most of my coworkers (regardless of race) spent their childhood taking Japanese language instruction and study abroad trips to France, I was working in restaurants and in construction so I could pay my rent while I went to a poor kids university.

A lot of your commenters laugh at this kind of wacky corporate signaling, while others react with fear for the future. I can only speak for myself and a few other straight white men when I say our reaction is anger.

kgasmart , says: November 19, 2018 at 7:38 pm
I work in a troubled industry (to say the least) and about a year ago there was a company-wide conference call where the CEO was talking about our strategy going forward, how we planned to retool and shift gears to navigate the increasing headwinds, etc.

At the end of his presentation they opened the floor to questions, and the very first question was: "Do we have a social justice mission?" From the tone of the commenter, you could tell immediately she thought we should indeed have a "social justice mission." The CEO fumbled through a few sentences about diversity and opportunity, he was clearly caught off guard.

But I thought: Here this industry (media) is struggling to survive, and the very first priority among younger employees is social justice.

If this industry's primary mission is social justice over "just the facts ma'am," then this industry is doomed. But I definitely get the idea the younger crowd would just as soon drive the business into the ground as work for a company that wasn't sufficiently "woke."

TheSnark , says: November 19, 2018 at 7:38 pm
And the liberals wonder why so many white guys voted for Trump.
Fran Macadam , says: November 19, 2018 at 7:56 pm
"I look at the silver lining: there is so much incompetence due to this homosexual/feminist/political crap it's actually a great opportunity for competent guys (who live in the real world, natch) to keep the lights on for an expensive price. Good help is now very hard to find everywhere."

No, incompetence is rewarded. The woke political opinions count more than anything else in a nation that's outsourced making things, which is no longer thought important Paper pushing requires no particular competence at all, and the paper pushers are now ascendant.

No longer can managers tell the difference between a good job and a bad job, except the bad job is more profitable for them.

I have to say, that if the Russians really were as malevolent as they make them out to be, God help us.

Jim in Ohio , says: November 19, 2018 at 8:07 pm
I find all of this very odd.

I've worked in IT for a number of large companies in Ohio, some of whom have their national headquarters here. They all have progressive policies in terms of hiring and all that, but the guys who run things in practice are generally conservative white men in their 40s and 50s.

I think this is less a matter of imposed ideology by hardened ideologues than a matter of wanting to avoid lawsuits by the actual fanatics.

It's the same reason we're forced to endure HR seminars on what is and what is not appropriate physical contact in a work environment. A pat on the back that lasts for too long or is placed a half inch too low will result in a lawsuit.

Why bother with the hassle? Make your policies as strict as possible so that someone with a petty grudge has no grounds should they decide to sue.

JonF , says: November 19, 2018 at 8:11 pm
And now for a word from Common Sense, though I can already tell from the comments above the Panicky Horde will reject it and run around screaming "The sky is falling!". But here goes:

Only about 5% of the population is Gay or Lesbian. a far smaller percent is Trans. I've had "G" and "L" coworkers, but never a "T" person. I expect this be true of most people here. If you are working at a small to mid sized employer there will be neither the personnel nor the budget to allow for any sort of extravagance along these lines (nor for other trendy causes: businesses exist to make money after all and in our day they are especially stingy about lavishing funds on mere staff). You will find some of it at larger employers, but even there the primary mission to make money for the shareholders. Can anyone dispute that? When I was at Big Wall Street Bank, the Baltimore office, with about 1000 employees, hosted a Women's Group, a Black Employees' Group, and yep, a GL group (again, no "T" anywhere in evidence there). Each group held an annual fundraiser for a decidedly non-political Worthy Cause: the women for breast cancer (they did a spaghetti luncheon for the office), the Black group for the local animal shelter, and the GL group for a meals on wheel type of charity, with a bake sale. The latter named of these was a "movable" event: the folks brought the goodies around the office for purchase on carts. Most of us did buy something: sweets in the afternoon! There was a Russian guy in our area– he bought nothing. Why not? Maybe he had no cash on him that day, maybe he had dietary issues, maybe he disapproved of the group and never mind the innocuous charity the money went to. Whatever: nothing came of that.

One note of caution here: I am speaking about private employment only. I am not making a comment about circumstances in public employment, including academia as I have no experience there.

[Nov 17, 2018] Each Google performance review consists of a self-assessment, a set of peer reviews, and if you're applying for a promotion, reasons for why should be promoted to the next level

Nov 17, 2018 | www.quora.com

dmond Lau , former Engineer at Google (2006-2008) Answered Aug 26 2010 ·

Upvoted by Venkata Rajesh Mekala , Engineer at Google (2016-present) and Piyush Khemka , worked at Google

Google schedules their performance reviews twice a year -- one major one at the end of the year and a smaller one mid-year. This answer is based on my experience as a Google engineer, and the performance review process may differ slightly for other positions.

Each review consists of a self-assessment, a set of peer reviews, and if you're applying for a promotion, reasons for why should be promoted to the next level. Each review component is submitted via an online tool. Around performance review time, it's not uncommon to see many engineers taking a day or more just to write the reviews through the tool.

In the self-assessment, you summarize your major accomplishments and contributions since the last review. You're also asked to describe your strengths and areas for improvement; typically you'd frame them with respect to the job expectations described by your career ladder. For example, if you're a senior engineer, you might write about your strengths being the tech lead of your current project.

For peer reviews, employees are expected to choose around 3-8 peers (fellow engineers, product managers, or others that can comment on their work) to write their peer reviews. Oftentimes, managers will also assign additional individuals to write peer reviews for one of their reports, particularly newer or younger reports who may be less familiar with the process.

Peers comment on your projects and contributions, on your strengths, and on areas for improvement. The peer reviews serve three purposes:

An additional part of the peer review is indicating a list of engineers that are working below the level of the peer and a list of engineers that are working above the level of the peer. These factor into a total ordering of engineers within a team and are used to determine cutoffs for bonuses and promotions.

If you're applying for a promotion during a performance review cycle, you're given an additional opportunity to explain why you should be promoted. A key part to a strong application is explaining with specific details and examples how you're achieving and contributing based on the expectations of the next level in the job ladder.

[Nov 17, 2018] How did you handle a bad annual performance review?

Notable quotes:
"... Reviews should never (ever ever ever) be a surprise to either party (ever). If there is something in your review that was never brought up before, ask why your manager waited until now to bring it up instead of addressing it in the moment. ..."
"... Does the company as a whole actually give a crap about reviews? Are reviews used to make decisions on what departments to trim/cut and who is at the bottom? Are they used for financial decisions? (none of those uses is good by the way). ..."
Nov 17, 2018 | www.quora.com

Nanci Lamborn ,

Pretty naive, pro-management, view...

Reviews should never (ever ever ever) be a surprise to either party (ever). If there is something in your review that was never brought up before, ask why your manager waited until now to bring it up instead of addressing it in the moment. Have an uncomfortable discussion (yikes! YES. have an uncomfortable dialogue about it). Uncomfortable doesn't mean ugly or yelling or fist pounding. We don't like conflict, so we don't like asking people to explain why they chose to act in a certain way when we feel wronged. Get over that discomfort (respectfully). You have every right to ask why something was put in your review if it was a surprise.

Does the company as a whole actually give a crap about reviews? Are reviews used to make decisions on what departments to trim/cut and who is at the bottom? Are they used for financial decisions? (none of those uses is good by the way). Or do they sit in a file gathering dust? Has anyone ever actually pulled out someone's performance review from 2 years ago and taken action on it? If none of these things are true, while the bad review is still crappy, perhaps it's less of an issue overall.

... ... ...

If the comments are more behavioral or personal, this will be tougher. "Johnny rarely demonstrates a positive attitude" or "Johnny is difficult to work with" or "Johnny doesn't seem to be a team player" - for statements like this, you must ask for a detailed explanation. Not to defend yourself (at first anyway) but to understand. What did they mean exactly by the attitude or difficulty or team player? Ask for specific examples. "Please tell me when I demonstrated a bad attitude because I really want to understand how it comes across that way". BUT you MUST listen for the answer. If you are not willing to hear the answer and then work on it, then the entire exercise is a waste of time. You have a right to ask for these specifics. If your boss hesitates on giving examples, your response is then "How can I correct this issue if I don't know what the issue is?"

... ... ...

Lastly, if all of this fails and you're not given a chance to discuss the review and you truly believe it is wrong, ask for a meeting with HR to start that discussion. But be sure that you come across with the desire to come to an understanding by considering all the issues together professionally. And don't grumble and complain about it to colleagues unless everyone else is getting the same bad review treatment. This situation is between you and your manager and you should treat it as such or it can backfire.

[Nov 17, 2018] Should I argue a negative performance review?

If traditional performance reviews aren't officially dead, they certainly should be.
The arbitrary task of assigning some meaningless ranking number which is not connected to anything actionable is a painful waste of everyone's time. "You look like a 3.2 today, Joe looks like a 2.7, but Mary looks like a 4.1." In today's environment filled with knowledge workers, such rankings are silly at best and demotivating at worst. There is no proven correlation that such a system yields high-performance productivity results.
Nov 17, 2018 | www.quora.com

David Spearman , I operate by Crocker's Rules. Answered Feb 26, 2015 Yes if and only if you have documentation that some factual information in the review is false. Even then, you need to be careful to be as polite as possible. Anything else is unlikely to get you anywhere and may make your situation much worse.

[Nov 17, 2018] A Googler's Critique of Google's Performance Management Reviews by I Done This Support

Notable quotes:
"... This post was written anonymously by a current Google and former Microsoft employee. It details the author's perspective on her first-hand experience with Google's performance management review system. ..."
Aug 05, 2014 | blog.idonethis.com

This post was written anonymously by a current Google and former Microsoft employee. It details the author's perspective on her first-hand experience with Google's performance management review system.

"Confidence thrives on honesty, on honor, on the sacredness of obligations, on faithful protection and on unselfish performance. Without them it cannot live."

–Franklin D. Roosevelt

Institutions are built on the trust and credibility of their members. This maxim holds true for employees and their employers just the same as it does for citizens and their government. Whereas the electoral process in modern democracies allows you and me to rate our government's performance, performance rating systems make employees the subject of evaluation. In both cases, however, faith in the integrity of the process is the only thing that ensures order.

Managing a performance rating system that motivates, rewards, and retains talented employees across an organization tens of thousands large is a grueling, never-ending challenge. How does an organization balance values core to its DNA and its continued success -- merit, openness, innovation, and loyalty -- all while maintaining perceptions of fairness?

I've worked at both Microsoft and Google and seen both tech giants fight this battle with complex formulae, peer awards, and strict curves .

Numerical ratings were originally born out of a desire for precision. Performance buckets were born out of an inability to defend the precise scores. As of November 2013, Microsoft eliminated its forced curve rating system. And in April 2014, Google followed suit.

All four performance rating schemes follow a similar cadence: employees are given a rating relative to their peers on a quarterly basis. This is done in secret and potentially never shared with employees. On a semi-annual basis, summary assessments are shared with a selective set of examples (of work and behavior) that articulate and reinforce the rating. Then employees are made aware of the bonuses, salary raises, and stock grants they will be awarded. The rewards are decided unilaterally regardless of the dialogue that takes place during the review, and next chance to check in and reassess is six months away.

First-Hand Observations

As someone who has lived through cycles of the ever-evolving performance evaluation and rating mechanisms at these tech giants, a few observations emerge:

Forced curves undermine the spirit of collaboration and foster a mindset of hoarding pie instead of expanding it

There are particular specialized organizations that benefit from having a defined numerical goal. For example, a quarterly sales quota is a very clear measuring stick, as are portfolio returns, bugs resolved, or customers satisfied. But absent specific, level measures of productive output, large firms face the uphill battle of linking performance to rewards.

When you force fit a curve to the array of employee responsibilities, which vary in scope and complexity, it becomes virtually impossible for one lowly employee to pinpoint what distinguishes "good" from "poor" or "great".

I've found myself asking, "Did I score well because I put in the hours or because I got an easy draw?" Or, "Is managing a profitable line of business more merit-worthy than building a floor for a failing business?"

In my experience , people managers suffer through this ambiguity just the same. Despite the wealth of data they have about their direct reports, they're unable to articulate the rationale (or broader context within the cohort) underlying the numerical scores they assign. And in the absence of transparency or an understanding of how individual contributions compare to team success, self-preservation rules supreme.

And even with the recent moves away from strict numerical curves, there remains a finite pool of awards to be distributed, which doesn't reflect the mentality they're trying to foster.

Celebrating performance through evaluation cycles (quarterly, semiannually, annually) creates a sense that everyday work does not matter

The climb toward credible ratings grows steeper when you divorce an accomplishment from recognition with an annual or semiannual review. The emotional impact of a successful presentation or a new policy is nowhere to be found in a set of six-month-old notes. Worse still, seeing changes to compensation or a performance rating system in response to months old polling data address past concerns (and possibly the concerns of past employees).

Even data-rich, data-loving companies shy away from being transparent about how they arrive at individual ratings which produce a perception of arbitrary assessment and a false notion of precision

How do employees adapt and improve if they aren't working at the trading desk or privy to examples of exceptional performance? They turn to Glassdoor, HR brochures, or worse of all, personal anecdotes to bolster their own assessment of whether they are receiving a "fair" deal. Unfortunately, not one of these third party sources has the nuanced understanding of an employee or his/her team necessary to provide context. What's often left is a broken, trust-less relationship.

Performance rating systems are reactive and intended to buoy the ship against alarming trends in survey data and rates of attrition; improvements and tweaks are subject to lengthy implementation cycles

Employers seek to improve their performance rating systems and do so by soliciting regular feedback from their employees. The intention is that a system designed in collaboration will better serve all and engage employees. Where these good intentions run awry is at the implementation stage -- it takes at least one quarter for to synthesize feedback and evaluation potential changes. The feedback loops for employee performance as well as the performance review system are out of sync with actual job performance and employee sentiment.

How to Do Better

So what can these firms do to win the war for credibility? Be transparent . Throw open the doors and share the notes. Make measurement and compensation public. Have peers drive the rating process. The power of transparency is well understood. There are already measures in place to build engagement among employees and alignment within teams:

Increased context and knowledge builds comfort and trust for employees and managers alike. When employees know how they're measured, there's less room for suspicion. And when they know can connect the dots between individual performance and team success, there's greater job satisfaction.

Ultimately, the goal of a performance rating system is to reward and retain capable employees by keeping them happy and feeling like they have a fair deal.

Transparency goes a far way toward lending credibility to the process and building commitment to the company, but it isn't a silver bullet. Giving employees greater flexibility in what they take on and the efforts they lead also builds a sense of ownership and commitment. Opportunities such as 20% projects (wherein employees spends 20% of their time working on something about which they're passionate) or cross-organizational initiatives (e.g. building a volunteering program) are excellent examples of empowering employees through choice. But there's room for this notion of self-direction to go even further -- a completely open allocation (e.g. 100% self-directed time) or letting employees choose their manager are two programs I would certainly sign up for.

What it boils down to is that employees want to know how they are being evaluated and want to know that they're making conscious choices. Because while you vote with a punch card at the election booth, in the workplace you vote with your feet.

Alicia Butcher Ehrhardt4 years ago ,

Good points. Two of my children, boys with STEM degrees from 1st tier colleges (CS and ME), just changed jobs to get away from the culture at the ones where they worked. Each to a more flexible, small environment - I'm hoping it will work.

[Nov 03, 2018] Neoliberal Measurement Mania

Highly recommended!
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. -- Archibald Putt
Neoliberal PHBs like talk about KJLOCs, error counts, tickets closed and other types of numerical measurements designed so that they can be used by lower-level PHBs to report fake results to higher level PHBs. These attempts to quantify 'the quality' and volume of work performed by software developers and sysadmins completely miss the point. For software is can lead to code bloat.
The number of tickets taken and resolved in a specified time period probably the most ignorant way to measure performance of sysadmins. For sysadmin you can invent creative creating way of generating and resolving tickets. And spend time accomplishing fake task, instead of thinking about real problem that datacenter face. Using Primitive measurement strategies devalue the work being performed by Sysadmins and programmers. They focus on the wrong things. They create the boundaries that are supposed to contain us in a manner that is comprehensible to the PHB who knows nothing about real problems we face.
Notable quotes:
"... Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. ..."
Nov 03, 2018 | www.rako.com

In an advanced research or development project, success or failure is largely determined when the goals or objectives are set and before a manager is chosen. While a hard-working and diligent manager can increase the chances of success, the outcome of the project is most strongly affected by preexisting but unknown technological factors over which the project manager has no control. The success or failure of the project should not, therefore, be used as the sole measure or even the primary measure of the manager's competence.

Putt's Law Is promulgated

Without an adequate competence criterion for technical managers, there is no way to determine when a person has reached his level of incompetence. Thus a clever and ambitious individual may be promoted from one level of incompetence to another. He will ultimately perform incompetently in the highest level of the hierarchy just as he did in numerous lower levels. The lack of an adequate competence criterion combined with the frequent practice of creative incompetence in technical hierarchies results in a competence inversion, with the most competent people remaining near the bottom while persons of lesser talent rise to the top. It also provides the basis for Putt's Law, which can be stated in an intuitive and nonmathematical form as follows:

Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand.

As in any other hierarchy, the majority of persons in technology neither understand nor manage much of anything. This, however, does not create an exception to Putt's Law, because such persons clearly do not dominate the hierarchy. While this was not previously stated as a basic law, it is clear that the success of every technocrat depends on his ability to deal with and benefit from the consequences of Putt's Law.

[Nov 03, 2018] The evaluation system in which there was ALWAYS a "top 10 percent" and a "bottom ten percent" is sociopathic in it's nature

Notable quotes:
"... Four years in GTS ... joined via being outsourced to IBM by my previous employer. Left GTS after 4 years. ..."
"... The IBM way of life was throughout the Oughts and the Teens an utter and complete failure from the perspective of getting work done right and using people to their appropriate and full potential. ..."
"... As a GTS employee, professional technical training was deemed unnecessary, hence I had no access to any unless I paid for it myself and used my personal time ... the only training available was cheesy presentations or other web based garbage from the intranet, or casual / OJT style meetings with other staff who were NOT professional or expert trainers. ..."
"... As a GTS employee, I had NO access to the expert and professional tools that IBM fricking made and sold to the same damn customers I was supposed to be supporting. Did we have expert and professional workflow / document management / ITIL aligned incident and problem management tools? NO, we had fricking Lotus Notes and email. Instead of upgrading to the newest and best software solutions for data center / IT management & support, we degraded everything down the simplest and least complex single function tools that no "best practices" organization on Earth would ever consider using. ..."
"... And the people management paradigm ... employees ranked annually not against a static or shared goal or metric, but in relation to each other, and there was ALWAYS a "top 10 percent" and a "bottom ten percent" required by upper management ... a system that was sociopathic in it's nature because it encourages employees to NOT work together ... by screwing over one's coworkers, perhaps by not giving necessary information, timely support, assistance as needed or requested, one could potentially hurt their performance and make oneself look relatively better. That's a self-defeating system and it was encouraged by the way IBM ran things. ..."
Nov 03, 2018 | www.zdnet.com

Gravyboat McGee , Wednesday, April 26, 2017 9:00 PM

Four years in GTS ... joined via being outsourced to IBM by my previous employer. Left GTS after 4 years.

The IBM way of life was throughout the Oughts and the Teens an utter and complete failure from the perspective of getting work done right and using people to their appropriate and full potential. I went from a multi-disciplinary team of engineers working across technologies to support corporate needs in the IT environment to being siloed into a single-function organization.

My first year of on-boarding with IBM was spent deconstructing application integration and cross-organizational structures of support and interwork that I had spent 6 years building and maintaining. Handing off different chunks of work (again, before the outsourcing, an Enterprise solution supported by one multi-disciplinary team) to different IBM GTS work silos that had no physical special relationship and no interworking history or habits. What we're talking about here is the notion of "left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing" ...

THAT was the IBM way of doing things, and nothing I've read about them over the past decade or so tells me it has changed.

As a GTS employee, professional technical training was deemed unnecessary, hence I had no access to any unless I paid for it myself and used my personal time ... the only training available was cheesy presentations or other web based garbage from the intranet, or casual / OJT style meetings with other staff who were NOT professional or expert trainers.

As a GTS employee, I had NO access to the expert and professional tools that IBM fricking made and sold to the same damn customers I was supposed to be supporting. Did we have expert and professional workflow / document management / ITIL aligned incident and problem management tools? NO, we had fricking Lotus Notes and email. Instead of upgrading to the newest and best software solutions for data center / IT management & support, we degraded everything down the simplest and least complex single function tools that no "best practices" organization on Earth would ever consider using.

And the people management paradigm ... employees ranked annually not against a static or shared goal or metric, but in relation to each other, and there was ALWAYS a "top 10 percent" and a "bottom ten percent" required by upper management ... a system that was sociopathic in it's nature because it encourages employees to NOT work together ... by screwing over one's coworkers, perhaps by not giving necessary information, timely support, assistance as needed or requested, one could potentially hurt their performance and make oneself look relatively better. That's a self-defeating system and it was encouraged by the way IBM ran things.

The "not invented here" ideology was embedded deeply in the souls of all senior IBMers I ever met or worked with ... if you come on board with any outside knowledge or experience, you must not dare to say "this way works better" because you'd be shut down before you could blink. The phrase "best practices" to them means "the way we've always done it".

IBM gave up on innovation long ago. Since the 90's the vast majority of their software has been bought, not built. Buy a small company, strip out the innovation, slap an IBM label on it, sell it as the next coming of Jesus even though they refuse to expend any R&D to push the product to the next level ... damn near everything IBM sold was gentrified, never cutting edge.

And don't get me started on sales practices ... tell the customer how product XYZ is a guaranteed moonshot, they'll be living on lunar real estate in no time at all, and after all the contracts are signed hand the customer a box of nuts & bolts and a letter telling them where they can look up instructions on how to build their own moon rocket. Or for XX dollars more a year, hire a Professional Services IBMer to build it for them.

I have no sympathy for IBM. They need a clean sweep throughout upper management, especially any of the old True Blue hard-core IBMers.

[Oct 30, 2018] Arbitrators overwhelmingly favor employers

Oct 30, 2018 | features.propublica.org

When it comes to employment claims, studies have found that arbitrators overwhelmingly favor employers. Research by Cornell University law and labor relations specialist Alexander Colvin found that workers win only 19 percent of the time when their cases are arbitrated. By contrast, they win 36 percent of the time when they go to federal court, and 57 percent in state courts. Average payouts when an employee wins follow a similar pattern.

Given those odds, and having signed away their rights to go to court, some laid-off IBM workers have chosen the one independent forum companies can't deny them: the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. That's where Moos, the Long Beach systems security specialist, and several of her colleagues, turned for help when they were laid off. In their complaints to the agency, they said they'd suffered age discrimination because of the company's effort to "drastically change the IBM employee age mix to be seen as a startup."

In its formal reply to the EEOC, IBM said that age couldn't have been a factor in their dismissals. Among the reasons it cited: The managers who decided on the layoffs were in their 40s and therefore older too.

[Oct 30, 2018] I see the Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) problem as its nearly impossible to take the fact that we know PIP is a scam to court. IBM will say its an issue with you, your performance nose dived and your manager tried to fix that. You have to not only fight those simple statements, but prove that PIP is actually systematic worker abuse.

Notable quotes:
"... It is in fact a modern corporate horror story; it's also life at a modern corporation, period. ..."
Oct 30, 2018 | features.propublica.org

Cindy Gallop , Thursday, March 22, 2018 10:24 AM

This makes for absolutely horrifying, chills-down-your-spine reading. A modern corporate horror story - worthy of a 'Black Mirror' episode. Phenomenal reporting by Ariana Tobin and Peter Gosselin. Thank you for exposing this. I hope this puts an end to this at IBM and makes every other company and industry doing this in covert and illegal ways think twice about continuing.
Daisy S Cindy Gallop , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
Agree..a well written expose'. I've been a victim of IBM's "PIP" (Performance Improvement Plan) strategy, not because of my real performance mind you, but rather, I wasn't billing hours between projects and it was hurting my unit's bottom line. The way IBM instructs management to structure the PIP, it's almost impossible to dig your way out, and it's intentional. If you have a PIP on your record, nobody in IBM wants to touch you, so in effect you're already gone.
Paul Brinker Daisy S , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
I see the PIP problem as its nearly impossible to take the fact that we know PIP is a scam to court. IBM will say its an issue with you, your performance nose dived and your manager tried to fix that. You have to not only fight those simple statements, but prove that PIP is actually systematic worker abuse.
dragonflap Cindy Gallop , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
Cindy, they've been doing this for at least 15-20 years, or even longer according to some of the previous comments. It is in fact a modern corporate horror story; it's also life at a modern corporation, period.
Maria Stone dragonflap , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
This started happening in the 1990's when they added 5 years to your age and years of service and ASKED you to retire.
Matt_Z , Thursday, March 22, 2018 6:01 PM
After over 35 years working there, 19 of them as a manager sending out more of those notification letters than I care to remember, I can vouch for the accuracy of this investigative work. It's an incredibly toxic and hostile environment and has been for the last 5 or so years. One of the items I was appraised on annually was how many US jobs I moved offshore. It was a relief when I received my notification letter after a two minute phone call telling me it was on the way. Sleeping at night and looking myself in the mirror aren't as hard as they were when I worked there.
IBM will never regain any semblance of their former glory (or profit) until they begin to treat employees well again.
With all the offshoring and resource actions with no backfill over the last 10 years, so much is broken. Customers suffer almost as much as the employees.
I don't know how in the world they ended up on that LinkedIn list. Based on my fairly recent experience there are a half dozen happy employees in the US, and most of them are C level.
Jennifer , Thursday, March 22, 2018 9:42 AM
Well done. It squares well with my 18 years at IBM, watching resource action after resource action and hearing what my (unusually honest) manager told me. Things got progressively worse from 2012 onward. I never realized how stressful it was to live under the shadow of impending layoffs until I finally found the courage to leave in 2015. Best decision I've made.

IBM answers to its shareholders, period. Employees are an afterthought - simply a means to an end. It's shameful. (That's not to say that individual people managers feel that way. I'm speaking about IBM executives.)

Herb Jennifer , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
Well, they almost answer to their shareholders, but that's after the IBM executives take their share. Ginni's compensation is tied to stock price (apparently not earnings) and buy backs maintain the stock price.
Ribit , Thursday, March 22, 2018 8:17 AM
If the criteria for layoff is being allegedly overpaid and allegedly a poor performer, then it follows that Grinnin' Jenny should have been let go long ago.
Mr. Hand Ribit , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
Yes! After the 4th of those 22 consecutive quarters of declining revenues. And she's no spring chicken either. ;-)
DDRLSGC Ribit ,
Especially these CEOs who have ran their companies into the ground for the last 38 years.
owswitch , Thursday, March 22, 2018 8:58 AM
Just another fine example of how people become disposable.
And, when it comes to cost containment and profit maximization, there is no place for ethics in American business.
Businesses can lie just as well as politicians.

Millennials are smart to avoid this kind of problem by remaining loyal only to themselves. Companies certainly define anyone as replaceable - even their over-paid CEO's.

DDRLSGC owswitch

The millennials saw what happen to their parents and grandparents getting screwed over after a life time of work and loyalty. You can't blame them for not caring about so called traditional American work ethics and then they are attacked for not having them when the business leaders threw away all those value decades ago.

Some of these IBM people have themselves to blame for cutting their own economic throats for fighting against unions, putting in politicians who are pro-business and thinking that their education and high paying white collar STEM jobs will give them economic immunity.

If America was more of a free market and free enterprise instead of being more of a close market of oligarchies and monopolies, and strong government regulations, companies would think twice about treating their workforce badly because they know their workforce would leave for other companies or start up their own companies without too much of a hassle.

HiJinks DDRLSGC

Under the old IBM you could not get a union as workers were treated with dignity and respect - see the 3 core beliefs. Back then a union would not have accomplished anything.

DDRLSGC HiJinks
Doesn't matter if it was the old IBM or new IBM, you wonder how many still actually voted against their economic interests in the political elections that in the long run undermine labor rights in this country.
HiJinks DDRLSGC
So one shouldn't vote? Neither party cares about the average voter except at election time. Both sell out to Big Business - after all, that's where the big campaign donations come from. If you believe only one party favors Big Business, then you have been watching to much "fake news". Even the unions know they have been sold out by both and are wising up. How many of those jobs were shipped overseas the past 25 years.
DDRLSGC HiJinks ,
No, they should have been more active in voting for politicians who would look after the workers' rights in this country for the last 38 years plus ensuring that Congressional people and the president would not be packing the court system with pro-business judges. Sorry, but it is the Big Business that have been favoring the Republican Party for a long, long time and the jobs have been shipped out for the last 38 years.

[Oct 30, 2018] The women who run large US companies are as shallow and ruthless as the sociopathic men.

Oct 30, 2018 | features.propublica.org

Bob Gort , Saturday, March 31, 2018 9:49 PM

Age discrimination has been standard operating procedure in IT for at least 30 years. And there are no significant consequences, if any consequences at all, for doing it in a blatant fashion. The companies just need to make sure the quota of H1B visas is increased when they are doing this on an IBM scale!
900DeadWomen Bob Gort , in reply to" aria-label="in reply to">
Age discrimination and a myriad other forms of discrimination have been standard operating procedure in the US. Period. Full stop. No need to equivocate.
Anon , Friday, March 30, 2018 12:49 PM
Wait for a few years and we can see the same happening to "millenials".

And the women who run these companies are as shallow and ruthless as the sociopathic men.

[Oct 29, 2018] In the early 1980's President Regan fired the striking air traffic controllers. This sent the message to management around the USA that it was OK to abuse employees in the workplace.

Notable quotes:
"... In the early 1980's President Regan fired the striking air traffic controllers. This sent the message to management around the USA that it was OK to abuse employees in the workplace. By the end of the 1980's unions were totally emasculated and you had workers "going postal" in an abusive workplace. When unions were at their peak of power, they could appeal to the courts and actually stop a factory from moving out of the country by enforcing a labor contact. ..."
"... The American workplace is a nuthouse. Each and every individual workplace environment is like a cult. ..."
"... The American workplace is just a byproduct of the militarization of everyday life. ..."
"... Silicon Valley and Wall Street handed billions of dollars to this arrogant, ignorant Millennial Elizabeth Holmes. She abused any employee that questioned her. This should sound familiar to any employee who has had an overbearing know-it-all, bully boss in the workplace. Hopefully she will go to jail and a message will be sent that any young agist bully will not be given the power of god in the workplace. ..."
Oct 29, 2018 | features.propublica.org

Stauffenberg , Thursday, March 22, 2018 6:21 PM

In the early 1980's President Regan fired the striking air traffic controllers. This sent the message to management around the USA that it was OK to abuse employees in the workplace. By the end of the 1980's unions were totally emasculated and you had workers "going postal" in an abusive workplace. When unions were at their peak of power, they could appeal to the courts and actually stop a factory from moving out of the country by enforcing a labor contact.

Today we have a President in the White House who was elected on a platform of "YOU'RE FIRED." Not surprisingly, Trump was elected by the vast majority of selfish lowlives in this country. The American workplace is a nuthouse. Each and every individual workplace environment is like a cult.

That is not good for someone like me who hates taking orders from people. But I have seen it all. Ten years ago a Manhattan law firm fired every lawyer in a litigation unit except an ex-playboy playmate. Look it up it was in the papers. I was fired from a job where many of my bosses went to federal prison and then I was invited to the Christmas Party.

What are the salaries of these IBM employees and how much are their replacements making? The workplace becomes a surrogate family. Who knows why some people get along and others don't. My theory on agism in the workplace is that younger employees don't want to be around their surrogate mother or father in the workplace after just leaving the real home under the rules of their real parents.

The American workplace is just a byproduct of the militarization of everyday life. In the 1800's, Herman Melville wrote in his beautiful book "White Jacket" that one of the most humiliating aspects of the military is taking orders from a younger military officer. I read that book when I was 20. I didn't feel the sting of that wisdom until I was 40 and had a 30 year old appointed as my supervisor who had 10 years less experience than me.

By the way, the executive that made her my supervisor was one of the sleaziest bosses I have ever had in my career. Look at the tech giant Theranos. Silicon Valley and Wall Street handed billions of dollars to this arrogant, ignorant Millennial Elizabeth Holmes. She abused any employee that questioned her. This should sound familiar to any employee who has had an overbearing know-it-all, bully boss in the workplace. Hopefully she will go to jail and a message will be sent that any young agist bully will not be given the power of god in the workplace.

[Oct 26, 2018] Cocain abuse cause metal symptoms that can be called "induced sociopathy"

Oct 26, 2018 | craigmurray.org.uk

Here – apart from sniffing and a runny nose – from a treatment website is a list of some of the mental symptoms of cocaine abuse. An interesting take on the reckless Khashoggi assassination?

Mental state:

Euphoria

Overconfidence

Unusual excitement

Aggressiveness

Paranoia

Poor judgment

[Oct 22, 2018] First off, the coercion "come back or else " flat out. The ruthlessness vis- -vis the victim, the complete disregard for that individual's life. The crassness of the methods applied. The carelessness concerning the risks and the half-assed way in which this exercise, by and large, was carried out. Followed by, of course, a sudden switch from ever-so-charming to furious rage

Such people sadly self-destruct. It's terrible when person became his/her own worst enemy.
Oct 22, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Scotch Bingeington , Oct 22, 2018 5:00:53 PM | link

B, amazing work again, thrilling to read. Though this is a yet unfolding story, you manage to write about it in a profound way.

Regarding the manner in which MbS operates here and subsequently reacts towards other people's reactions is certainly telling, at least to me. First off, the coercion -- "come back or else " -- flat out. The ruthlessness vis-à-vis the victim, the complete disregard for that individual's life. The crassness of the methods applied. The carelessness concerning the risks and the half-assed way in which this exercise, by and large, was carried out. Once word got out, being utterly taken by surprise that this murder should draw so much attention and should shock and outrage people -- like, at all! Followed by, of course, a sudden switch from ever-so-charming to furious rage.

That's textbook psychopathic behavior. MbS is a psychopath. I don't mean that as an insult, but as the descriptive term and category that it is. It was already palpable in all the other incidents, which was duly pointed out here by people at the Moon. To me, it's also in his eyes.

But the thing is, as such, MbS is a befitting representation of his country. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the way that it works, how it's organized, its history, its outlook on the world -- it's the equivalent among states of a psychopath.

I certainly agree, the sooner MbS gets kicked off the stage, the better for them and for us. But he'll be replaced and SA will still be the equivalent among states of a psychopath -- and act accordingly. There's much more to be done than just put an end to MbS' games. In that vein, I'd be appalled if Russia were to seriously consider sucking up to SA should they break away from the US orbit.

[Oct 07, 2018] In a fiery speech announcing her decision, Collins ripped unsupported claims by Avenatti's client, Julie Swetnick, that Kavanaugh facilitated a Cosby-esque "gang rape" operation while in high school

See the text of full speech at New York Times
Oct 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

In a fiery speech announcing her decision, Collins ripped unsupported claims by Avenatti's client, Julie Swetnick, that Kavanaugh facilitated a Cosby-esque "gang rape" operation while in high school.

Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why the presumption of innocence is so important . I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor Ford, but of the allegation that, when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang rape .

This outlandish allegation was put forth without any credible supporting evidence and simply parroted public statements of others . That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness. -Sen. Susan Collins


Paracelsus , 38 minutes ago link

I didn't really care much about the stuff alleged to have been done by Kavanaugh thirty-five years ago. Arguing with a close family friend I stated that there was nothing I found more tiresome than the old lawyers tactic of springing something on you at the last possible minute, leaving a steaming pile of turds in the middle of your desk, and then expecting to be taken seriously. Decorum? Rules of debate? How about the laws of discovery, sharing info amongst colleagues?

Just because this was not a criminal trial is no reason to throw out the rules for policy making, the nomination process, which both sides have adhered to in the past. People were comparing this to the Anita Hill fiasco during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings. Delay, interrupt, stall, maximum media exposure. Never any evidence or criminal charges to point to.

In criminal trials there is the process of discovery by which the admission of evidence at the last minute is strongly ill advised, and can result in it being tossed out. Sen. Feinstein would be aware of all the rules and procedures, but she feels above it all.

FBaggins , 1 hour ago link

Hey Avenatti! If you and your client had any idea of what the truth is no one would every have heard of her or of you. Don't give us this ******** that you were just representing your client. If you had a brain you would have known she was FOS from the get go, and if you were honest you never would have represented her. So what is it? Are you just stupid or are you dishonest, or both?

bh2 , 3 hours ago link

People who make salacious claims unconfirmed or outright denied by their own named "witnesses" tend to get sued for defamation. And the lawyers they rode in on.

... ... ...

The Terrible Sweal , 3 hours ago link

Three women advance fabricated allegations and the #resistance, Demonrats, Third Wavers and cucks blame one male lawyer.

They just can't learn.

platyops , 4 hours ago link

Michael Avenatti is not a nice man at all. He was a factor in making the accusations seem like a circus. No one takes him seriously as he slinks around the gutters.

Debt Slave , 4 hours ago link

I sure am glad that Avenatti was stupid enough to represent a lunatic like Swetnick.

trutherator , 5 hours ago link

Avenatti is the scapegoat. The Ford story was already fast breaking down, and the secret polygraph and the secret therapist notes and her ex-boyfriend should have made more noise in the Senate.

... ... ...

RictaviousPorkchop , 6 hours ago link

This filth needs to be disbarred.

KingTut , 6 hours ago link

They embraced this puke and revelled in his garbage accusations. Now they need a scapegoat, and he's it. God forbid Feinstein get raked over the coals for screwing this thing up. The was a political hit, and everyone knew it. But the GOP are so spineless that a high-school-drunken-grope-fest brought them to their knees. Fortunately, the Dems stayed true to form and blew themselves up.

What I do not understand is how could they be so stupid as to endorse the Avenatti slime factory in the first place? TONE DEAF.

inosent , 7 hours ago link

Avenatti needs to be disbarred. To file a complaint for his breach of professional responsibility, suborning perjury, and engaging in acts of moral turpitude:

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/0/documents/forms/2017_ComplaintFormENG_201701.pdf

If enough complaints are filed with the CA state bar, he may get disbarred.

Attorneys ALREADY have a really bad rep. Part of professional responsibility is to uphold the integrity of the legal profession. The ONLY thing Avenatti did was to make every attorney look like a complete shyster sleazeball, which given I just took the bar exam and will probably become an attorney soon, I find immensely offensive.

Here is his license information:

http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Licensee/Detail/206929

Kidbuck , 5 hours ago link

The MSM gave these clowns face time and the morons of America watched and believed...

John_Coltrane , 6 hours ago link

The Demonrats used false sexual allegations against Roy Moore coupled with ballot box cheating (their typical mode) to win a senate seat in conservative Alabama. So, since their main national platform of open borders is so repugnant to any normal taxpaying voter, this is their only strategy. They simply got caught. All the allegations against both Kavanaugh and Moore were fabricated and the proof is the Soros' paid lawyers who represented them all. And Feinstein and Schumer conspired in this farce. And independent voters know it!

They're just pissed they got caught in their fraud and this energized the R. base which will lead to a red wave in a few weeks. And just think of the political commercial possibilities for any Demonrat senator hoping to prevail if they vote against Kavanaugh. I expect the final confirmation vote won't as close as the vote for cloture for this reason.

TemporarySecurity , 5 hours ago link

Be careful, Roy Moore was a different story. There was evidence including him saying he liked to date high school age girls as a 30 year old along with multiple other people who remembered what was alleged. Not just Democrat operatives. Morals were not that different then than now. Was he guilty of a crime no, could reasonable people still dislike his morals sure. I grew up close to that era and thought the college age kids hanging around HS girls was nasty. Moore verified as a 30 year old he liked them young.

Ford 0 corroborating evidence. By lumping in Moore with Kavanaugh you are giving credence to believe the victim because all you are following the "patriarchy" of believing the accused regardless of evidence.

MoreFreedom , 6 hours ago link

The Democrats have a long history of making last minute sexual misconduct allegations against their political opponents, always without any evidence or corroboration. And sexual misconduct allegations that pale in comparison to what a lot of Democrats have been alleged to do (rape allegations against Clinton, Kennedy having an affair that left a woman dead, John Conyers for settling sexual harassment allegations with taxpayer money, Hillary for trashing victims, or consider Weinstein and other famous/rich Democrat donors or newsmen). I'd bet most of these allegations against Republicans were simply made up for political purposes because they were plausible, couldn't be disproven, and couldn't be proven. Ford's allegations fit the pattern.

The charges are always last minute, to deny the accused an opportunity to defend themselves. Kavanaugh provided an excellent defense that would be good court room drama in a movie, when no one in the GOP was willing to defend him, and too afraid of being accused of not believing a victim and attacking them.

What's really going on are the Democrats in charge, are looking to deflect the attention from what they did, to Avanetti because Avanetti did the same, except the charges of his client, weren't believable, even though they couln't be proven or disproven. They don't want to take the blame, for what voters might do in the midterms.

One thing's for sure, you don't see Democrats calling for indicting and prosecuting false accusers. They're teaching people to bear false witness for their personal purposes.

Totally_Disillusioned , 7 hours ago link

" Gang rape mastermind " might have been a bridge too far"

putupjob , 7 hours ago link

was this great or what?

avenatti gave the diversion, the clutter, the political sideshow so that all charges could be swept away and completely fake and uncorroborated. there was no provable basis for the ford charges, but the crazy swetnick stories simplified brooming the whole thing.

we can only hope that avenatti will be back in 2020, to run for president, and to come marching with his parade of **** stars and "wronged" women who spend all their time performing in strip clubs.

[Oct 05, 2018] False accusations are a very serious thing, and we are accepting them all too glibly

Oct 05, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

Deltaeus , October 2, 2018 at 4:38 pm

Wow. I'm saddened that so many people carelessly toss aside the best parts of our civilisation such as the presumption of innocence.
Accusers have to prove their charges.

Imagine Joe Lauria is accused by someone of something heinous. Anyone who doesn't like Joe can now comment on social media about how he looks like the type of guy who would do that. Anyone who disagrees with him might be motivated to do that. They can suggest psychological reasons for his atrocious behaviour. The accuser does not need to prove anything – just some lurid details and a tearful interview are enough, and the rest of us can no longer see his by-line without remembering all of the innocent children he molested.
See? What I just insinuated is completely untrue. Joe is an honest and good man, but anyone can smear him at any time and ruin his livelihood. Its easy. And Joe just made it easier with this article.

Please, think about what it is like to be unfairly accused. Perhaps in the abstract you can shrug, but talk to anyone who has actually been the victim of false allegations, and you will realise how powerless you are in that situation. Your only protection is the civilised idea that you are innocent until proven guilty, and if you destroy that, well, that would be a shame.

irina , October 2, 2018 at 10:53 pm

Have you ever experienced a false accusation ? I have, and I didn't even know it.

For many years, my mother in law sincerely believed that her grandson was not her son's child. This was patently untrue, but I was clueless because no one (we lived surrounded by her immediate family) told me, although the women all gossiped behind my back. You can only imagine how this affected all my familial relationships. She never did come clean about this situation (her thinking was affected by long term steroid use) but did eventually apologize to me (without precisely stating why) the year our son turned thirteen, at which point he started strongly resembling his dad (her son).

False accusations are a very serious thing, and we are accepting them all too glibly.

[Oct 05, 2018] Alcohol, Memory, and the Hippocampus

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... . . . The ability of alcohol to cause short term memory problems and blackouts is due to its effects on an area of the brain called the hippocampus. The hippocampus is a structure that is vital to learning and the formation of memory. ..."
"... Why did no one ask Christine Beasley Ford how much and how often she drank in high school and in college? ..."
Oct 05, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon [107] Disclaimer , says: October 5, 2018 at 1:18 am GMT

Alcohol, Memory, and the Hippocampus
[In adolescents] . . . cognitive processes are exquisitely sensitive to the effects of chemicals such as alcohol. Among the most serious problems is the disruption of memory, or the ability to recall information that was previously learned. When a person drinks alcohol, (s)he can have a "blackout."
A blackout can involve a small memory disruption, like forgetting someone's name, or it can be more serious -- the person might not be able to remember key details of an event that happened while drinking. An inability to remember the entire event is common when a person drinks 5 or more drinks in a single sitting ("binge").

. . . The ability of alcohol to cause short term memory problems and blackouts is due to its effects on an area of the brain called the hippocampus. The hippocampus is a structure that is vital to learning and the formation of memory.

Thus without a properly functioning hippocampus learning and memory become problematic. https://sites.duke.edu/apep/module-3-alcohol-cell-suicide-and-the-adolescent-brain/content-alcohol-memory-and-the-hippocampus/

Christine Ford claims her difficulties in her first years in college were due to "trauma" from the attempted rape. A professor of psychology, Ford used impressive big words, (iirc) stating that endocrine imprints such traumatic memories on the hippocampus.

So does alcohol.

Why did no one ask Christine Beasley Ford how much and how often she drank in high school and in college?

[Oct 05, 2018] How to Defend Against Charges of Harassment in the Workplace

Oct 05, 2018 | smallbusiness.chron.com

If you are accused of harassment in the workplace, it is important to carefully consider your next moves. Your initial reaction might be to vehemently defend yourself against the claims; however, try to keep a cool and calm head and approach the situation professionally. The more hotly you protest the charges and the angrier you get, the less inclined people may be to listen to your side of the story. Talk to a Lawyer

Book a consultation with a lawyer. If the matter can't be resolved via simple mediation within the workplace, you have to be sure to protect yourself and your job. A lawyer can advise you of your legal rights and give you an idea of how to best proceed with such allegations presented against you.

Write it Down

Provide a written account of what happened from your point of view. While this may differ from the account of the person claiming the harassment, it is important that you at least get your side of the story out. A written statement doing so gives human resources and/or management something to refer to during the investigation.

Tell the Truth

Be honest. If you know you did what the accusers say you did, be honest and the ensuing punishment may be less harsh. Talk to your manager about what happened, admit to what you did wrong and provide solutions for how to avoid further incidents. Most important: stop the "harassing" behavior immediately. The situation may worsen if it continues, whether you feel it is actual harassment or not.

Provide Witnesses

Provide an alibi and/or witnesses, if the claims are not true. If someone says you harassed them at a time when you know you were in a meeting or talking to someone in his office, then say so. Supply the name of any witnesses who can provide you an alibi. If there were other people around at the time that the alleged harassment took place, ask them to speak up on your behalf.

Stay Calm

Avoid retaliating in any way. Particularly if you have been falsely accused, you may feel angry, frustrated and more emotional than usual because of what you are going through. Don't take any adverse reaction against the person that made the allegations or do anything that might be perceived as retaliatory.

Draw Attention to Your History

Give an accounting of your track record with the company. If you've been accused of something you know you didn't do and you have a clean personnel file, explain to your manager that you've been with the company "X" amount of years, have never had a problem with another employee and have always treated others with the utmost respect. Your record could work in your favor.

Consult with HR

Consult with your human resources representative to determine how to best proceed according to company policy. Explain your side of the story and focus on what you can do to resolve the matter quickly and focus on your job. A human resources rep might be able to mediate in the matter and get it settled without having to take things further; she may also advise you of the steps you need to take or explain that there is nothing more you can do while the company investigates.

Tip

[Oct 05, 2018] Here's the truth about false accusations of sexual violence by Lisa Lazard,

Oct 05, 2018 | www.irishexaminer.com

What's clear is that the spectre of false allegation continues to dog the reporting of sexual violence. There remains a public impression that false allegations are common and that innocent people suffer as the result of being wrongfully accused.

The evidence on false allegations fails to support public anxiety that untrue reporting is common. While the statistics on false allegations vary – and refer most often to rape and sexual assault – they are invariably and consistently low. Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4% of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false.

Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2% and 6%.

... ... ...

This article was written by Lisa Lazard , Senior Lecturer in Psychology, The Open University and was originally published on The Conversation .

[Oct 03, 2018] False accusations of rape are not uncommon. A few gain national attention. Most do not.

Notable quotes:
"... The editor of a major paper once told me that he never allowed a woman into his office unless the door was open and a third person present. Why? If a disgruntled reporter says, "He groped me," it will go viral. (Joyful headline headline in competing paper: "Editor of Daily Blatt allegedly .") Months of furor will ensue. He will have large legal bills. The suspicion arising from that "allegedly" will never die. The paper's board may well decide that regardless of guilt he is having too serious an affect on the advertisers. He will be permitted to resign, never to get a similar job. The Daily Blatt will settle as quietly as possible for a quarter million. ..."
Oct 03, 2018 | www.unz.com

False accusations of rape are not uncommon. A few gain national attention. Most do not. A few: Tawana Brawley , a black woman, was gang-raped by four white (of course) men, except that she wasn't. Next there is the Duke Lacrosse case , Then at Rolling Stone a feminist writer and a magazine not greatly given to fact checking published the story of rape at the University of Virginia, also discredited. It cost them a libel settlement. And so on.

Again, if the accused men and boys had been guilty, long prison terms would have been a good idea. But they weren't. The presumption of guilt for men and innocence for women are convenient for those who want to prevent confirmation of a judge but do not reflect reality. People, assuredly to include women, use what power they have to get what they want.

The editor of a major paper once told me that he never allowed a woman into his office unless the door was open and a third person present. Why? If a disgruntled reporter says, "He groped me," it will go viral. (Joyful headline headline in competing paper: "Editor of Daily Blatt allegedly .") Months of furor will ensue. He will have large legal bills. The suspicion arising from that "allegedly" will never die. The paper's board may well decide that regardless of guilt he is having too serious an affect on the advertisers. He will be permitted to resign, never to get a similar job. The Daily Blatt will settle as quietly as possible for a quarter million.

Meanwhile, the Kavanaugh carnival is up and running. Now, Lord save us, we have USAToday trying to nail Kavanaugh for yes pedophilia. The evidence? Ain't none. None needed. Hey, we're talking the American media.

Nuff said. I predict the soon headline: "Berkeley sychotherapist recounts seeing Brett Kavanaugh leading the entire Marine Division in gang-raping thirteen-year-old autistic orphans."

[Oct 02, 2018] VINDICATION by Chateau Heartiste

There is not reports that she is a sociopath but references from her students are highly negative.
Oct 02, 2018 | www.theburningplatform.com

Gateway Pundit and the crack sleuths at /pol/ are both reporting on something veeery interesting about Christine Ballsy-Fraud: that second door on her home she claimed was the trigger for her remembering sexual abuse by Kavanaugh? it's likely all made up and the truth is that she was trying to hide her illegal landlord activity from authorities.

Here's an accomplished woman, Margot Cleveland, who has thoroughly analyzed Ballsy-Fraud's testimony and come to the conclusion that her constant story changes to stay one step ahead of any defense against her accusations that would attempt to falsify her recollections is the best evidence that Ballsy-Fraud was LYING UNDER OATH:

https://twitter.com/ProfMJCleveland/status/1046408449918218240

There are sociopaths among us. Most people don't know when they've met one. The sociopath is adept at concealing herself through mimicry of normal people. So when a sociopath like CBF sheds crocodile tears in front of Congress, normies think she's credible. They can't fathom anyone who would blatantly lie about a good man and destroy him before an audience of millions.

But these soul-killers exist, and normies had better wake up real quick to the fact that their inability to fathom anyone so radically and malevolently unlike themselves doesn't mean sociopaths don't swim among them, preying on their gullibility and integrity.
They do.
And they have like-minded kin in Congress who will cover for them.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/11197471582021478?pubid=ld-8519-2561&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theburningplatform.com&rid=&width=600

I will be vindicated in my very early assessment of Ballsy-Ford as a psychopathic liar who made up her accusation out of thin air.
And I will be vindicated in my very early assessment that it was wrong of the GOP and assorted pants-wetters and pedestal polishers on the Right to sacrifice Roy Moore to the jackals and embolden the Leftoid Fuggernaut to even greater slanders against innocent men.

[Oct 02, 2018] Mitchell the "veteran prosecutor" also failed to ask Ford who hosted the party where the alleged assault took place

Oct 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

BGO , 1 day ago

Mitchell the "veteran prosecutor" also failed to ask Ford who hosted the party where the alleged assault took place.

This is an important question. Maybe the most important question.

No one should be expected to remember their high school friends' home addresses, just like no one should be expected to remember every person who attended a specific high school party.

One thing ANYONE who suffered a violent attack would remember is WHO OWNED THE HOUSE where the attack took place.

High school parties generally are hosted by a the same people throughout a students high school years. It's not like everyone in class takes their turn throwing a kegger.

As anyone who drank to get drunk at parties in high school will tell you, it was always the same handful of kids, maybe three or four, who let their friends drink alcohol in their parents' home.

Narrowing down exactly who owned the home where the alleged attack took place should be easy due to the fact that, according to Ford, it was more of a small get together than a full blown party.

All investigators should need to do is ask the known attendees, under oath, whether or not they hosted the party where the alleged attack took place.

The fact that Ford's testimony includes exactly one person whose name she cannot remember is NOT a coincidence.

The phantom attendee was created out of thin air to give Ford an out if the known attendees claimed the attack did not occur at their homes.

There are so many things wrong with this political farce. Liberal mental illness, as with any case, is a given, automatically assumed.

Flip flopping dufuses on the other side, weakness, gross ineptitude.

The entire system needs to be culled via a massive firestorm; no one or thing left standing.

Cassander , 1 day ago

@BGO -- Re your first sentence, Mitchell notes in her memo "She does not remember in what house the assault allegedly took place or where that house was located with any specificity". I think this covers your point implicitly. If she doesn't remember what house it was, how can she remember whose house it was?

Just thought you were going a bit hard on Mitchell, whose memo seems pretty damning to me...

BGO , 1 day ago

Asking *what* house and *whose* house are two ENTIRELY different things.

Think about the most traumatic experience of your life. You know EXACTLY where the traumatic experience took place, right?

[Oct 02, 2018] The danger of false accusations from women who have a grudge or female sociopaths

This is ridiculous. "Me too" movement actually propagandizing Islam.
Oct 02, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

The #MeToo movement hits a block when it gets reduced to party politics, as we are witnessing...

... ... ...

A young woman marching in support of Kavanaugh put it this way: "This could be our brother, our dad, our boyfriend "

[Oct 02, 2018] Female false accusers demonstrate some common patterns, too many smiles, attention seeking, stories that make no sense or too vague

Oct 02, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

JLee2027 , 1 day ago

Guys who have been falsely accused, like me, knew quickly that Ford was lying. They all have the same pattern, too many smiles, attention seeking, stories that make no sense or too vague,etc.

VWAndy , 22 hours ago

Mrs Fords stunt works in family courts all the time. Thats why they tried it folks. They have gotten away with it before.

Barney08 , 1 day ago

Ford is a crusader. She thinks she is a Roe v Wade savior but she is an over educated ditz.

Kelley , 1 day ago

One word uttered by Ford proves that not only did Kav. not attack her but no one ever assaulted her . That word is "hippocampus." No woman in recorded history has ever used that word to describe their strongest reaction to a sexual assault.

It's mind blowing that a person would react to what was supposedly one of the most traumatic experiences of her life with a nearly gleeful "Indelibly in my hippocampus " or something to that effect unless of course it didn't happen. Her inappropriate response leads me to believe that Ford was never assaulted in the manner in which she claimed. If her claimed trauma had been a case of mistaken identity regarding a real assault, she still would have felt it and reacted far differently.

Emotional memories get stored in the amygdala. The hippocampus is for matter-of-fact memories. When Senator Feinstein asked Ford about her strongest memories of the event, Ford went all "matter of fact" in her reply, "Indelibly in my hippocampus ." without a trace of emotion in her response. No emotions = no assault by ANYONE let alone by Kavanaugh.

Giant Meteor , 1 day ago

Not only that, her most indelible memory from the experience was the maniacal laughter, not the part where a hand was forcibly placed over her mouth and she thought she may in that moment, have been accidently killed.

As to the hippopotamus, is that a turtle neck she is wearing or just her neck. What the **** happened there, she said nothing about strangulation.

pnchbowlturd , 1 day ago

Another peculiar thing about Ford's testimony was the adolescent voicing she gave it in. It was if she was imitating a 6 year old. I wish MItchell had fleshed out Ford's hobbies (surfing??) more and given more context to her career activities and recreational pursuits in college, alcohol consumption patterns or substance abuse treatments.

Her voicing was a tell that she seemed to be overplaying the victim persona for a person who holds a doctorate and travels the world surfing

Nunny , 1 day ago

If they coached her (while on the loooong drive from CA...lol) to use that voice, they didn't do her any favors. I thought femi-libs were all about being 'strong' and 'tough'. They can't have it both ways.....strike that.....they do have it both ways.....and the useful idiots on the left buy it.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

IMHO, the most peculiar thing was her outright refusal to say aloud the name of the boy that introduced her to Kavanaugh, when repeatedly questioned by Rachel Mitchell. It was wildly obvious that she was being evasive and I see it as an enormous tell. Chris Garrett, nicknamed "Squi", was IMHO the boy that drove her to and from the party, and if he didn't outright assault her that day, he may have dumped her that day.

MedTechEntrepreneur , 1 day ago

If the FBI is to have ANY credibility, they must insist on Ford's emails, texts and phone records for the last 2 years.

Anunnaki , 1 day ago

Kill shots:

· She testified that she had exactly one beer at the party

· "All three named eyewitnesses have submitted statements to the Committee denying any memory of the party whatsoever,

· her BFF: Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present with

· the simple and unchangeable truth is that Keyser is unable to corroborate [Dr. Ford's allegations] because she has no recollection of the incident in question.

· Mitchell stated that Ford refused to provide her therapy notes to the Senate Committee.

· Mitchell says that Ford wanted to remain confidential but called a tipline at the Washington Post.

· she also said she did not contact the Senate because she claimed she "did not know how to do that."

· It would also have been inappropriate to administer a polygraph to someone who was grieving.

· the date of the hearing was delayed because the Committee was told that Ford's symptoms prevented her from flying, but she agreed during testimony that she flies "fairly frequently."

· She also flew to Washington D.C. for the hearing.

· "The activities of Congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford's attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford's account.


NaturalOnly , 10 hours ago

It is not a matter of proving he is guilty to be prosecuted and go to jail. I think he did it. I think we all do stupid stuff when we are young and drunk. By all accounts he was a boozer.

There are a ton of people who would like to be on the Supreme court, why shove this guy down everyone's throat? He was an a$$. He needs to go away.

At first I thought this was all about politics. It might be a little. But women are sick of being victimized by men who get by with it. He should not get by with this.

Mzhen , 10 hours ago

No. Corroborating. Evidence.

Mike in Tokyo Rogers , 9 hours ago

Illogical and emotional "reasoning."

merlinfire , 2 hours ago

"I think he is guilty despite the evidence, so he must be guilty, despite the evidence."

Mzhen , 11 hours ago

Ms. Mitchell had a line of questioning about the friend who was mutual to Kavanaugh and Ford. It turns out this was the same person who had been named earlier by Ed Whelan. Ford said she had dated Garrett, also knew his younger brother, but flatly refused to refer to him by name in public.

I'll assume Ms. Mitchell was allowed to review all of the investigative material collected by the Committee to date. There has to be a reason she pursued this line of questioning.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

Who would most likely drive a girl to a party with older high school boys from a different school and different circle of friends? Who would most likely take a 15 year old girl home from a party in an age without cell phones? His name is Chris Garrett, nickname of "Squi". She claims to not remember the person that drove her home, and she claims to not remember the name of the last boy at the gathering. And she refuses to publicly state the name of the boy that introduced her to Kavanaugh. These are all one and the same person, her boyfriend and soon-to-be-ex-BF Chris Garrett, who may have either assaulted her or broke up with her that day.

fleur de lis , 13 hours ago

What a spoiled brat she must have been whilst growing up.

She must be a really obnoxious snot to her coworkers over the years, too.

And as a teacher she must be a real screwball.

Which explains how she landed an overpaid job at a snowflake factory.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

Yes. I was focused on trying to get into an elite college when I was in HS and these people's lives were nothing like mine in my teens. But then like a lot of people I'm lowborn as opposed to these people. I was a caddy at the Country Club, and my parents were certainly not members.

Brazillionaire , 14 hours ago

I haven't read all the comments so I don't know if somebody already brought this up... can this woman (who was 15) explain why she was in an upstairs bedroom with two boys? Did they drag her up the stairs? In front of the others? If she went willingly, for what purpose?

tsog , 14 hours ago

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1046611274753290240.html

Torgo , 11 hours ago

She walked upstairs calmly with her boyfriend Chris Garrett, nicknamed "Squi".

StarGate , 14 hours ago

So it seems... the Prosecutor determined which 'he said, she said'

gave False testimony under Oath

- Blasey Ford.

Ban KKiller , 13 hours ago

That's what it says. Investigate Ford and her scumbag fuckwad attorneys. Ha ha.

Westcoastliberal , 14 hours ago

What's this? https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christine_Blasey

motoXdude , 14 hours ago

Some things reign eternal... You go (down) girl, Doctor Ford! What a brave 15 year-old drinking at HS and College-Level Parties! Truly a Progressive ahead of the times! Thank you for paving the road to ruin! Don't forget to breathe in-between. You ARE the FACE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, GIRL! Suck it up, Buttercup!

alfbell , 15 hours ago

RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!!

RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!!

RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!!

RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!!

RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!! RED WAVE!!

RighteousRampage , 15 hours ago

Yes, we all got to see Kavanaugh PMS'ing on national television. No need to shout about it.

alfbell , 15 hours ago

I BELIEVE!!

... that America's institutions are being torn down by Leftists. The attempt to create a new totalitarian regime has been upon us for decades and is now perfectly clear.

We will not say goodbye to morality.

We will not say goodbye to science.

We will not say goodbye to democracy.

We will not say goodbye to our Constitution, Bill of Rights, Founding Fathers, Logic, Decency, etc. etc. etc.

MAGA!

AHBL , 15 hours ago

Morality: Your dear Leader cheated on 3 different wives, one of them with a prostitute,...while she was pregnant (or had a 4 month old, I forget); filed for bankruptcy 5 times, cheating many people out of money; settled fraud lawsuits; lied about charity donations; your party nominated an actual PEDOPHILE (Moore) for Senate and now wants to appoint an angry drunk to be SCJ!

Science: You folks are literally disputing the conclusions of the vast, vast majority of scientists (97% by my last count) when it comes to global warming.

Democracy: this is a Democratic Republic...if it was a Democracy Trump wouldn't be President.

The rest of the nonsense you wrote was just filler...obviously.

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

Still better than the rapist and intern cigarer

and Benghazi killer clintons😂😂😂

why do retarded libturds not see that!!

alfbell , 11 hours ago

You are clueless. Have all of your priorities and importances upside down. Have zero critical thinking.

Can't see that it isn't about Trump. It's about a Populist/Nationalist movement to put an end to the degradation of Progressive Globalists. Look at the big picture AHBL. C'mon you can do it.

RighteousRampage , 15 hours ago

"Wave goodbye to science"

Um, I believe you have your parties confused.

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

ISIS killee obama turned the democrats into te

aloha_snakbar , 15 hours ago

Why was Ms. Ford wearing glasses that looked like someone rubbed Crisco on the lenses? As a long time wearer of glasses, I can tell you we dont roll that way, kind of defeats the purpose. Answer? Those were not her glasses...they were a prop...

NeigeAmericain , 13 hours ago

Hahaha! She should have just taken out the lens out. No one would have looked that closely or would they ? 🤔

Dormouse , 15 hours ago

She's an Illuminati/NXIVM MKUltra-ed CIA sex-kitten. Her family glows in the dark with CIA connections. She's a CIA recruiter at Stamford, as well as her other job at Palo Alto. Oh, something traumatic has happened to her, multiple times; but at the hands of her family and their close Agency friends. Alyssa Milano in the audience? Come on! This is so ******* sick! What a disgusting display for those in the Know. Does the FBI currently have the balls to call them all out? That's the question, has Trump reformed the DOJ/FBI -- beyond the hobbled and shackled part consummed by these criminals with their coup? He seems confident, almost like he's tormenting his enemies as usual.

RighteousRampage , 15 hours ago

I heard she was chapter head of the local Elk's lodge as well.

GotAFriendInBen , 16 hours ago

Bye bye lying Brett

New reports question Kavanaugh's credibility on past drinking behavior, when he knew about allegations

By Mike Murphy

Published: Oct 1, 2018 8:26 p.m. ET

Texts suggest Supreme Court nominee knew of Ramirez accusations months before when he testified he had heard them

Gold Banit , 16 hours ago

Trump is brilliant and very smart!

Trump destroyed 17 high profile and very rich Republicans in the primaries.

Trump destroyed high profile and very rich Hillary Clinton and became the President of the USA.

Trump will now destroy the Democratic Party CNN and the main stream media.

Trump is not only brilliant and very smart he is a genius..

The DemoRats are in panic mode and are scared to death cause they are starting to realize that this could be the end of the Democratic Party.

RighteousRampage , 15 hours ago

"Trump is brilliant and very smart!"

Easy there, you're gonna hurt yourself.

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

Best president in hi

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

He is brilliant

he knew this pick would get beat so he picked Kavanaugh

it was brilliant because even Bush was forced to fight for kacenau😂😂😂

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

He will be confirmed this week

no problem

just outing the democrats that will be targeted in nov

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

I'll believe a woman after she's happily, on her own, made me breakfast 5 years or more....like mine does 8 years later.

ParaZite , 16 hours ago

Democrats have shown that they are anything but reasonable.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

Racheal Doleazle...Blase'- Ford....We should believe these women! - Why?l

ParaZite , 16 hours ago

Because they have a vagina and can cry when their go fund me page hits 500K.

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

Cause a fat turd senator from Hawaii ordered us too😂😂😂

after that bitch tried to get the democrat rapist clinton back in my White House???

she hates Brett???

dekocrats are riding a fastvttrain to hell

aloha_snakbar , 16 hours ago

Funny how Democraps are getting their panties in a wad over BK drinking beer in college, yet were okay with Slappy Sotoro snorting cocaine in college....go figure...

Dormouse , 14 hours ago

They're terrified of what happens once he's confirmed.

10/10/18 Checkmate

Extinction

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

The million babies a year quit being executed

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

Where WAS the media when ISIS killer obama put those two fat no resume turds on the court???

GotAFriendInBen , 16 hours ago

Be wary of anyone this lunatic wants to plant for a lifetime position

Trump Says He 'Fell In Love' With Korean Leader Kim Jong-Un

RighteousRampage , 16 hours ago

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-01/kavanaugh-college-visit-to-bar-erupted-in-fight-classmate-says-jmqwga1s?srnd=premium

" The episode occurred on a September evening in 1985 after Kavanaugh, Ludington and Dudley, attended the UB40 concert ."

UB40? Well, there you have it, if that isn't disqualifying, I don't know what is.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

Terms of Service Violation

Your usage has been flagged as a violation of our terms of service .

For inquiries related to this message please contact support . For sales inquiries, please visit http://www.bloomberg.com/professional/request-demo

If you believe this to be in error, please confirm below that you are not a robot by clicking "I'm not a robot" below.


Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review the Terms of Service and Cookie Policy.

Block reference ID: f9d6i listen to the ****-11e8-8d59-**** you

aloha_snakbar , 16 hours ago

Lol... what, seeing UB40?

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

Ouch

might be right on that😂😂😂

Mareka , 16 hours ago

I suspect this is as much about discouraging others from stepping forward as it is about destroying Kavenaugh.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

I suspect this is about Communists trying to take over our government.

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

Amen

this is warning the good guys

Debt Slave , 16 hours ago

She is a cross eyed boobis and we have to believe her because she says Kavanaugh, a white hetero catholic man without any decent upbringing or engrained scruples raped her like a monkey savage out of the jungle. Oh sorry, TRIED to rape her. As a teenager. Tried to raped a pathetic, stupid cross eyed retarded moron that has since been successfully lobotomized at a 'modern' American university.

When is the last time you saw a 'mentally challenged' person being abused? Oh yes I remember now, it was Chicongo, January 2017. Four negroes shoved a retarded white man's head in a toilet and demanded he swear that he loved Niggers.

Never heard what happened to the savage fuckers, eh? Not surprised.

i know who and what I am voting for white man, do you?

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

This is all over BRUTAL KISS

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

Whaaa waa waa waa. Whahhh wa waaaaa. It's good to be retarded! Then you don't even have to try and understand the stupid **** we are FED today!

ThePhantom , 17 hours ago

bitch didn't clean her glasses.... mother ******

rkb100100 , 17 hours ago

I hear Anita Hill is worth a lot of money. I wonder what kind of pay-off this slime ball will end up with.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

Pubic hair is worth a lot! It's got electrolytes!

Empire's Frontiers , 17 hours ago

You know, we ain't heard much about Russia for a few days.

Mouldy , 16 hours ago

Yeah ZH... **** this Kavanaugh ****, can we get back to the regularly

scheduled doom **** please.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

Quitchabitchen.

benb , 16 hours ago

Time for the un-redacted FISA docs and the text messages. That should send Schumer and the gang into a tailspin.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

....disqus spinning thing

Hadenough1000 , 11 hours ago

God bless brilliant trump

holding those real crimes over democrats

cant wait until he drops the bombs

MrAToZ , 17 hours ago

The Dims don't believe Ford any more than they believe in the constitution. They are building a better world. They are true believers, one in the cause.

If one of them were at the receiving end of this type of Spanish inquisition they would be crying foul right out of the batter's box. But, because this is for the cause they will put the vagina hat on, goose step around and say they believe that mousey Marxist.

It's a made up sink if he's innocent, guilty if he floats game show. They know exactly what they are doing, which makes them even more reprehensible.

benb , 16 hours ago

Yes a Hoax! But how many out there believe this crap? I'd like to see an accurate poll if that's possible.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

I believe it all! Both sides are right!

Debt Slave , 16 hours ago

That's why we call them 'Bolsheviks'. That's what they are.

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

They killed millions! ...and are poised to try and do it again.

BankSurfyMan , 18 hours ago

Fordy had sexual encounters, she drinks beer and flies all over the globe... One day she had a beer and cannot remember getting home on time to watch, MOAR DOOM NEWS! Fucktard Fordy! Doom 2019! Next!

inosent , 18 hours ago

Well, at least Rachel doesn't come off as one of those psycho SJW bitches

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

I am a black woman that identifies as a pre-pubescent Taiwanese man.

SocratesSolutions , 18 hours ago

Hmm. I think here, now which is it really? Does Ford make a better looking man, or does Kavanaugh make a better looking woman?

Giant Meteor , 17 hours ago

I dunno. But so far no one has been able to answer this question. Why, in the picture above, does Ford look like she swalowed a hula hoop ?

Oldguy05 , 16 hours ago

Because.

Kafir Goyim , 18 hours ago

Just had lunch with a democrat. He's generally tolerable, so his level of anger at Kavanaugh and his acceptance of "anything goes" to derail Kavanaugh was surprising to me.

Democrats believe that Roe V Wade is instantly overturned if Kavanaugh gets in. They also think that if Roe V Wade is overturned, no woman will ever be able to abort another baby in the US.

I explained to him that destruction of Roe V Wade will only make it a state issue, so girls in California, Oregon, Washington, New York, etc will be able to kill as many babies as they want to. It will only be girls in Wyoming or Utah or some other very red state that might have to schlep their *** to another state to kill their kid.

Democrats see this as a battle for abortion, and if Kav gets confirmed, abortion is completely gone in the USA. That's why you have these women freaking out. They think the stakes are much higher than they actually are. Almost all of the women that are so worried about this live in states where it won't have any effect on them at all.

I am Groot , 18 hours ago

I hope you took a bath and a flea dip after lunch.

Kafir Goyim , 18 hours ago

I think I kind of calmed him down. We need to let them know that their world doesn't end if Roe V Wade is overturned. I am also not at all sure it would be overturned, even with Kav on the court, but they insist it will be, so not worth arguing. Reminding them that it doesn't effect them, if they live in a blue state should calm their fears a little.

The right to abort is their 2nd amendment, God help us. If you explain to them they are not really in danger, it may calm them down. They'll still make noise about those poor girls who can't get an abortion after school and still make it home for dinner, and instead, have to take a bus to another state to kill their kid, but they won't be as personally threatened and lashing out as they mistakenly are now.

when the saxon began , 17 hours ago

And therein lies the fatal flaw of an elected representative government. The votes of the ignorant and stupid are counted the same as yours or mine. And there are far more of them.

VisionQuest , 18 hours ago

Democrats stand for atheism, abortion & sodomy. Ask yourself this question: Who stands with Democrats? If your answer is "I do." then you'd best rethink your precious notions of morality, truth, common decency, common sense and justice.

It is undoubtedly true that, in our entirely imperfect world, the American Way of life is also far from perfect. But it is also true that, compared to every other system of government on the planet, there is no comparison with the level of achievement accomplished by the American Way of life.

Democrats hate and will destroy the American Way of life. Have you been a Democrat? Walk away.

Automatic Choke , 19 hours ago

EXCUSE ME, Y'ALL.....

but where the hell are the texts, FISA memo, & other docs?

look, another ******* squirrel !!!!!

J Jason Djfmam , 19 hours ago

They should also recommend an investigation of the woman with two front holes...errr front doors.

snatchpounder , 18 hours ago

Yes Flake should be investigated I concur.

Anunnaki , 17 hours ago

Zing!

freedommusic , 19 hours ago

At this point the FBI should recommend a criminal investigation to the DOJ for treasonous actors who are subverting the constitutional process of SC nomination. The crimes of perjury, sedition, and treason, need to be clearly articulated to the public and vigorous prosecution ensue.

We are STILL a Constitutional Republic - RIGHT?

Giant Meteor , 18 hours ago

Well, I am betting 27 trillion dollars that the answer to your question is a resounding , no ...

didthatreallyhappen , 19 hours ago

there is not "case"

ZeroPorridge , 19 hours ago

STOP SHOWING THIS LAME ****, TYLER! I HAD ENOUGH OF THIS WAFFLECRAP!!

DingleBarryObummer , 19 hours ago

It's the nothing burger flavor of the week. Tylers gotta put bread on the table u know. Be grateful for the good stuff they host, ZH is still the best news site on the internet. And don't worry, this nothing burger will get stale and we will have a new one in a week or 2, and everyone can get hysterical from that and forget about this one.

dchang0 , 19 hours ago

A body language analysis video on BitChute goes through the Ford testimony and points out all the markers for lying and rehearsed lines:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/5uv6SHt1Z5Gm/

RighteousRampage , 19 hours ago

I saw a video on youtube where a man threw chicken bones and saw Kavanaugh is guilty. I mean, what other proof does one need.

Anunnaki , 17 hours ago

Red herrIng much?

Anunnaki , 14 hours ago

Excellent. Thanks

loved the part on pretty pose. Her helium voice was an act

Shillinlikeavillan , 19 hours ago

This **** won't mean anything to the leftards, they will pretend that this report never happened and will carry on acting like a bunch of dumbasses...

Meanwhile, there was indeed a party with ford in it that night...

... and its hard to stop a train...

RighteousRampage , 19 hours ago

...of old angry entitled white men from gang banging our constitutional rights.

Mr. Universe , 19 hours ago

How come all of a sudden 8 year old accounts whom I've never seen before start trolling? At least 4 so far I've seen, strange co inky dink ehh?

RighteousRampage , 16 hours ago

I gave up posting here years ago when the site went from sharp-eyed financial analysis to Russia-humping conspiro-nazism. That said, this Kavanaughty thing is just too much of a meatball to pass up.

Now, respect your elders, and go back to playing in your sandbox, little boy.

Sinophile , 19 hours ago

If the bitch 'struggled academically in college' then how the hell did she get awarded a freaking P(ost)H(ole)D(igger)?

snatchpounder , 18 hours ago

She probably blew the right man or men.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

That's why GRE and other standardized tests should be prioritized. Thinking on one's feet is a good thing!

eitheror , 19 hours ago

Thank you Rachel Mitchell for having the courage to tell the truth about the testimony of Ms. Blasey Ford, P.h.D.

Ford is not a medical Doctor but is a P.h.D.

The Democrats seem to have abandoned Ms. Ford like a bad haircut, instead focusing on other smoke and mirrors.

onewayticket2 , 19 hours ago

Again, So What??

The democrats have already soiled this Judge's career and family name. Now it's about delay.

Exoneration note from the Republicans' lawyer carries precisely zero weight with them.....they are too busy sourcing everyone who ever drank beer with Kav....in an effort to get another Week Long extension/argue that Trump already greenlighted such an extension to investigate how much Kav likes beer. or who's milk money he stole in 3rd grade....

RighteousRampage , 19 hours ago

i guess Kavanuaghty wasn't worried about soiling the family name all those times he stumbled home slurring his words and yelling at random passersby.

onewayticket2 , 18 hours ago

He is not the first college student to get drunk.

Equating getting drunk to charges in every newspaper and TV news station for weeks stating he is a gang rapist ring leader etc is laughably idiotic. Nice job. Thx for the laugh.

HowdyDoody , 19 hours ago

Reports that Chinese naval vessel has chased a US vessel USS Decatur out of disputed waters. The Chinese vessel came within ~40 meters of the USS vessel (which is pretty darn close).

French president Macron, visiting the West Indows was interviewed about the confrontation. He responded, saying "don't bug me, bro. I got important things on my mind".

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoXSUqBX0AEuwfO.jpg

Babble_On2001 , 20 hours ago

About 35 years ago, at a party in San Francisco where everyone was very drunk, now Senator Feinstein sexually molested me. Don't remember the date or location or anything else, but it happened, I swear! Naturally, want to remain anonymous to protect my integrity, but it did happen! She shoved me down onto my knees and ground her crotch in my face. It was terrible, I can still recall the horrible smell to this day! The stench was a combination of rotting flesh and urine. Makes me nauseous just thinking of that sexual assault. INVESTIGATE this serial molester!

nope-1004 , 20 hours ago

Anyone see what that fat, big mouthed, undisciplined pig Rosie O'Donnell tweeted today? I didn't. But I'm sure that fat piggy just had to weigh-in (no pun intended) on how she's been crossed by this.

Any other lefties lurking here who have kids that can't stand you / your insane views, and have disowned you like Rosie's did?

lol

I am Groot , 19 hours ago

Piggy ? More like a rabid albino silverback beating her hairy chest.

Opulence I Has It , 20 hours ago

The only things she does remember, are the things that directly support her allegations. That fact, by itself, is reason enough to disbelieve everything she says. The idea that she would have concrete memories of only those specific events, is not believable.

It's totally believable, though, that she's been counseled thus, to make her story easier to remember and avoid those inconvenient secondary details. You know, those secondary details that every police detective knows are how you trip up a liar. They are so focused on their bogus story, the little details of the time surrounding the fabrication don't hold up.

Mr. Universe , 19 hours ago

Would you expect less from the company?

Anunnaki , 17 hours ago

Can't remember when it happened, how she got there, who was there, how she got home

but she does remember she only had one beer

yeah. Right.

StychoKiller , 16 hours ago

Perhaps it was one REALLY BIG Beer!

Last of the Middle Class , 16 hours ago

She remembers clearly she only had one beer and was taking no medication yet cannot remember for sure how she accessed her counselors records on her whether by internet or copying them less than 3 months ago?

Not possible.

She's a lying shill and in time it will come out.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

She doesn't remember her rescuer that drove her home and away from such a terrible situation. Is this plausible? I say absolutely not. IMHO, she knows his name but refuses to say it while pretending to not remember. Chris Garrett, nicknamed "Squi", who introduced her to Kavanaugh and who was her boyfriend once. Some have speculated that he assaulted her that day and/or ended her relationship that day after she didn't want to take things to the next level with him.

quasi_verbatim , 20 hours ago

What a load of 'Murican crap.

Giant Meteor , 20 hours ago

Squawkkkkkk, it's what we do !

American Dissident , 20 hours ago

McConnell on the Senate Floor 50 minutes ago: "The time for endless delay and obstruction has come to a close.... Mr. President, we'll be voting this week."

xear , 21 hours ago

Brett is obviously innocent. Groping her, holding her down, grinding into her... it's not like it was rape. And as far as covering her mouth so she couldn't scream... after a heavy night of drinking who wants to hear screaming? Almost anyone would do the same.

I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 20 hours ago

it's always interesting to see where and why people claim to know things about which they have literally no 'knowledge.'

Also interesting to see how the same people who would protest assuming the guilt of an alleged Muslim terrorist or Black liquor store robber now argue it is 'whiteness' and 'patriarchy' to not assume the guilt of a white male regarding decades old uncorroborated charges... which 4 named witnesses deny having knowledge of, by a woman who lied about a fear of flying to try to delay the process.

We can all be hypocrites.

But watching the Left embrace hypocrisy as social justice has been, in the pure sense of the word, awesome to behold.

RighteousRampage , 20 hours ago

Almost, but not quite, as awesome to behold as the right's embrace of complete immorality by the supposed party of faith and religion.

ZD1 , 20 hours ago

The demonic Democrat socialist party are all about immorality.

The real neo-Marxist fascists on the Supreme Court are:

Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Marxist *** from ACLU)

Elena Kagan (Marxist ***)

Sonia Sotomayer (Marxist brown supremacist from La Raza/MEHcA)

Stephen Breyer (Marxist ***)

They are no different than the left-wing billionaire neo-Marxist fascists that own and control the demonic Democrat socialist party.

RighteousRampage , 20 hours ago

Showing your Nazi stripes again?

The religious right will never again be able to claim any moral high-ground, never. Not after Trump and this Kavanaugh fiasco.

ZD1 , 20 hours ago

The immoral lying neo-Marxist fascists in the demonic Democrat socialist party never had any high ground, EVER!

Now run along Antifa fascist.

RighteousRampage , 20 hours ago

Whatever you say, Boris.

Dancing Disraeli , 20 hours ago

Boris is a Russian name. If you wanted to run the Nazi narrative, you should've called him Fritz.

Anunnaki , 17 hours ago

I love the new ignore feature on the Hedge. Buh bye Snowflake

Babble_On2001 , 20 hours ago

Right, that's why the fraud Ford kept repeating, "I don't remember" or "I can't recall." Yes, a very believable story. Now let me tell you about another female figure that has been treated poorly, she's called the Tooth Fairy.

deja , 19 hours ago

Tawana Brawley, substitute republican conservative for white state trooper.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

Not only are these claims of not remembering completely implausible, but the transcript shows that she explicitly refuses to say the name of the boy that introduced her to BK. It strikes me as wildly disrespectful to Rachel Mitchell and just screams for further exploration.

FBaggins , 21 hours ago

To fix things if after all of this crap from the feminazis and Kavenaugh simply withdraws his name, Trump should put forward Judge Amy Coney Barrett as the next candidate. It would really ensure support for Trump candidates in the midterms from women in general and from social-conservative family-values people in the US and it would perhaps teach the feminazis a lesson at the same time.

istt , 20 hours ago

No, Kavanaugh deserves better. He has earned his place on the USSC.

Giant Meteor , 20 hours ago

My prediction was, and still is Kavanaugh goes forward. Even the revered CNN is starting to walk the drinking issue back.

By the way , the Trump presser today was a ******* hoot!

cheech_wizard , 20 hours ago

Aren't they all...

Standard Disclaimer: Keep calm and MAGA on!

ToddTheBabyWhale , 21 hours ago

Nine page memo, Tyler. Your starting to write like a pro journalist now.

jomama , 21 hours ago

Checked in for a minute to have a peek at countless fat, white, middle aged, anonymous assholes spewing hatred and misogyny.

Wasn't disappointed. Keeping it classy, ZH.

I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 21 hours ago

that's big talk coming from a pedophile.

prove you aren't, dickhead.

Lore , 21 hours ago

That isn't helpful. The reason why jomama's post is wrong is because it's merely spewing vitriol, when the priority should be to dis-indoctrinate and self-educate.

American Dissident , 20 hours ago

Reading this made is like seeing a fire truck on fireeeeeee

tmosley , 20 hours ago

I started blocking low effort trolls after one warning.

Slowly cleaning the place up.

Jein , 20 hours ago

Tmosley: "it hurts my feelings to read things I dont like and I need a safe space to cry in"

Mr. Universe , 19 hours ago

Another 9 year member troll I've never seen before. Do you think the mockingbirds want to disrupt any discourse and devolve it into "them vs. us"? You bet they do. Buzz off, jomama back to whatever basement they dug you up out of. Tell Georgie that we will resist this treachery with our last breaths.

Lore , 21 hours ago

You misunderstand, because your perspective is handicapped by progressivist indoctrination. A conscientious ZHer will read a note like that and dismiss it as intellectual laziness: mindless regurgitation of programming.

Strive to deprogram, and you'll quickly develop better perspective about the distinction between political correctness and pursuit of truth. God knows there is name-calling on both sides, but I think it's safe to say that the biggest concern on sites like ZH is the way mainstream American discourse has been hijacked by amoral pathocracy. What matters is not doing The Right Thing: what matters is ******* over the other guy to get Your Way. That is the evil that is on the verge of destroying this nation.

cheech_wizard , 20 hours ago

It's either that, or drugs.

robertocarlos , 21 hours ago

I'm not that fat.

Harvey_Manfrengensen , 21 hours ago

I am at 16% bodyfat. Nor am I white. Try again.

istt , 21 hours ago

Jomama raped me when I was in the 6th grade. Just came out after a therapy session. Can anyone corroborate my story, you ask? No, but I am 100% sure he is the guy. You are a guy, right? Now if we can just expose who he is I will press charges and have him put away for a very long time, ruin his family and his career.

rwmomad , 20 hours ago

He pulled my pants down in first grade on the play ground and touched my pee pee. I am seeking counsel.

Giant Meteor , 20 hours ago

How's that going?

IridiumRebel , 20 hours ago

Still can't refute anything so ad hominem attacks....got it.

Stay generalized!

let freedom ring , 21 hours ago

Trump has given up on K. The calculus is that it will be bad for the democrats if he doesn't make it on the court. Don't expect Trumps help from here on in. K was a flawed candidate from the start and Trump knew it, and is playing his base like a violin.

istt , 20 hours ago

Total BS. You've lost your senses. People are expendable but not that much. Trump has to be thought of as a guy who backs his appointees, that he will go to the wall for them.

sunkeye , 21 hours ago

T/y Prosecutor Mitchell for conducting yourself w/ professionalism, decency, & honor - personal traits none of the Democratic senators seem to possess, or would even recognize if shown to them directly as you did. Again. t/y & bravo.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

She allowed Ford to refuse to speak the name of the boy that introduced her to BK. Chris Garrett, nicknamed "Squi", who was Ford's one-time boyfriend. Some speculate that he was the unnamed final boy at the party and that he may have assaulted Ford and/or dumped her after she refused to go to the next level with him. Hence the trauma.

Jein , 21 hours ago

All this vitriol breaks my heart. Why can't we all just love eachother? I heard human centipeding is a great way to team build. Who's in?

chrbur , 21 hours ago

Jein...because first we must remove evil....

RighteousRampage , 21 hours ago

right, and by labeling the opposing side, "evil" that pretty much means anything goes.

first step is to dehumanize, then all possibilities are on the table, amirite?

istt , 20 hours ago

Yeah, that's following the Alinsky playbook. Something you have been spewing all over these threads. Guilty until proven innocent. No, better, yet, guilty because he was accused.

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out -- because I was not a socialist."

RighteousRampage , 20 hours ago

Funny how all of the "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law" crowd here was so quick to send Hillary to the gulag, or believe in that Obama was a Muslim, or that a pizza parlor was ground-zero for a child trafficking ring, or....

let freedom ring , 21 hours ago

I like it. lets sew a string of Trumptards together *** to mouth, south park style.

Jein , 21 hours ago

Love it. I'm willing to make the sacrifice be the head.

Negative_Prime , 20 hours ago

Why? You're so good at being the rear.

Don't deny your nature.

tmosley , 20 hours ago

I told you to stop that ****.

You are now on ignore. Suggest everyone do the same. This guy never said anything interesting.

Paracelsus , 21 hours ago

I am having trouble keeping these personalities separate as I want to give everyone the benefit of the

doubt. When I see Justice Kavanaugh, I think of the confirmation hearing as a political attack on the

Trump administration . Also as an attempt to score points, or make the other side screw up, before the

upcoming elections.When I see Dr. Ford, I see Hillary Clinton and all the bitterness from a failed

politician.

The funny thing is I thought all the Trump "fake news" statements were a load of crap. Turns out he hit the

mark quite often. The lefties are so damn mad because Trump is succeeding and they haven't been able to

score points against him. So they feel that it is justified to use other methods,regardless of the fallout.

There is a whiff of panic and desperation present.

I have stated this before, as have others: The loss of the White House by the Democrats provided a

unique opportunity to clean out the deadwood. This may have seemed cruel and heartless but the

Obama era is over and the Dem's urgently need to return to their roots before it is too late. Did they

use this moment of change or did they revert to business as usual? To ask the question is to

answer it.... This is commonly described as bureaucratic inertia. The Dem's only needed to get the

ball rolling and they would be moving towards the objective of regaining power. New, younger

and more diplomatic and law abiding types need to be encouraged to apply. Put out the help wanted

sign. Do what Donald does,"You're fired!".

RighteousRampage , 21 hours ago

Well, if others have stated it before, it MUST be true. Republiconarists and Demcraps are playing the same stupid games. Dems got punked w Garland, and now Reps are getting their comeuppance w Kavanaugh (who really made it worse for himself by holding up such an obviously false pious portrait of himself).

American Dissident , 22 hours ago

I believe Judge Brett Kavanaugh. I believe Rachel Mitchell, Esq. I believe Leland Keyser. I believe Mark Judge. I believe P.J. Smyth.

I believe the evidence. That's why I don't believe Ms. Christine Blasey Ford.

Anunnaki , 17 hours ago

But she only had one beer!

Torgo , 11 hours ago

What do you think of the Chris Garrett hypothesis?

VWAndy , 22 hours ago

Mrs Fords stunt works in family courts all the time. Thats why they tried it folks. They have gotten away with it before.

Drop-Hammer , 22 hours ago

IOW, she is a lying leftist loon and fraud. I am only surprised that she is not a treacherous jewess.

1970SSNova396 , 22 hours ago

The bitch was a fraud and anybody with a working brain understands that. Of course that exempts the democrat voting base.

The two ugly women senators from Maine and Alaska just might sink Kav. Lord knows they want to so bad.

arby63 , 22 hours ago

And you are about duplicitous as one paid troll could be. Go punch yourself and apologize to those that actually have a job.

1970SSNova396 , 22 hours ago

G F Y sport

arby63 , 22 hours ago

Don't you wish. Bitch.

RighteousRampage , 21 hours ago

Zerohedge is basically Breitbart now, with even more doomporn and more Putin puffery.

cheech_wizard , 20 hours ago

******* yourself might be the only sex you're getting... Just saying...

RighteousRampage , 20 hours ago

Maybe he's a proud beer drinking virgin, just like your man Kavanaugh.

STONEHILLADY , 22 hours ago

also for someone going up before Congress for any reason, this Ford girl had NOT one family member or husband by her side....that is a real telling sign.

Also check out the secret courts going on in E. Warren's state Mass. same kind of Justice, guilty to prove innocent, they have adopted the court system of the Inquisition, get ready folks if the Dems. take back the Congress. these type of courts coming to blue state near you.

1970SSNova396 , 22 hours ago

If your father was CIA would you want him there? Of course she is a carpet eater so two lesbians is enough.

RighteousRampage , 21 hours ago

I guess then, by your logic, the Clinton's should be considered innocent?

Anunnaki , 14 hours ago

She kept looking at her prepared statement like a security blanket under cross examination

Torgo , 11 hours ago

It was an attempt to make her look alone and vulnerable. Along with the girly voice and the glasses to make her eyes look huge and neotenous.

YourAverageJoe , 22 hours ago

Writing the memo was easy for her. She could have cut and pasted large parts of Comey's July 2016 exoneration of Hillary speech.

aloha_snakbar , 22 hours ago

Ms Ford, the newly minted millionaire, is probably lying poolside in Mexico, indulging in her favorite psychotropics and getting pounded by the local brown talent. Wow...having a vagina is like having a meat 3D printer that spews out money...

cheech_wizard , 20 hours ago

That so reminds me of this line in "He Never Died"...


I, uh, don't have money, so...
Then how did you end up inebriated?
Vaginas are like coupon books for alcohol.

Aubiekong , 23 hours ago

Never was about justice, this is simply a liberal/globalist plan to stop Trump.

peippe , 22 hours ago

why can't they lay back & take the pounding?

might even start to enjoy it. MAGA!

Trump Train will place at least one more justice on the bench beyond Brettster. : )

I Am Jack's Macroaggression , 21 hours ago

Trump is surrounded by Jews.. Zionists and bankers.

We are watching the Ultra-Zionist Jews in a power struggle with the Globalist Jews.

And 100 years ago Churchill notes the same - Jews divided between destroying nations (Bolsheviks) and building their own to rule the world and possess its wealth (Zionism).

Bad cop, bad cop.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

Well stated. Churchill famously and openly wrote about this in the early 1920s.

arby63 , 23 hours ago

If you haven't punched a Democrat today, try harder.

Jein , 22 hours ago

Cuck alert

arby63 , 22 hours ago

Let us all know when you're ready to jump.

LadyAtZero , 22 hours ago

Prosecutor Rachel did a great job and given that Christine's testimony was under oath, Christine is set up to be held to what she said.

Friends, Christine is C_A and so is her dad. These C_A facts are all over the internet.

Christine during her testimony had a fake "little girl, looking over her glasses, am I not cute?" demeanor.

She is a psych. PhD for heavens sake -- she is 52 years old. No need to act like a hurt little girl, unless one is facing the big white male meanies who dare to question her and she can emit "I'm a victim" all day long.

Go Kavanaugh!

(and I don't care if Brett Kavanaugh likes to drink beer and I don't care that he drank in college and got rip-roaring drunk. Most of us did... as we all know).

........sigh.....

Prince Eugene of Savoy , 20 hours ago

Squeaky Ford only testified to what she had written down. She never used the part of the brain dealing with actual memory. https://youtu.be/uGxr1VQ2dPI

Torgo , 11 hours ago

And she outright refused to speak the name of the boy that had introduced her to BK. It was wildly evasive and inappropriate and is a huge red flag for this case. Chris Garrett, nicknamed "Squi". Her one-time boyfriend and I am convinced that he both drove her to and away from the party. After she refused his effort to take their relationship to the next level.

I am Groot , 18 hours ago

There are no more "Democrats" or "liberals". There are only Marxists and communists.

VWAndy , 23 hours ago

Worth thinking about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGBIMU__nmM

ExcelMonkey , 22 hours ago

Stop spamming.

arby63 , 22 hours ago

Stop breathing. We will all be better off. Even you.

headless blogger , 22 hours ago

We don't need a cultist that talks at the camera with only his head showing (weird) to tell us what to believe.

We can figure it out without that phony racist cultist's lecture.

VWAndy , 22 hours ago

Attack the message not the messenger. Every discerning person here is hip to that trick.

headless blogger , 19 hours ago

We don't need cultists speaking out in our name. It only discredits the truth movement. The Messenger DOES matter.

Golden Phoenix , 23 hours ago

Ever notice #MeToo

reads 'Pound Me Too!'

American Dissident , 23 hours ago

should be #boxwineresistance

Grandad Grumps , 23 hours ago

Sp, Rachel is "deep state"?

ToSoft4Truth , 23 hours ago

Parrty on, Garth.

blindfaith , 23 hours ago

Was there in 1965, and I can recall what my classmates wore, who could dance, who kissed great, who had the best music, who got laid and how often...and it was NOT the head of the football or basketball team.

Her memory is selectively scripted, and I am 20 years older and my memory is just fine.

charlewar , 23 hours ago

In other words, Ford is a liar

JohnG , 23 hours ago

She's a goddamned sociopathic lying bitch.

arby63 , 23 hours ago

A highly paid one. Gofundme alone is over $900,000.

1970SSNova396 , 22 hours ago

Her two *** lawyers doing well for their time and attention. McCabe's lawyer comes to the rescue for Ford.

LA_Goldbug , 22 hours ago

This nose nearly took my eye out,

https://www.gofundme.com/to-cover-dr-fords-security-costs

I am Groot , 18 hours ago

My German Sheppard's nose is smaller than hers. Holy schnozes Batman ! That's Toucan Sam in glasses.

LA_Goldbug , 22 hours ago

Amazing. Now I see what a wonderful mechanism they created with this. Payoff camouflage !!!

Moving and Grooving , 21 hours ago

Gofundme is a dead man walking. It cannot be allowed to expedite money laundering on the donor side, and anonymous donations to the receiver in these ridiculous amounts on the other. If this isn't already illegal, I'll be shocked.

.

PantherCityPooPoo , 21 hours ago

Dead how? We already know that these corporation are die hard neo-liberal but name me 2 republicans or ANY federal entity that would EVER go after a corporation like that.

You are not aware of the score if you think anything will be done to them.

HerrDoktor , 23 hours ago

My hippocampus is turgid and throbbing after seeing Chris Ford in those Adrian (Talia Shire) spectacles.

blind_understanding , 23 hours ago

I had to look it up ..

TURGID - from Latin turgidus , from turgēre to be swollen

peippe , 22 hours ago

nothing better than a confused lady who forgets stuff...........

I'm all over that if she was thirty-six years younger. oops.

blindfaith , 23 hours ago

So why is Ford dressed like a WWII school Liberian? Halloween?

How does she do all the water sports (easy boys, keep it clean) that she brags about? How does she keep a case of beer down and then go surfing in Costa Rica? What is all this 'Air sickness" stuff? How come she works for a company that has a very controversial Abortion pill and didn't say this? That $750,000 in GoFundMe bucks will sure help heal those cat scratches she gave herself. Does she pay taxes on that? So many questions and so little answers. Did she perjer herself?

Sort of convenient that the statute of limitations has run out for her to make an OFFICIAL complaint in Maryland.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2018/09/29/montgomery-co-police-maryland-state-attorney-respond-to-state-lawmakers-reques-n2523791

phillyla , 23 hours ago

Ford looks like she is channeling the character of Satan's therapist on the TV show Lucifer

http://lucifer.wikia.com/wiki/Linda_Martin

San Pedro , 23 hours ago

Ford is a practiced liar. She was coached to cry all the way thru her polygraph test thus skewing the results.

Jein , 23 hours ago

Brett's tears were real

RighteousRampage , 23 hours ago

But my calendars!!! I graduated Yale!!!! My mommy was a judge!!! SCOTUS is my destineeeyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, it's mine all mine!!!!!

arby63 , 23 hours ago

Kavanaugh would/could literally beat the **** out of you. I believe that 1000000000%.

RighteousRampage , 23 hours ago

C'mon, his performance was disgraceful for a wannabe SCOTUS judge. He whinges like a little a girl who had her lolly stolen.

Can you imagine Gorsuch or Scalia behaving that way?

arby63 , 22 hours ago

Disgraceful? Seriously? Because he spoke like a MAN and wasn't willing to "take it" from the ****** fascists? **** you.

Jein , 22 hours ago

Arby (you're probably a fat **** right?), he spoke like a whiny cuck bitch. Just like you do. That ain't being a man. Try sucking a my **** for a taste of masculinity.

NEOCON1 , 23 hours ago

Still jerking off to photoshopped nudes of Hillary Clinton?

Jein , 22 hours ago

Nah chelsea. She has nice nips

peippe , 22 hours ago

they were beer tears.

it's said he cries Bud Light.

He's awesome.

Being Free , 23 hours ago

Stunning accusation that Sen. Feinstein covered up 1990 sexual assault by a wealthy foreign donor against another supporters daughter ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A_Zg2phhLI

Mimir , 23 hours ago

Rachel Mitchell Memo

Follow the money !!

whatthehay , 23 hours ago

I was the victim of an abuse event when I was 4. I'm 47 now. I know exactly where the house is, we were in the backyard and I can tell anyone what happened and who was there. It happened a few days back to back maybe three days, it was during the winter in the midafternoon. I guess my hippocampus is in better shape than hers.

Anunnaki , 17 hours ago

When I brought this up wth Liberal friends at coffee this AM, they said it was so traumatic that forgetting details was her coping mechanism

Iberal pretzel logic

Jein , 1 day ago

I would let trump **** my girl. How bout yall?

Giant Meteor , 23 hours ago

Is that code? The nickname you gave your penis? Girl? God damn you are a sick ****. Look the gay thread is down the hall, second door on the left, therapy third door on the right ..

Good luck ...

Jein , 23 hours ago

Yeah I would top for trump. Normally love getting my ******* pounded though. U verse bro?

Goldennutz , 23 hours ago

We all be gettin' our asses pounded for years by our goobermint!

HerrDoktor , 23 hours ago

Everyone else is having your girl, so why not?

sgt_doom , 1 day ago

" Dr. Christine Blasey Ford was poised, articulate, clear and convincing. More than that, she radiated self-assured power ."

----- So says Robert Reich

Saaaaay, Bobby, have you ever met Wesley Allen Dodd or Ted Bundy? I once came into contact with Dodd, the epitome of calm, cool and collected --- and he was later executed for torturing to death small children!

A (female) law professor from Seattle University said:

" Dr. Christine Blasey Ford (why do they keep referring to a professor of psychology as doctor --- s_d) was credible and believable. " (Evidently, we don't need no stinking proof or evidence where a law professor is concerned!?)

Sgt_Doom says: Prof. Christine Blasey Ford sounded credible, believable and completely unsubstantiated.

Credible Allegations

Over this past weekend I learned three startling facts:

(1) All American women have been raped;

(2) All American males are rapists and liars; and,

(3) "Credible allegations" are accusations not requiring any shred of evidence.

Fake news facts , that is . . . . .

All this was conveyed by high-middle class (or higher) females who worship globalization and American exceptionalism --- from the same news conduits who once reported on weapons-of-mass-destruction in Iraq and other similar mythologies!

Not a single so-called reporter --- not a single self-described journalist in American --- thought to ask that most obvious of obvious questions:

Where in bloody perdition is Christine Blasey Ford's Holton Arms yearbooks?

After all, they introduced Kavanaugh's yearbook, so why not Christine Blasey's yearbook?

Second most obvious question:

When one searches online for Holton Arms yearbooks, the searcher can find the yearbooks for the years preceding Ford's last several years at Holton Arms, and the years following --- why have the last several years when Christine Blasey attended missing? Why have they been removed --- even cached versions --- from the Web?

Takes some serious tech resources to accomplish this in such a short period of time?!

How very odd . . . .

I do not want Kavanaugh, nor anyone like him, on the Supreme Court bench, but that does not mean I automatically believe any and all unsubstantiated accusations and am sane enough to comprehend that credible allegations require proof --- also referred to as evidence.

It is not enough to state that this person drinks and is therefore guilty or that person is a male and is therefore guilty.

I fully support an expanded investigation into both Kavanaugh AND Christine Blasey Ford, including Ms. Ford's Holton Arms yearbooks and any and all police blotter activity/records for her ages of 13, 14, 15 and 16.

And I wish some of those useless reporters would being asking the obvious questions . . . . and finally start doing their jobs!

Sidebar : Sen. Chris Coons claimed that Prof. Ford was courageous to have come forward as she had nothing to gain , yet within several days after her testimony, Christine Blasey Ford is almost one-half million dollars wealthier --- nothing to gain?

Hardly . . . .

[Next rant: MY elevator encounter with a 14-year-old psychotic blonde student, and her buddy, many years ago in Bethesda, Md.]

Giant Meteor , 23 hours ago

Radiated self assured power? Are you shitting me?

rwmomad , 23 hours ago

The courageous woman with nothing to gain is well on the way to a mil in go fund me contributions. Plus there will be a book and movie deal.

DjangoCat , 23 hours ago

"And I wish some of those useless reporters would being asking the obvious questions . . . . and finally start doing their jobs!.."

Those useless reporters would be fired if they did. The problem is much further up the line than the reporter on the beat.

blindfaith , 23 hours ago

Yep, BCC was VERY loose...So was Northwestern in G.Town and Holton-Arms High. They were way ahead in drugs, booze and Freon baloons too. Heck at Blair, we thought drugs were like aspirin and stuff. Now if Ms.Ford had gone to Blair, I might believe her....helm lines above the knee was a no no.

Jein , 1 day ago

Is lindsey Graham a closet homosexual?

robertocarlos , 1 day ago

There are men who are not gay but have never been with a woman.

Dancing Disraeli , 23 hours ago

It's a bot.

Giant Meteor , 23 hours ago

Possibly but this site is not your own personal dating service.

Jein , 23 hours ago

GM let me get them digits homie. Haven't seen u on grindr lately

Giant Meteor , 23 hours ago

Look if we are going to converse you're going to have to speak in English or some other language I might understand, what is this verse and grindrr you speak of "bro?'

Jein , 23 hours ago

Hablas espanol? Quiero tu tongueo en my cacahole

Giant Meteor , 23 hours ago

Now that was just ******* funny as all hell. You are improving....

rwmomad , 23 hours ago

He might be, but that is his business. The left, which is supposedly supporters of gay rights,throw that out the window if you are on the other team.

Jein , 23 hours ago

I just dont like trannys

Anunnaki , 23 hours ago

I love The Hedge's new block feature. Buh bye, Hillary

Giant Meteor , 23 hours ago

I'm going to let this one go awhile . A fascinating case study.

Jein , 23 hours ago

<3

Jein , 23 hours ago

Snowflake

tmosley , 20 hours ago

You just don't have anything to say that is intersting.

Just bile.

Goodbye forever.

robertocarlos , 1 day ago

So Mitchell faked her love for Ford. You sure can't trust women.

Giant Meteor , 1 day ago

She (Mitchell) was there to handle her like the delicate flower. To the pubes defense, someone was smart enough to realize that a bunch of GOP white guys questioning her was not going to play well. Enter the female prosecutor and her report.

On the other hand the dem guys and dolls could not genuflect enough , so their questioning was fine. I mean they had her painted as the courageous hero of the modern era. So brave, so noble , so, so, utterly awesome!

Puke ....

scraping_by , 23 hours ago

She had an emotional meltdown for a big finish. Note who gave her the run-in for it. (Not Mitchell).

nicholforest , 1 day ago

Seems pretty obvious that Mitchell could not see a case for prosecution - what we heard was mostly 'He said ... She said". So an unsurprising conclusion.

And there is no moral high ground for Republicans to criticize the process pursued by the Democrats. They would have (and in the past have) done the same. A curse on both their houses.

But what struck me was the behavior and style of Kavanaugh. He came across as belligerent, petty, evasive, aggressive and impulsive. Those are not the characteristics that we want in a candidate for the Supreme Court.

Little Lindsey G would say that Kavanaugh has a right to be angry, which may be so - but the way that such anger is manifested is critical. In the military we look for leaders to be cool under fire. The same should be true for a judge in the highest court in the land.

Instead he came across like a fearful, reactive, spiteful, spoilt frat boy. That will not do.

scraping_by , 1 day ago

Ah, the double bind. Either he's robotic and reciting a script, or he's wild and howling brat. Nice how that works.

FAQMD1 , 23 hours ago

nicholforest - And there is no moral high ground for Republicans to criticize the process pursued by the Democrats. They would have (and in the past have) done the same. A curse on both their houses.

Please enlighten us on specifically which Dem. SC nomination the Republicans did a full on character assassination .... were waiting!

It is mindless comments and a lack of rigorous thinking and moral equivocation like yours that has led the country into the abyss of nonsense and division.

Mineshaft Gap , 23 hours ago

We're all left to imagine the calm, lucid, rational yet caring manner in which you would have defended yourself against a pack of vultures and their vague career-ending accusations.

I'm picturing a cross between Cicero, Chris Cuomo and Caitlin Jenner.

Dancing Disraeli , 23 hours ago

Counting on that spiteful aspect to offset his RINO squish proclivities.

rwmomad , 23 hours ago

Why has their never been a sex scandal on a dem appointment, but their always is now on a repub appointment? Just a coinky dinky or a part of their playbook?

Bastiat , 1 day ago

I like that last pic of Mitchel: defines "looking askance."

I Write Code , 1 day ago

"Weaknesses", forsooth.

Dickweed Wang , 1 day ago

Look at the time line provided and then tell me the Democrats aren't a pack of lying weasles. The truth means absolutely NOTHING to them. Their agenda (to **** over Trump in any way possible) is all that matters. Could anyone imagine what would have happened if the Republicans would have pulled just 1/10th of that kind of ******** with the Homo *****?? There would have been continuous MSM inspired riots in the streets.

Anunnaki , 1 day ago

They play by Alinsky Rules

rksplash , 1 day ago

I guess the only way this nonsense is going to go away is if the GOP start using the same tactics. Hire some wannabe spin doctors to go through some old high school yearbooks in a church basement somewhere in Alabama. An old black and white of some poor pimple faced senator grabbing his crotch at the prom in 72.

scraping_by , 1 day ago

Well, the Arkansas Project was political and partisan. Indeed, the right-wing world were praising Mellon for using money effectively. And it wasn't until Flint evened the score that decorum was restored.

truthalwayswinsout , 1 day ago

How dare another women even think of questioning a rape and assault allegation and demand facts, and consistent detailed explanations that do not change.

Zus , 1 day ago

She's obviously an "old white guy" in disguise.

Wile-E-Coyote , 1 day ago

If this woman can try and attempt to destroy a man's life then the least she should be made to do is a take a lie detector test. You can't prosecute anyone on hear say.

nicholforest , 1 day ago

She did take a polygraph - and passed.

scraping_by , 1 day ago

That's the story. Little or no evidence of what that story means.

Dickweed Wang , 1 day ago

She did take a polygraph - and passed.

Yeah that's what the lying sacks of **** say, but of course there's absolutely no proof it happened. She passed? O.k., let's assume they are at least not lying about that . . . what questions were asked?

Bastiat , 1 day ago

A polygraph with 2 questions apparently. In other words a complete joke. A real poly has scores if not hundreds of questions.

robertocarlos , 23 hours ago

Two questions were asked. "Are you a woman"? and "Are you a liar"?

Wile-E-Coyote , 1 day ago

It's amazing what a false memory can do.

Is there a verbatim transcript of the questions asked?

Anunnaki , 1 day ago

Mitchell said it was irresponsible to give a polygraph to someone grieving the loss of a loved one. Grandmother in this case.

peippe , 22 hours ago

rumor has it the exam included two questions.

Two Questions.

you decide what that means.

nsurf9 , 1 day ago

Not one shred of corroboration evidence of Ford's testimony, not even from her friend, who flatly denied she ever went to such party, NONE, NADA, UNBELIEVABLE!

Don't these Congressional a-holes vet these people to safeguard against crazy loons' bald-faced lies, and even worst, one's with democrat financed malicious intent to defame?

And further, Montgomery County Police has formally stated that, as a misdemeanor, the statute of limitations ran out on this allegedly crime - 35 frigging years ago.

And lastly, with regard to drinking in college, not one democrat mentions he finished top of his Yale undergrad class and top of his Yale Law School class.

FAQMD1 , 23 hours ago

nsurf9 - Don't these Congressional a-holes vet these people to safeguard against crazy loons' bald-faced lies, and even worst, one's with malicious intent to defame?

Please tell me how you or I could possible "safeguard" ourselves from "crazy loon" and "bald-face lies" ....?

That is why we're supposed to be a nation of laws and innocent until proven guilty.

It is one thing to disagree over a person political position and or ideas but that is not what is happening here. The Dems are in full assault mode to destroy BK and his family as a warning to any future Conservative judge who may dare accepts a nomination to the SC.

What the Dems are doing will lead to some type of civil war if they do not stop this. It will not be pretty if that happens.

nsurf9 , 23 hours ago

Requiring even a modicum of corroborated facts or evidence, outside of mere "words," would be a good start!

JLee2027 , 1 day ago

Guys who have been falsely accused, like me, knew quickly that Ford was lying. They all have the same pattern, too many smiles, attention seeking, stories that make no sense or too vague,etc.

dogmete , 1 day ago

Yeah what an incredible story. She was at a party with some drunken creepy guys and got sexually assaulted. Everyone knows that never happens!

Nunny , 1 day ago

^Tool

austinmilbarge , 23 hours ago

All she has to to is prove it.

samolly , 1 day ago

None of this matters. What matters is that the democrats think Kavanaugh will overturn Roe v. Wade so they will be against him regardless of any outcome in this matter.

It's all and only about abortion.

scraping_by , 1 day ago

The current sleaze isn't overturning the legal right to abortion, it's making it impossible to get one. It's a legal right that a woman has to sit through lectures, travel to specific places, make certain declarations, and get a physician who's usually under attack at the state level. It's not illegal, it's impossible.

It's not about restricting women, it's about making life harder for middle and lower class people. Women of the Senator's economic class have always had and always will have access to safe abortions. It's wage earners who have to depend on local providers.

Whether Catholic K will go along with the sabotage of a privacy right isn't clear. But he's probably going to be sympathetic to making those working class wenches show some responsibility.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

To quote famed feminist and Democrat Jennifer Granholm of Michigan, women can always "Keep their pants zipped". But then Granholm only extended her authoritarian control freakery to the male half of the human race when she said that a few years ago. If women lose some "reproductive rights" then some of them might start to have some empathy for men and our lack of rights. But I won't hold my breath waiting for them to empathize with us.

Bastiat , 1 day ago

. . . but according to Dr. Fair, white men are murderous.

Barney08 , 1 day ago

Ford is a crusader. She thinks she is a Roe v Wade savior but she is an over educated ditz.

dogmete , 1 day ago

Right Barney, not an undereducated and-proud-of-it slob like you.

MrAToZ , 1 day ago

You Dims are so willing to just swallow the hook. You idiots have been trained to react, leave common sense at the door, slap on the vagina hats and start marching in circles.

What a cluster f*ck. Evidently there are suckers born every minute.

Kelley , 1 day ago

One word uttered by Ford proves that not only did Kav. not attack her but no one ever assaulted her . That word is "hippocampus." No woman in recorded history has ever used that word to describe their strongest reaction to a sexual assault.

It's mind blowing that a person would react to what was supposedly one of the most traumatic experiences of her life with a nearly gleeful "Indelibly in my hippocampus " or something to that effect unless of course it didn't happen. Her inappropriate response leads me to believe that Ford was never assaulted in the manner in which she claimed. If her claimed trauma had been a case of mistaken identity regarding a real assault, she still would have felt it and reacted far differently.

Emotional memories get stored in the amygdala. The hippocampus is for matter-of-fact memories. When Senator Feinstein asked Ford about her strongest memories of the event, Ford went all "matter of fact" in her reply, "Indelibly in my hippocampus ." without a trace of emotion in her response. No emotions = no assault by ANYONE let alone by Kavanaugh.

Giant Meteor , 1 day ago

Not only that, her most indelible memory from the experience was the maniacal laughter , not the part where a hand was forcibly placed over her mouth and she thought she may in that moment, have been accidently killed.

As to the hippopotamus, is that a turtle neck she is wearing or just her neck. What the **** happened there, she said nothing about strangulation.

pnchbowlturd , 1 day ago

Another peculiar thing about Ford's testimony was the adolescent voicing she gave it in. It was if she was imitating a 6 year old. I wish MItchell had fleshed out Ford's hobbies (surfing??) more and given more context to her career activities and recreational pursuits in college, alcohol consumption patterns or substance abuse treatments. Her voicing was a tell that she seemed to be overplaying the victim persona for a person who holds a doctorate and travels the world surfing

Nunny , 1 day ago

If they coached her (while on the loooong drive from CA...lol) to use that voice, they didn't do her any favors. I thought femi-libs were all about being 'strong' and 'tough'. They can't have it both ways.....strike that.....they do have it both ways.....and the useful idiots on the left buy it.

Torgo , 11 hours ago

IMHO, the most peculiar thing was her outright refusal to say aloud the name of the boy that introduced her to Kavanaugh, when repeatedly questioned by Rachel Mitchell. It was wildly obvious that she was being evasive and I see it as an enormous tell. Chris Garrett, nicknamed "Squi", was IMHO the boy that drove her to and from the party, and if he didn't outright assault her that day, he may have dumped her that day.

I Write Code , 1 day ago

Wasn't there an old SNL skit about the "amygdala"?

YouTube doesn't seem to have an index on the term, LOL.

seryanhoj , 1 day ago

One more example of US governance and party politics on its way down the tubes. There is no topic, no forum nowhere where the truth is even something to be considered. Media, law makers, everyone looks at a story and says " Let's make this work for our agenda even if we have to reinvent it from scratch". Then it is more than easy to find people to testify any which way you want. Vomits copiously.

mabuhay1 , 1 day ago

The standard for females should be "They are lying if their lips are moving." Any claims of sexual abuse should require proof, and witnesses that can back up said claims. Many studies have found that years before the MeToo# lies began, about 60% of all claimed rapes were false. Now, with the "Must believe all women" and the "MeToo#" scam, I would suspect the rate of false claims to be very close to 100%

scraping_by , 1 day ago

The standard for any criminal investigation is ABC. Assume nothing, Believe no one, and Check everything. The current feminist howl is sweep that aside and obey a women when she points at a man.

Jack McGriff , 1 day ago

And yet every single MSM outlet is claiming she is credible! WTF!!!

MedTechEntrepreneur , 1 day ago

If the FBI is to have ANY credibility, they must insist on Ford's emails, texts and phone records for the last 2 years.

Anunnaki , 1 day ago

Kill shots:

· She testified that she had exactly one beer at the party

· "All three named eyewitnesses have submitted statements to the Committee denying any memory of the party whatsoever,

· her BFF: Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present with

· the simple and unchangeable truth is that Keyser is unable to corroborate [Dr. Ford's allegations] because she has no recollection of the incident in question.

· Mitchell stated that Ford refused to provide her therapy notes to the Senate Committee.

· Mitchell says that Ford wanted to remain confidential but called a tipline at the Washington Post.

· she also said she did not contact the Senate because she claimed she "did not know how to do that."

· It would also have been inappropriate to administer a polygraph to someone who was grieving.

· the date of the hearing was delayed because the Committee was told that Ford's symptoms prevented her from flying, but she agreed during testimony that she flies "fairly frequently."

· She also flew to Washington D.C. for the hearing.

· "The activities of Congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford's attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford's account.

Collectivism Killz , 1 day ago

Brett's real blight is that he barely dignifies the fourth amendment, which has arguably been the most compromised as of late. Funny how the dims never bring this up. His record and statements are RVW are centrist, so what makes the dims scared? Maybe Q is on to something with the whole military tribunals.

GoingBig , 1 day ago

If he just said that he drank too much in college and that was that I would be okay with him. But he made himself out to be a freak up there saying all this conspiracy crap about the Clintons. What kind of SCOTUS Justice is this guy? I say no!

Ron_Mexico , 1 day ago

you fight fire with fire

rockstone , 1 day ago

Well if the question even makes sense to you then you're too ******* stupid to have an opinion that anyone should take seriously. In other words, what you think doesn't count.

kbohip , 1 day ago

I think you got confused today honey. This is not the Salon comments section.

seryanhoj , 1 day ago

That age group drink and grope every chance they get. Its what we all did given the chance. No one made fuss because up till now no one was told to get upset about it or try to get political leverage out of it.

Anunnaki , 1 day ago

The only way to fight back against passive aggressions is with full on aggression. It shocked the Dems b/c they thought they could just dole out a bunch of virtue signalling holier than thou testimony and Kavanaugh would have to sit and eat ****

Mineshaft Gap , 23 hours ago

+1

"It shocked the Dems"

Spot on. They had their safe space taken away from them and called out for what it was -- an auto-da-fe.

Heather Mac Donald made the astute point that this is hideous campus culture emerging into the mainstream.

Anunnaki , 23 hours ago

Do you watch Game of Thrones? Remember the season when Cersei was being attacked by the religious nuts.

The woman kept asking her "Do you confess?" under torture

Same here. Kavanaugh was asked to bend the knee and beg forgiveness for his "crime".

He said **** YOU

dogmete , 1 day ago

Goingbig, don't try to talk sense to knuckle draggers. They huddle together or die.

RighteousRampage , 23 hours ago

One has to think that half of them are on working overtime at the troll farm trying to stir up partisan hatred. Hard to believe real people could be this obtuse.

Zero-Hegemon , 1 day ago

Major Hegelian dialectic **** going on with the Ford/Kav reality show.

Women everywhere side with Ford because she's a women, claims she was abused, and "has to be believed", in order to settle some personal score that they all claim empathy for, even though she has given every tell in the book that she is lying.

Men everywhere empathize with a man being falsely accused, regardless of his politics and judicial history, even though he made his bones in the Bush administration, and can probably be relied on to further the authoritarian state via the Supreme court. Guilty of this myself, because it could be anyone of us next.

Pick a side, doesn't matter, because we've already lost.

Bastiat , 1 day ago

I "Believe the Women" -- the 3 women Ford named as witnesses who denied it ever happened, the 65 women who signed the letter in support of Ford, and all the women who have worked with him and had no issues. I don't believe this one, though.

Zero-Hegemon , 1 day ago

I'm with you 200%

phillyla , 1 day ago

I am a woman, a wife and the mother of an adult male and I don't believe this mewling quim for one second and I haven't met one woman who believes her.

Most of the women of my acquaintance know that anyone with a repressed memory is a loon looking for attention.

Anunnaki , 1 day ago

A lot of women have seen their sons and brothers falsely accused. Ford was completely unconvincing in her "I don't remember the details of a traumatic "sexual assault"

Whoa Dammit , 1 day ago

In her letter to Feinstein, she said "me and 4 others" were at the party

This does not sound like something a PHD would write. I would hope that someone who is well educated would know that the proper English is "four others and I." It makes one wonder if Dr. Ford wrote the letter, or if was written by a Feinstein aide.

dogmete , 1 day ago

No, it should be "myself and four others"

But you make a good point

[Oct 02, 2018] Narcissist, Psychopath, or Sociopath How to Spot the Differences - YouTube

Notable quotes:
"... get away from them fast as you can before they make you into another thing they own ..."
Oct 02, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Robert Bright , 11 hours ago

I didn't bother to continue to listen to her exegesis when she stated that the main problem of a narcissist is low self-esteem. This is not true. The fundamental element of all forms of narcissism is the over-arching need to divert all social attention to their own agendum.

Pip's Channel , 1 day ago (edited)

Very clear explanation of the differences and well spoken by Dr. Ramani. However, the knowledge explained in this interview was already defined in the DSM-1 from 1952 and is nothing new. Hell, even Freud was trying to figure out narcisists more than a hundred years ago.. The danger of explaining these types of personality disorders this popular way, i.e. the behavior of the so called psychopath from the interviewer's story, is that people popularize these labels and tend to use them whenever they see fit, like for instance 'This guy hurt my feelings, he is a total psycho'. Please remember that a person's personality is a spectrum. They're not to be labeled by one disorder. Dr. Ramani's mistake in this interview is to put a label on this psycho-boyfriend-from-college-person, based on a story, transfered from like 4 people or more, so it might be full of bias. Of course there must be something really wrong with the guy for acting that way he did if this is actually a true story. However, this is not a remotely valid diagnosis of the actual person because, from the information I got from this interview both of them have never even seen this guy. These kind 'ghetto-diagnoses' have a tendency to become gossip or even slander, like 'We, the people have labeled you a total psychopath because your behaviour fits Dr. Ramani's description of a psychopath in a certain way, move to the Antarctic' (not talking from personal experience here haha) ;-) My point is: In actual science, measuring is knowing. Jumping to a conclusion like that: Not very professional in my humble opinion. Tends to pseudo science if you ask me. But I guess the good doctor knows this, being a professor..

Mary M , 1 week ago

I was in a 17 year relationship, 15 yr marriage with a sociopathic man. He was successful, he could read people like a book and played games with ppl to get his way. {He was the exact opposite of an e Empath. Reading people's visual cues is not the same as being attuned to what others around you are feeling.}

He would come home and brag about his manipulations. He knew just how to make anyone love him including doctors for whatever meds he wanted, or psychologists to check a box.

His mother always told me, "that man is not the same person I raised." He had absolutely no guilt or regret, but he had a strong black and white clarity of right and wrong.

It's a learned morality without intuition. He knew what he was-- he told me his father and uncle were sociopaths and he knew he was missing something inside. We got together in high school, so I didn't see it until years after we were married, and he was in his early 20's...he morfed into a different person. I knew I could not have children with him.

He was charming but it was a facade. His anger, control, power issues were under the surface of it all. I loved him deeply and believed he loved me deeply as well. (You will never feel a stronger connection to someone with narcissistic tendencies-they can make the earth stand still for you. They will also shatter your world in an instant if you're no longer useful to them.) {**Sociopaths do in fact care... They become incredibly ANGRY & FRUSTRATED when they're found out, when someone gets in their way, or when their power/control is threatened. If you're the target of their anger, WATCH OUT!!! }

In the final year, he was living a double life, engaged to another woman, and continued normal every day life with me. When I went to see my mother before her surgery, he moved his girlfriend into my house, and served me divorce pprs. (It was no big deal to him. I was merely an inconvenience.)

I never saw him again, never got most of my things back, and my service dog became another game for him to hurt me with. She died of a stroke just after. I never saw her again either. This was the worst... He spent 25k of our savings in one month taking her to our favorite places.

You kiss your husband goodbye one day, and the next day, your entire world falls apart. He played victim on social media, in court and with our friends, with a smear campaign and cyber stalking me.

It was absolutely brutal to watch, but I said nothing (until court). Truth comes out eventually--and it did. I had a great lawyer. It was very clear my ex hadn't thought through the most basic consequences of a divorce much less his actions. Typical narcissistic behavior is doing what you want, when you want, not thinking through the potential outcomes (hurting ppl, jail, losing a job, causing illness, etc.)

Part of the manipulation is to play the part of victim in any circumstance things don't go their way. They'll play the hero every other time- mind you it is all an act. I'm disabled and chronically ill, and he used the most fragile moments of my illness to publicly shame me as someone "pathetic" that "no one would want to be married to".

It was not a bad marriage at all, it was like a mother-child relationship, which can make it confusing for ppl when they turn into these spiteful monsters out of nowhere. It took years for the shock to wear off, for the feelings of love and protection to melt away and for me to see what family and friends had already known. I refuse to see myself as a victim.

I'm not angry, bc this is meant to be part of my story--certainly not the end, as I'm starting over at 35, lol.

This is the short version of my story, and if you suspect you are in a relationship with a sociopathic person, please get out. "You can't fix people, you can only love them..."

And you will be the one who needs fixing when they are through with you. Give them to God, pray for them, but get away from them fast as you can before they make you into another thing they own . xo

Holly Kendrick , 2 days ago

Most leaders in history also display characteristics of psychopathy, not just Trump. The fact is that any normal functioning person would be completely overwhelmed with the responsibilities that come with running a country, including decisions that involve moral obligations and an emotional aspect way beyond the normal every day decisions that the average person has to make. It takes a narcissistic person to have that much confidence in themselves to believe they can run an entire country successfully - and to want that much power in the first place.

paula villegas , 3 days ago

I just dated a psychopath for 3 yrs on and off,hes in jail now but he has broken my house car windows beat me up because ive asked him to leave my house threatened me of were to leave him, I seen in hos eyes his motives were evil, totally different person around other people and very charming when my female friends were around, always came off like he had sexual desire for them by the way hed make eye contact,Id catch him doing certain actions then tell me I didnt see what I know I seen. He made me miserable and scared constantly,then when accused he'd go in a rage until I admitted I was wrong and apologized. He'd leave for a wk. Come back and accuse me constantly for cheating sometimes to the point of violence having no remorse for the pain he had caused I wouldn't dare question where he had been. Out of 3 yrs I dont believe hes ever answered any of my questions he'd always turned the tables and questions were being asked out of my guilt so to speak was a roller coaster ride.

Mark Gabl , 3 days ago

In the Story the man told of this Girl he knew and the Guy she dated... The Dr. got it right that this Guy is a Psychopath, but she is not seeing the whole picture, or doesn't realize one of the most important traits of a Psychopath... That is, that in ANY situation the psychopath will not allow someone else to "Best" them. After being dumped by this Girl, he became her "perfect boyfriend" and she took him back for another year. That entire year was a Deception Game for the psychopath, and after the year, probably on the exact date, he announced to the Girl, that he had "Played Her" for that entire year, just to "break her heart." This example will give one an idea of the dedication as well as the level of deceit this guy was willing to go through, just to Prove that He will not be "Bested"... by her or anyone else. This Girl is really lucky that this psychopath chose that route... as usually the psychopath would just Kill the Girl, in some meticulously planned out fashion, where not only does he get away with it, but he plants evidence on whoever the Girl is now dating, and takes care of Two Birds with one stone. Psychopath comes out on top. Psychopaths consider themselves Superior Beings... and something as simple as beating them in a game of Golf could end up costing you your life. Especially if there were others their who cheered on the winner, or made fun of the loser. He wouldn't just kill the guy right there in front of everyone like a schizophrenic person might. Instead he will take his time, plan his Revenge, and the right time and place to exact his revenge. It could be 15 years down the road, but the psychopath never let go of it, and he kills the guy... Probably either on the Golf Course, or in the Club Locker Room or in the showers, as he wants the victim to know why he is being killed, and that he can't "Best" the psychopath. Women get killed by their ex-husbands and ex-Boyfriends all the time, and the Cops always look at the New Husband or Boyfriend... They might interview the old Husband or Boyfriend, but find it hard to believe that someone would kill their ex-Wife or GF 12 years later. When they have had seemingly no contact for all that time. With a psychopath the length of time does not matter... what matters is that he got the "Best" of the situation.

5.56&9mm kindaguy , 7 hours ago

Damn! Listening to Dr. Ramani describing psychopaths and sociopaths was kind of chilling to be honest. Mostly because it made me start thinking about everyone I've ever met in my life and trying to figure out whether or not I know someone like this.

JuegosTheTitan , 4 days ago

What would be the diagnosis for a person with most sociopathic traits, except two things: they do think ahead, a lot, and do very heavy planning and considering potential consequences, and how to avoid the undesirable ones. And they feel fear. They do not take the risks where they dont stand a good chance of achieving their goals. Everything else is there, the lack of empathy, not feeling guilty or bad after hurting someone, superficial charm, lying, manipulating etc etc.

Mark Gabl , 3 days ago (edited)

The other thing this Dr. failed to mention, is that Psychopaths are so adept in the Disguise they have cultivated over their lifetime, that it is Very Common for a psychopath to fool even a trained psychologist or Dr.of psychiatry into believing they are the far less dangerous Sociopath. Quite often the Psychopath has a Higher IQ than the Doctor who is treating them, and they find it easy to fool and manipulate these people. There is a video here, made by a male Teen, that has just been diagnosed as a "Sociopath", but you can hear out of his own mouth that it is easy to see that he was mis-diagnosed. He tells everyone he was just diagnosed, and then goes on to describe how he has always known he was a "Sociopath"... and that "all of us know, and learn how to hide in plain sight." I hope his Doctor sees this video, and the re-diagnoses this kid, as just that statement alone gives himself away as a far more dangerous Psychopath. Most "Sociopaths" do not know they are sociopaths, and think they are just like everyone else. They mostly refuse to believe they are "different"... because they hang out with a bunch of other Sociopaths, all who think they are "normal"... They do not Cultivate a "Disguise", as they see no need, they are just like everyone else around them. The Sociopath is Made by his social background and the people he associates with. On the other hand, a Psychopath is Born... and realizes he is a psychopath, and starts cultivating his or her Disguise around age 5... By the time they are out of High School they have has a dozen or so years to perfect that disguise, and they are very good at "hiding in plain sight. Watch this video of this kid, and maybe you will see that he has been mis-diagnosed as is so often the case. Also... Just look at this kid, ad tell me he does not look like a psychopath. No Kidding, many psychopaths do have that "psychopath look"... just like it is so easy to spot someone with "Downs Syndrome". I almost wish it were possible to have the word "Psychopath" branded into his forehead, as a warning to other to Stay Far Away. Check it out... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUuCMybwEuc

Todd Cook , 2 days ago

Missed the boat on polygraphs. Psychopaths can't routinely pass polygraphs. They don't have empathy but they do usually care about getting caught. Murder may not make them feel sorrow or guilt but they will often don't want to get caught. Also, the domestic abuse is not usually done by sociopaths or psychopaths. You need to work with law enforcement and talk to senior detectives who have dealt with these people. You said that you have done research but haven't dealt with many because they don't come in for therapy.

Daniela Attison , 1 day ago

Hey guys this is very wrong. I dont know where she learned this but its actually the other way around. Psychopaths are the ones who end up in a looney bin. They are the ones who kill people because "a voice of god told them to do it", they are usually very disorganized when it comes to their crimes. Imagine a schizophrenic. And infact some psycopaths may feel guilt after they commit a crime as they do not know how to properly express their emotion. And sociopaths are actually very social creatures. The reason why it is very hard to catch these guys is because they never leave clues, they are organizied and incredibly intelligent. Sociopaths feel absolutely zero guilt or remorse, and they tend not have no emotional (romantic) attachments but do connect easily with others due to their high confidence and ego. And yes they are the ones who can lie on a test, the can compose themselves very well even in a stressful situation. I just did some digging and it seems many actual psychologists have it the other way around which is shocking to me. Psycopaths don't always know that what they doing are wrong and do it anyways (some think they are doing good i.e. cleansing streets of "sinful hookers"), meanwhile sociopaths know exactly what they are doing and that it is wrong but do it anyways.

wolvenwood , 5 hours ago

I was a psychotherapist for 20 yrs and i found numerous mistakes with this woman. First, psychopaths are NOT always born that way. Other things can make them that way such as serious abuse in childhood or illness that leave lesions on the brain. Weve known this since at least WW2. Stalin had lesions on the brain, that's what made him a psychopath, before that he was normal. This is a HUGE error, anyone educated in psychopathic disorder would know this. Also, stealing, skipping school could point to other problems that are not being a psychopath but setting fires as a child is a definite sign that needs to be addresssed asap. This woman is ignorant of these conditions in many ways nor does she explain in depth. The genetic factor seems to be a very low factor as it is inherited by about only 1% or less of psychopaths. I can think of far better psychologists to interview - also in her credentials, she is a professor but doesn't say where??? No one does that.

Nerdy Snailie , 2 hours ago (edited)

She forgot to include that sociopaths can mimic emotions highly and even switch on terms of emotions because they are good learning and manipulating victims. On other hand psychopaths are incapable of such emotional intelligence. They are able to trick your mind, be charming but they cannot mimic or display empathy because they don't see the emotional need to it in the society. That's what makes catching a psychopath easier than a sociopath. The sociopaths are the ones abuse bully and torture then kill their wives. The ones who keep their victims and develop Stockholm syndrome with them. Psychopaths develop fear based connection and no human emotion-based interactions. The example given by the interviewer is sociopathic. This lady has to make it clear and she failed. That's why people are confused.

G de Almeida , 4 hours ago (edited)

I was in a relationship with a Narcissistic Sociopath for 5 and a half years and it was terrible. It took me a long time to realize what was happening because he would be so fantastic for months at a time- he literally presented himself as my soul mate and it felt like we has everything in common: he was so charming and flattering and would shower me with gifts. Then he would suddenly just beak off ALL communication with me for anywhere from 3 days to 6 weeks and I would not have any idea why. He loved it when I would beg him to tell me what he was angry about, what I had done, how I could fix it. I would end up apologizing for everything but not actually know what I supposedly did. When when he was done "punishing me" (his own term) he would pretend to forgive me for whatever indiscretion he was supposedly punishing me for. I never knew what I had done, he would just say "you should know". I started keeping a detailed journal to try to figure out what was happening- I recorded details of every date, what the mood was, what we said and did, how he was acting... I never could find a trigger for the events but it helped a lot when I approached a psychologist to try to help me figure out what was happening and how to navigate the relationship. I began to be afraid to talk when we were together because I was afraid I would do something to anger him. As he only liked to talk about superficial things, this was good for him. I stayed so long because when times were good they were extremely good, way better than any prior relationships. He seemed to have an uncanny sense of knowing when to play his mind games, he knew just when to start and stop. I loved him and came to realize something was wrong, but I initially thought he was Bipolar. I wanted to help him and believed that he was suffering during the times he went Silent. I thought I would be able to help him and didn't want to abandon him. I was mistaken- it was just part of his game. He was very controlling. I developed what is called a trauma bond which is very hard to break. Even he knew something was wrong and also thought he may be Bipolar. He admitted to me that he never felt fear or stress, love or empathy. He did feel rage and he was extremely jealous, insanely so. Even though he was in his early 40's, he was extremely emotionally immature. He often accused me of ridiculous affairs (with a drummer from the band "Trooper", my 72 year old yoga instructor... etc...). After 3 years of pretty much living together I found out he was married and has a son (he told me he was divorced and had no children). I found a picture his wife had posted on Google one day when I searched his name. He was estranged from his wife and had no feelings at all for his son who he never visited and to this day has no contact with despite living just 10 minutes away. His son still does not even know where he lives or that he is in the same neighbourhood. I highly suspect he was cheating on me during some of the longer Silent periods. This may have even been a reason he imposed them. He absolutely did not love me- he actually told me this many times and said that he hated the word "Love". Even though he didn't love me, I was his possession and he did not want anyone else playing with his toys. When times were good (and they were good long enough to make me forget the terrible times) it SEEMED like he loved me. I always believed he would change. In the end it was not even me who ended the relationship, even though two psychologists told me very adamantly that I needed to get out of the relationship because I was in great danger. He got bored and dumped me, and to this day I still look back at the "good times" and miss those parts very much. However, when I am feeling low I reread my journals and reality hits me because I have to recall the really, really awful parts. I am grateful I am alone. Looking back, even his gifts were non-personal: lots of electronics that I didn't want. Sometimes he would give me food items, but never anything intimate or personal like jewelry or clothing. His home had no personal effects- here was not one item that gave any idea what he liked to do or what his hobbies were. When we had sex there was zero intimacy. He would touch me but I was not allowed to touch him- he said it was pointless because he didn't feel anything when I tried. I often felt like I was just filling a physical need for him (and that is very likely what I did and why he stayed in the relationship). I discovered that he watched a LOT of porn and I suspect he got his education that way, because he treated me a lot like the women get treated in those videos: like an object to be used. No touching, no kissing, no tenderness. He liked to bite me and he knew I hated it but did it anyways. It was so twisted and convoluted I lost myself and at one point, during a very lengthy Silent period, came very close to ending my life. If I had, he would have not cared (or been flattered but not cared). He really, really enjoyed playing mind games with me, and would constantly build me up then tear me down. When he was being cruel, his eyes were completely dead. It was creepy, like looking into the eyes of a snake. I've heard other people who have dated sociopaths and psychopaths also describe this and I know exactly what they mean. Dr. Ramani said that psychopaths and sociopaths have trouble keeping jobs- this was not true with my partner. He was extremely intelligent and Title-oriented: he was and still is in a very high position of power. I often wonder what the people working below him think of him... but can't ask because in 5 1/2 years I never met a single co-worker, friend or family member. I seemed to be his only friend. He works in public office and is slated for another very large promotion that will give him even more power and control. He thinks he is smarter than everyone, including the current Director who he is slated to replace. I fear for anyone who crosses him. Now that I am free I have been trying to get my belongings back from his home, but of course he has to use it as another way of keeping control. He makes a date then cancels at the last minute. It never ends.

Bar Bee , 1 day ago

I was in a long term relationship who was clinically diagnosed as a Sociopath w Narcissistic tendencies. as he explains about the guy getting even, they want revenge & never forget when they feel people do them wrong. Great actors. In the beginning, they figure out what the woman thinks is the perfect man, rushes to commitment & marriage, then the REAL them comes out.

They don't care if you catch them lying, cheating or whatever. break up with one? Will NEVER leave you b alone. U better ha v s bigger threat than a restraining order.

Also, they need power -- the money that comes w the fancy title is a bi-product. They crave power. Very dangerous!

If u date a guy & within 2 weeks he is your soul mate & wants to marry- run. He will do whatever it takes to get you back (actin, crying, flowers, big diamond ring- RUN.

linda parker , 13 hours ago (edited)

Familiar with all three, due to my professional. Yes a person is in trouble if involved with either one of these persons. I dated one narcissi-psyschopath combined. For an 18 months. Totally train wreck , disgusting , no respect for others. Just ...... Till this day he tries to be a part of my life! Sad,Sad........only to take advantage of me again !!!!

Neo Morpheus , 4 days ago

You guys are incorrect about psychopathy. Actually to not follow immoral man made precepts doesn't make you a psychopath. Nobody should experience fear because they make a mistake ie running a red light. There are a lot of statutes and codes put into effect that are BS. The average man or woman breaks 6 statutory law today. Should we be walking around in fear. Should we be afraid of the officers who allegedly protect and serve. Should we follow false doctrine. If there is no victim there is no crime. Actually, a lot of People spend time in prison and have never harmed anyone. I'll give an example. We have the right to travel in a car without license and registration . The Supreme Court of US had said so, driving is a commercial activity. It is the act of for profit business on the road. We could get a certificate to prove competency, but they want the people to be licensed because it's a contract that cedes jurisdicton to the state and it's agencies. New Hampshire wrote up bill NH HB1778 to point out how the corporate state has engaged in silent deception and inducement by fraud. That people are exempt from licensing and registration. Also court cases are Thompson v Smith 154, SE 579 and Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago, 169 NE 22. And those cases are shepardized. If anything these cops arresting People for victimless crimes and attorneys and judges ruining families and putting people in prison for 15 years and more for putting a chemical in their body. (Prosecuting attorneys win 98% of the time and and that's with the defendant having an attorney.) shouldn't it be obvious that we have something going on that is unequitable and adverse to justice in the "Court System". If you can't chose what to put in your body then your nothing but a slave. And you can't say that people that put certain substances in their body will cause crime because it's untrue, and even if it was true, we can't put people in jail because they may cause a crime. In other words, One should be able to eat a food or use a chemical, just because some one else may not act honorably with such things doesn't take away my right to consume them. if they were to do the same. BTW US has largest prison pop. Higher than China even though they have a bigger population. 85% of the prisoners in the system have never harmed anyone. I also have some good stats on how poor the cops are doing from protecting against actual male in se (crimes with a victim). You are 15 times more likely to be murdered by Law Enforcement then the general population. And cops are no more likely to be harmed in their jobs then the average worker. They are a little less likely to get killer on the job then men and a little more likely them women. And by the way, they are literal creating bonds of these prisoners and in the court cases then what they are doing is putting the defendants into default for not settling the bonds. They are drafting these people for performance because they use the statutes as an evidence of a debt and then bond the cases with SF 24, 25, and 25a,then federally with the Miller act bonds GSA 274, 275, 276. What they do is pool these bonds like the reits and remics in real estate, and sell them as investment securities on the market. So these bonds make about 10k a month, meanwhile the prisons spend about $2.50 a day for necessities. This is slavery in a new form. The peculiar institution of slavery was never abolished, just the term. Read the 14th ammendmebt. A federal citizen is a subject, granted privileges by the state. And the 13th amendment says you can be a slave if your convicted of a crime. Well if you believe in the statutory laws, which really only apply to legal Fictions, then the average American commits 6 statutory violations a day. you are saying that you, and all other men are nothing but slaves because if one wants to, they could find a statute for you to break Without you knowing what you did much less harming anyone or their Property. And by the way, anybody can learn to be a good salesmen and how to read People. VThat's ridiculous to say that selling is psycothapy. I agree that some People have been induced into a form of secondary psychothopy, which is basically outwardly psychopathic, but it's actually learned behavior. We're talk to collect as many federal reserve notes as possible even if we may hurt others. We're taught that it's ok to murder many people in war if it's in the name of Democracy (Democracy is a false doctrine and de facto law. The founding fathers disliked it because the majority could steal from the minority. It's mob rule. In a republic which is the only guaranteed corn of law in the usA Your rights are protected regardless of a majority vote. The only way you can give up a natural right is through contract. And the corporate state has been getting the People to do that under on way adhesion contracts since 1933 and even a little before. To a minor degree it started in 1871. I just think your definition of psychopath is scary because you base the definition on assumptions that may or may not be true. The prison population is higher in US than any other county so I think you should take a look at what's going on and not make assumptions. This country is no longer free, but I guess if we keep telling ourselves that it is it must be true. And I guess if our "therapist" tell us we're psycopaths just because we're not going to let a fear based system bully us, and we are willing to go to jail to stand up for what's right, and stand up to these officers who are clue less about the actual law. Not statutes and codes which are government and corporate policies. I can site 3 people who either spent a good amount of time in jail or killed for what's doing what's right. Martin Luther King. Muhatma Ghandi, and Jesus Christ. All the police ads is modern day Roman centurions. And if you don't believe Christ existed, the allegory is good enough. This People honor the Law with there lips, but there heart is far from it, in vain they honor the Law, holding the doctrines of the Commandments of men. I digress There's nothing new under the sun Those who have eyes will see; those who have ears will hear

Katja Lucin , 3 days ago

I'm sorry but this is just too much. She makes it seem like there is a lot of sociopaths out there and as we can hear they become that after they are hanging out with wrong kids...what??? I would think that her PhD would make her double think after saying something like that. People become sociopaths after they'we been abused so hard and for so long that their consciousness can't take it any longer and their body's reaction is to stop feeling anything... I just feel angry because she makes it look like everyone who was hanging out with "wrong people " can be a sociopath...so far away from the truth...

James Estelle , 2 days ago

One serious note: Dr. Martha Stout said in her book "The Sociopath Next Door" that sociopaths are often made through abuse trauma. These are people who put their sensibilities into 'hibernation' due to the pain they felt. The bad behavior afterward is a result of a learned protection mechanism where they have no feelings. They put their entire psyche into a box of "win and lose" scenarios where they 'have to' overcome everyone else or they will be hurt again. NOTE also IN REFERENCE TO THE PART OF THE VIDEO WHERE SHE SAYS THESE PEOPLE DO NOT SEEK THERAPY - There is a recent phenomenon of these personalities getting into therapy to "improve their game." This is how they learn to fake normal reactions to sew a seed of doubt about their behaviors - "Maybe he is just hurting inside, let's give him one more chance." I was told this was a major theme in "The Sopranos" series.

Isabella Jones , 4 days ago

Actually very few psychopaths are killers. Many many are successful CEO's - they have no blood lust, and know how to play by the rules. There might be a psychopath bank manager living next door to you. He isn't going to kill you, but if you get inot a bad situation and need help - he just wont care.

Mary Cahill , 1 month ago

I was a mental health RN for 17 years, 7 years in Forensic psychiatry. Dr. Ramani is spot on, and explains things quite well.

Robert Graham , 3 days ago

Licensed doctor... Still believes in lie detectors. I've lied on those things multiple times and I feel bad for all the people who get convicted by them

[Oct 01, 2018] She even got caught red handed at my friends house by his girlfriend and locked herself in the bathroom. All she did was give it back and say lets go, she didn't care what they thought.

Oct 01, 2018 | www.youtube.com

x per·i·ment , 4 days ago

I dated this girl for three years. She truely acted like she loved me and was very sweet to me when we were together. I was on a few medications that she liked to take. I remember when I quit taking medication, she left me right away without saying a word, and moved to a town an hour away to be with some guy. I later found out she was cheating all the time from her friends. I even found out she was dating a guy and just left him without a word and blocked his number when she got with me. I was stupid for being with her. She liked to steal from people all the time, it was embarrassing when I'd find out I took her to a friends house and they tell me things are missing. She even got caught red handed at my friends house by his girlfriend and locked herself in the bathroom. All she did was give it back and say lets go, she didn't care what they thought. Not sure what her diagnosis would be but she definitely had some issues!

[Sep 30, 2018] Ability to remarkably walked back on allegations after facing with proof that they are bogus is a warning sign that you may deal with a female sociopath

Kavanauch confirmation brought a very interesting set of female charaters (as his accusers). One of them is Julie Swetnick.
In her resume out of 12 former employers that are listed there are only few places where whe worked for more then a year. Julie Swetnick_IDC.docx - Google Drive . Despite more then two decades in Web business she does not list any scripting skills in her resume but lists "server tuning, hardening," which are impossible with shell scripting knowledge.
Notable quotes:
"... After a WebTrends human resources director informed Swetnick that the company was unable to corroborate the sexual harassment allegations she had made, she "remarkably" walked back the allegations, according to the complaint. ..."
Sep 28, 2018 | dailycaller.com

Swetnick's alleged conduct took place in June 2000, just three weeks after she started working at WebTrends, the complaint shows. WebTrends conducted an investigation that found both male employees gave similar accounts of Swetnick engaging in "unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct" toward them during a business lunch in front of customers, the complaint said.

Swetnick denied the allegations and, WebTrends alleged, "in a transparent effort to divert attention from her own inappropriate behavior [made] false and retaliatory allegations" of sexual harassment against two other male co-workers.

"Based on its investigations, WebTrends determined that Swetnick had engaged in inappropriate conduct, but that no corroborating evidence existed to support Swetnick's allegations against her coworkers," the complaint said.

After a WebTrends human resources director informed Swetnick that the company was unable to corroborate the sexual harassment allegations she had made, she "remarkably" walked back the allegations, according to the complaint.

In July, one month after the alleged incident, Swetnick took a leave of absence from the company for sinus issues, according to the complaint. WebTrends said it made short-term disability payments to her until mid-August that year. One week after the payments stopped, WebTrends received a note from Swetnick's doctor claiming she needed a leave of absence for a "nervous breakdown."

The company said it continued to provide health insurance coverage for Swetnick, despite her refusal provide any additional information about her alleged medical condition.

In November, the company's human resources director received a notice from the Washington, D.C. Department of Unemployment that Swetnick had applied for unemployment benefits after claiming she left WebTrends voluntarily in late September.

"In short, Swetnick continued to claim the benefits of a full-time employee of WebTrends, sought disability payments from WebTrends' insurance carrier and falsely claimed unemployment insurance payments from the District of Columbia," the complaint states.

Swetnick allegedly hung up the phone on WebTrends managers calling to discuss why she applied for unemployment benefits, according to the complaint. She then sent letters to WebTrends' upper management, detailing new allegations that two male co-workers sexually harassed her and said that the company's human resources director had "illegally tired [sic] for months to get privileged medical information" from her, her doctor and her insurance company.

WebTrends also alleged that Swetnick began her fraud against the company before she was hired by stating on her job application that she graduated from John Hopkins University. But according to the complaint, the school had no record of her attendance.

An online resume posted by Swetnick makes no reference to John Hopkins University. It does show that she worked for WebTrends from December 1999 to August 2000.

It's unclear what transpired after the complaint was filed against Swetnick. One month after WebTrends filed the action, the company voluntarily dismissed the action with prejudice.

[Sep 30, 2018] MeToo excesses create a vast playing field for female sociopaths by Elizabeth Bartholet

Notable quotes:
"... Finally, I am concerned with the cynical exploitation of sexual harassment cases and related scapegoating of individuals. ..."
"... Corporate and political leaders, who must have been at least generally aware of these problems, did little to address them until this moment of public shaming. Now they dismiss alleged perpetrators overnight, often with no regard for the facts but clearly with significant regard for their corporate reputations and electoral strategies. ..."
"... All this puts real reform at risk. It undermines the legitimacy of action against serious sexual misconduct and abuse of power. It creates the potential for backfire. ..."
Jan 16, 2018 | www.thecrimson.com

Like many others, I am outraged by the egregious incidents of sexual misconduct made public recently through carefully documented journalism. I applaud the removal of many alleged perpetrators who have clearly abused their positions of power, often through force and even violence. I celebrate those who have stepped forward to call out sexual misconduct and demand changes in the degrading culture that has characterized working conditions for women in too many settings for too long.

However, I am concerned that in the recent rush to judgment, principles of basic fairness, differences between proven and merely alleged instances of misconduct, and important distinctions between different kinds of sexually charged conduct have too often been ignored. Similar problems plagued the imposition of new sexual harassment guidelines for colleges and universities by the administration of former President Barack Obama. I was involved in attempts to push back against those guidelines and to develop at Harvard Law School our own policies, better designed to balance the important values at stake.

My fairness concerns with the #MeToo phenomenon include the ready acceptance in many cases of anonymous complaints, and of claims made by women over conflicting claims by men, to terminate careers without any investigation of the facts. Some argue that women who speak out should simply always be believed. Others argue that if some innocent men must be sacrificed to the cause of larger justice, so be it. I find this deeply troubling. I do not contend that mini-trials should always be required before action can be taken. Sometimes the alleged conduct is so egregious, or alleged patterns so suspicious, that suspension is warranted while facts are determined. Sometimes allegations are demonstrably credible by virtue of independent evidence. But where facts are in doubt or conduct is subject to different interpretations, efforts must be made to investigate what actually happened and how the different parties understood the events.

I am also deeply troubled by over-expansive definitions of wrongful conduct. In the current climate, men are called out for actions ranging from requests for dates and hugs on the one hand to rape and other forced sexual contact on the other, as if all are the same and all warrant termination. I do not believe that all touching by a man in power is the same as touching that is clearly unwanted or the deliberate abuse of power to obtain sexual favors. I do not believe that all romantic and sexual overtures should be banned from the workplace, even between people on different hierarchical levels. Some recent cases involve peremptory dismissal for behavior that may involve nothing more than that. Women are not so weak as to need this kind of protection. Banning all such activity from the workplace would reduce the quality of life for everyone, including women.

The legal definition of sexual harassment in employment and education is a helpful guide to what sexual conduct should be the focus. It is illegal to engage in quid pro quo harassment, namely conditioning an employment or educational benefit on sexual favors. It is illegal also to create a "hostile environment" through unwelcome sexual advances that are severe or pervasive and that limit the victim's ability to enjoy employment or educational opportunity.

Objective standards apply, so the question is whether a reasonable person in the position of the alleged perpetrator or alleged victim would have thought the conduct was sexual harassment, not simply what the alleged victim subjectively felt.

Finally, I am concerned with the cynical exploitation of sexual harassment cases and related scapegoating of individuals. The #MeToo movement has helped demonstrate to the world the toxic level of sex discrimination and sexual misconduct that have characterized work life for too many women in business, entertainment, media, and government. Corporate and political leaders, who must have been at least generally aware of these problems, did little to address them until this moment of public shaming. Now they dismiss alleged perpetrators overnight, often with no regard for the facts but clearly with significant regard for their corporate reputations and electoral strategies.

All this puts real reform at risk. It undermines the legitimacy of action against serious sexual misconduct and abuse of power. It creates the potential for backfire.

Elizabeth Bartholet '62 is the Morris Wasserstein Public Interest Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.

[Sep 29, 2018] Always remember the equally lurid "recovered memories" of UFO abduction survivors

Sep 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

El Dato says: September 29, 2018 at 4:41 pm GMT

@Nicephorus

Great writing.

Always remember the equally lurid "recovered memories" of UFO abduction survivors. It's the same mush pulled out and reinjected into the hippocampus only in a form that is even harder to swallow.

One would think Psychologist Ford, who apparently needs one herself (a shrink, that is) would have some self-awareness about. Apparently not.

Unless it's really all about renting out her bedroom illegally.

[Sep 29, 2018] Arthur Miller's "The Crucible" exemplifies very well how the hysteria of girls can be so dangerous that innocent men can be made to suffer terrible if not fatal consequences.

Notable quotes:
"... Arthur Miller's "The Crucible" exemplifies very well how the hysteria of girls can be so dangerous that innocent men can be made to suffer terrible if not fatal consequences. ..."
"... In fact, the only allegation we hear is of "witch" "he sexually abused me". ..."
Sep 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

Dorian says: September 29, 2018 at 1:44 pm GMT 400 Words History Repeats Itself: The Salem Witch Trials alla 2018

Arthur Miller's "The Crucible" exemplifies very well how the hysteria of girls can be so dangerous that innocent men can be made to suffer terrible if not fatal consequences.

Three hundred years later, the modern version of Abigail Williams, Christine Ford, with no facts, no evidence, no corroborative support other than other hysterical girls, with one finger pointing to John Proctor's modern portrayal played by a hapless Brett Kavanaugh, is found at the whim of a delusional embittered girl.

Like Abigail Williams, Christine Ford, with self loathing and hatred for any man, has found cold support from self-serving political leaders whom have nothing other than their own personal grandiose agendas for public glorification and self apotheosis. Like Reverend Samuel Paris, the wicked Feinstein and hypocritical sycophants like Booker, with their sanctimonious disregard for the rule of law and procedure of fact finding and procedural evidence, just as during Salem's hysteria cast supreme judgement on hollow words of a clearly embittered, delusional rantings of a wobabies (i.e. woman babies) whom can't even remember where, when, and what actually was done to them and to herself, Christine Ford. But like Abigail Williams, she is sure it was John Proctor, excuse me I mean Brett Kavanaugh.

In fact, the only allegation we hear is of "witch" "he sexually abused me". Ah if Abigail was so fortunate, as no doubt Abigail would find Ford to have been, maybe there would have been no Salem Witch Trials, and John Proctor would have lived. Like wise, maybe the truth here is that Ford whom admits to not being raped, is really embittered just for that!

But how can we know? Especially when, after 35 or more years of Ford's meteoritic incapacity to remember even where the house this occurred in, when this "sexual thing" happened. Abigail Williams would have done so much better today!

It has been over three hundred years since those unfaithful days of Salem, and here we find ourselves again, having to face the same vacuous allegations of embittered girls whom don't remember anything but that evil that was done by John Proctor and Brett Kavanaugh.

I think it is time for a new and updated version of The Crucible. With Christine Ford now playing Abigail Williams, and a devastated Kavanaugh the new Proctor. As for Reverend Paris, Senator Feinstein will do that role with great aplomb.

Three hundred years, and the United States of America is once again en-ravaged by the rantings of embittered girls that have been unable to grow up and deal with their own emotional short-comings. No wonder Ford is a psychologist, she's certifiably nuts!

[Sep 29, 2018] False memory syndrome and witch hunts based on it

I liked Christine Ford hearing as a textbook example of what is called "identity wedge" (by the way she comes from a family of lawyers). Lying is a troublesome endeavor for the liar. I looked at some commentary on YouTube abd some people's take on her behavior is the she was lying and was uncomfortable doing this even with so much couching. For me it was pretty convincing delivery, althouth timing is hugely suspect. Looks like Dr. Christine Ford is very psychologically troubled female personality indeed. Such people can be very dangerous. Some questions
-- Do you think we will see in our lifetime a good physical fight and punches in the floor or the Senate and/or House of representatives ? Or the Senate members are way too old for a good physical fight?
-- The country club is approximately 7 miles from any village. How she can leave by herself at night, as she has no car ?
-- Why neither she not her female companion reported the incident to police (which was "aggravated assault" type as her parent could explain to her) ?
-- As a Stanford psychologist was she involved in the Bush era program to torture prisoners?
-- Does Dr Ford tone remind you a corporate Human Resources Director who is scolding people for not showing up at the Diversity and Inclusion seminar?
t timing and the personality of the second assures really fascinating part of the story ? She probably might shed some light on the first. She was accused by two man of sexual harassment and as her counter-allegation were proved baseless was forced to leave the company, which she managed to defraud pretending illness ;-) Is no
Notable quotes:
"... On balance, although Judge Kavanaugh and his family were the ones who had to pay the price for this bitter learning experience ..."
"... What this sordid affair was all about was the zombie-like return-from-the-dead of a phenomenon exposed and pretty much completely invalidated more than thirty years ago, which never should have been permitted to raise its ugly head before an assembly of rational, educated Americans: the "Recovered Memory" (aka "False Memory") Syndrome movement of the 1980s, in which numerous troubled, frequently mentally off-balance, women (and a few men) came forward to declare that they had been the victims of incestual sexual abuse – most often actual sexual intercourse – at the hands of mature male family members; usually fathers but sometimes uncles, grandfathers, or others. ..."
"... Their testimony was usually highly emotional and impassioned, leaving an impression very similar to that conveyed last night by Dr. Ford. ..."
"... The "Recovered" (or "False") Memory Syndrome movement emerged in the midst of the steadily radicalizing Feminist Movement in the United States, probably at the very apogee of its extreme evolution, and was a movement in which Freudian therapy was central and Freudian therapists came to play the leading role. ..."
"... It was only after they had been subjected to extensive pseudo-scientific Freudian "therapy," in which sex always lay prominently at the center, that virtually all of these women came forward with these stories. ..."
"... nd, in this dispute the American ultra-Feminists chose to believe and preach the worst, most salacious, and most vicious possible interpretation of Dr. Freud's highly speculative, evidence-less, and – as subsequent study has overwhelmingly shown – completely contrived diagnoses. ..."
"... Beginning with a conviction that cocaine could provide a substantial therapeutic base for solving psychological problems, Freud seems himself to have become for a period a regular consumer of that drug, but subsequently altered the focus of his therapy to hypnosis. After realizing certain limitations to this approach, he shifted again, turning to the so-called "Talking Cure" rooted in provoking word associations, which provided the basis for the classic Freudian method of popular imagination – with the patient reclining on a couch and the good Dr. seated behind with his notebook and pen in hand. This is the method he retained for the rest of his life. ..."
"... Analysis thus follows a circular course, the analyst's theoretical surmise being first subtly communicated to the patient, then confirmed by the patient's casting of his (or, more often her) own ideas within the framework which had been suggested by the analyst. In the end, nothing new is actually discovered. The patient merely replicates the expressed Freudian doctrine. ..."
"... Those women patients, and a few men, became their victims, but in turn became the perpetrators in the savaging of numerous men's lives, as these men were subjected to the most vicious accusations imaginable. Most of these accusations were, in retrospect, clearly fantasies in a ruthless mid-20th century male-witch hunt. ..."
"... Into this popular intellectual desert walks Dr. Ford, both whose personal history and her strange physical mannerisms in testimony before the Senate clearly indicate she has unfortunately suffered some form of serious psychological disturbance. ..."
"... Seemingly alienated from her own parents and most immediate family members, she has made her home as far away from the Washington, DC area ..."
"... In 2012 she underwent some sort of psychological counseling with her husband, though the details as far as I know have not emerged. But, it hardly seems likely coincidental that her first documentable expressions of antipathy to Judge Kavanaugh occurred in that year, when it was announced that Judge Kavanaugh was considered the likely Supreme Court appointee should Mit Romney win the Presidential election. Her expressions of antipathy to him have only grown from there. ..."
Sep 29, 2018 | www.unz.com

Nicephorus , says: September 29, 2018 at 7:58 am GMT

We still have to wait to see whether Judge Kavanaugh's appointment will go through, so the most important practical consequence of this shameful exercise in character assassination is as yet unknown. I'm pretty sure he'll eventually be appointed.

But, I think some critical theoretical aspects of the context in which this battle was waged were definitively clarified in the course of this shameful and hugely destructive effort by the Democrat leadership to destroy Judge Kavanaugh's reputation in pursuit of narrow political advantage. On balance, although Judge Kavanaugh and his family were the ones who had to pay the price for this bitter learning experience, all of us should be the long-term beneficiaries of this contest's central but often hidden issues being brought to light and subjected to rational analysis. I want to show what I think these hidden issues are.

What this sordid affair was all about was the zombie-like return-from-the-dead of a phenomenon exposed and pretty much completely invalidated more than thirty years ago, which never should have been permitted to raise its ugly head before an assembly of rational, educated Americans: the "Recovered Memory" (aka "False Memory") Syndrome movement of the 1980s, in which numerous troubled, frequently mentally off-balance, women (and a few men) came forward to declare that they had been the victims of incestual sexual abuse – most often actual sexual intercourse – at the hands of mature male family members; usually fathers but sometimes uncles, grandfathers, or others.

Their testimony was usually highly emotional and impassioned, leaving an impression very similar to that conveyed last night by Dr. Ford. Many hearers were completely convinced that these events had occurred. I recall having a discussion in the 1990s with two American women who swore up and down that they believed fully 25% of American women had been forced into sexual intercourse with their fathers. I was dumbfounded that they could believe such a thing. But, vast numbers of American women did believe this at that time, and many – perhaps most – may never have looked sufficiently into the follow-up to these testimonials to realize that the vast majority of such bizarre claims had subsequently been definitively proven invalid.

The "Recovered" (or "False") Memory Syndrome movement emerged in the midst of the steadily radicalizing Feminist Movement in the United States, probably at the very apogee of its extreme evolution, and was a movement in which Freudian therapy was central and Freudian therapists came to play the leading role.

It was only after they had been subjected to extensive pseudo-scientific Freudian "therapy," in which sex always lay prominently at the center, that virtually all of these women came forward with these stories. A major controversy, which arose within the ranks of the Freudians themselves over what was the correct understanding of the Master's teachings, lay at the core of the whole affair. A nd, in this dispute the American ultra-Feminists chose to believe and preach the worst, most salacious, and most vicious possible interpretation of Dr. Freud's highly speculative, evidence-less, and – as subsequent study has overwhelmingly shown – completely contrived diagnoses.

It's now known that Dr. Freud's journey to the theoretical positions which had become orthodoxy among his followers by the mid-20th century had followed a strange, little known, possibly deliberately self-obscured, and clearly unorthodox course. Beginning with a conviction that cocaine could provide a substantial therapeutic base for solving psychological problems, Freud seems himself to have become for a period a regular consumer of that drug, but subsequently altered the focus of his therapy to hypnosis. After realizing certain limitations to this approach, he shifted again, turning to the so-called "Talking Cure" rooted in provoking word associations, which provided the basis for the classic Freudian method of popular imagination – with the patient reclining on a couch and the good Dr. seated behind with his notebook and pen in hand. This is the method he retained for the rest of his life.

The primary fault which has been cited for Freud's methods generally, but which has been particularly critiqued in both hypnosis and the "Talking Cure" as a reason for their invalidation, is the claim that both – at least inadvertently – incorporate the high probability of suggestion from the therapist. In this view, patient testimony moves subtly, and probably without the patient's awareness, from whatever his or her own understanding might originally have been to the interpretation implicitly propounded by the analyst. Analysis thus follows a circular course, the analyst's theoretical surmise being first subtly communicated to the patient, then confirmed by the patient's casting of his (or, more often her) own ideas within the framework which had been suggested by the analyst. In the end, nothing new is actually discovered. The patient merely replicates the expressed Freudian doctrine.

The particular doctrine at hand was undergoing a critical reworking at this very time, and this important reconsideration of the Master's meaning almost certainly constituted a major, likely the predominating, factor which facilitated the emergence of the Recovered Memory Syndrome movement. Freudian orthodoxy at that time included as an important – seemingly its key – component the conviction of a child's (even an infant's) sexuality, as expressed through the hypothesized Oedipus Complex for males, and the corresponding Electra Complex for females. In these complexes, Freud speculated that sexually-based neuroses derived from the child's (or infant's) fear of imagined enmity and possible physical threat from the same-sex parent, because of the younger individual's sexual longing for the opposite-sex parent.

This Freudian idea, entirely new to European, American, and probably most other cultures, that children, even infants, were the possessors of an already well-developed sexuality had been severely challenged by Christian and some other traditional authorities, and had been met with repugnance from many individuals in Western society. But, the doctrine, as it then stood, was subject to a further major questioning in the mid-1980s from Freudian historical researcher Jeffrey Masson, who postulated, after examining a collection of Freud's personal writings long kept from popular examination, that the Child Sexual Imagination thesis itself was a pusillanimous and ethically-unjustified retreat from an even more sinister thesis the Master had originally held, but which he had subsequently abandoned because of the controversy and damage to his own career its expression would likely cause. This was the belief, based on many of his earlier interviews of mostly women patients, that it wasn't their imaginations which lay behind their neuroses. They had told him that they had actually been either raped or molested as infants or young girls by their fathers. This was the secret horror hidden away in those long-suppressed writings, now brought into the light of day by Prof. Masson.

Masson's research conclusions were initially widely welcomed within the psychoanalytical fraternity/sorority and shortly melded with the already raging desire of many ultra-Feminist extremists to place the blame for whatever problems and dissatisfactions women in America were encountering in their lives upon the patriarchal society by which they claimed to be oppressed. The problem was men. Countless fathers were raping their daughters. Wow! What an incentive to revolutionary Feminist insurrection! You couldn't find a much better justification for their man-hate than that. Bring on the Feminist Revolution! Men are not only a menace, they are no longer even necessary for procreation, so let's get rid of them entirely. This is the sort of extreme plan some radical Feminists advocated. Many psychoanalysts became their professional facilitators, providing the illusion of medical validation to the stories the analysts themselves had largely engendered. Those women patients, and a few men, became their victims, but in turn became the perpetrators in the savaging of numerous men's lives, as these men were subjected to the most vicious accusations imaginable. Most of these accusations were, in retrospect, clearly fantasies in a ruthless mid-20th century male-witch hunt.

This radical ideology is built upon the conviction that Dr. Freud, in at least this one of his several historical phases of interpretative psychological analysis, was really on to something. But, subsequent evaluation has largely shown that not to be the case. The same critique which had been delivered against the Child Sexual Imagination version of Freud's "Talking Cure" analytical method was equally relevant to this newly discovered Father Molestation thesis: all such notions had been subtly communicated to the patient by the analyst in the course of the interview. Had thousands, hundreds of thousands, even millions of European and American women really been raped or molested by their fathers? Freud offered no corroborating evidence of any kind, and I think it's the consensus of most competent contemporary psychoanalysts to reject this idea. Those few who retain a belief in it betray, I think, an ideological commitment to Radical Feminism, for whose proponents such a view offers an ever tempting platform to justify their monstrous plans for the future of a human race in which males are subjected to the status of slaves or are entirely eliminated.

But, the judicious conclusions of science often – perhaps usually – fail to promptly percolate down to the comprehension of common humanity on the street, and within the consequent vacuum of understanding scheming politicians can frequently find opportunity to manipulate, obfuscate, and distort facts in order to facilitate their own devious and often highly destructive schemes. Such, I fear, is the situation which has surrounded Dr. Ford. The average American of either sex has absolutely no familiarity with the history, character, or ultimate fate of the Recovered Memory Syndrome movement, and may well fail to realize that the phenomenon has been nearly entirely disproved.

Into this popular intellectual desert walks Dr. Ford, both whose personal history and her strange physical mannerisms in testimony before the Senate clearly indicate she has unfortunately suffered some form of serious psychological disturbance.

Seemingly alienated from her own parents and most immediate family members, she has made her home as far away from the Washington, DC area where she was born as possible within the territorial limits of the continental United States. The focus of her professional research and practice in the field of psychology has lain in therapeutic treatment to overcome mental and emotional trauma, a problem she has acknowledged has been her own disturbing preoccupation for many decades. In 2012 she underwent some sort of psychological counseling with her husband, though the details as far as I know have not emerged. But, it hardly seems likely coincidental that her first documentable expressions of antipathy to Judge Kavanaugh occurred in that year, when it was announced that Judge Kavanaugh was considered the likely Supreme Court appointee should Mit Romney win the Presidential election. Her expressions of antipathy to him have only grown from there.

Dr. Ford is clearly an unfortunate victim of something or someone, but I don't believe it was Judge Kavanaugh. Almost certainly she has been influenced in her denunciations against him by both that long-term preoccupation with her own sense of psychological injury, whatever may have been its cause, and her professional familiarization with contemporary currents of psychological theory, however fallacious, likely mediated by the ministrations of that unnamed counselor in 2012. Subsequently, she has clearly been exploited mercilessly by the scheming Democratic Party officials who have viciously plotted to turn her plight to their own cynical advantage. As in so many cases during the 1980s Recovered Memory movement, she has almost certainly been transformed by both the scientifically unproven doctrines and the conscienceless practitioners of Freudian mysticism from being merely an innocent victim into an active victimizer – doubling, tripling, or even quadrupling the pain inherent in her own tragic situation and aggressively projecting it upon helpless others, in this case Judge Kavanaugh and his entire family. She is not a heroine.

PiltdownMan , says: September 29, 2018 at 9:01 am GMT
A recovered memory from more than five decades ago.

Violet Elizabeth, a irritating younger child who tended to tag along, often wore expensive Kate Greenaway dresses. Her family was new money.

William was no misogynist, though. He liked and respected Joan, who was his friend.

The second William book is online.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/17125/17125-h/17125-h.htm

Coemgen , says: September 29, 2018 at 10:35 am GMT
Rules-of-thumb
-- -- -- -- -- -- -
1. A good offense is the best defense.
2. An ambush backed up by overwhelming force is a good offense.
3. Use of weapons and tactics, of which the defender is unprepared for, is a good offense.

Are Republicans et al. unable to understand basic military strategy? Do we lack the ability to conceive of new tactics and weapons to use against Democrats and Globalists?

MarkinLA , says: September 29, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
I realize that it is unacceptable to attack this poor helpless victim so the "it can't be corroborated" card has to be played. However, who else notices how carefully manicured these charges are such that they can never be falsified? This is the actual proof she is a liar and this whole thing is staged.

She always takes everybody on some emotional ride right up to the point where she could be exposed but never with enough information so somebody could come out of the woodwork and prove she is a liar. We also have the infamous letter where we are repeately reminded she mailed it BEFORE Kavanaugh was picked. Of course, we only have Feinstein's word for that since nonody saw it until after this crap started. The delay was used to puch up the story with new revelation about Mike Judge in a grocery store that shied away from her – again with no specific date so Judge could prove she is a liar. This all reeks of testimony gone over and coached by a team of lawyers.

We also have all of our own recollections of high school insecurities and male-female interactions. What freshman or sophomore girl didn't get all giddy at the thought of the older guys hitting on her so she could tell all her friends about her older boyfreind and possibility of going to the prom as a lower classman? All he had to do (assuming he wasn't replusive physically and he was a bit of a jock) was make the usual play of pretending to be interested and he likely would have been at least getting to first base at the party. From her pictures she was no Pamela Anderson and would likely have been flattered. The idea that you rape someone without trying to get the milk handed to you on a silver platter is ridiculous.

This is another female driven hysteria based on lies like the child molestation and satanic cult hysterias of years past. Those were all driven by crazy or politically motivated women who whipped up the rest of the ignorant females.

Clyde , says: September 29, 2018 at 12:58 pm GMT
@Anon

Outside doors enter public areas kitchen sunroom living rooms not bedrooms. An outside door into a master bedroom with attached bathroom is a red flag that it's intended for an illegal what's called in law apartment

Your post is very perceptive and just might be how it all went down. With the complications of couples' counseling over her demand for the bizarre double main entry doors. (lulz) Though I would think any family that built an illegal in-law apartment into their Palo Alto house and deployed it, would be ratted out by their neighbors.

El Dato , says: September 29, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@Wally She reminded me of Samantha Power, the one suffering for us on TV as she uses her Responsibility To Protect subscription to lay waste on whatever is currently the Death Star.

[Sep 29, 2018] Former Employer Sued Third Kavanaugh Accuser For Sexual Harassment Allegations

Looks like she has mental issues. also some of her behaviour falls in female sociopath category, although it is difficult to tell without knowing a person.
Fake allegation of sexual harassment are favorite weapon of female sociopath. They also are poweful revenge weapon of some rejected woman.
Sep 29, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com
The Daily Caller

The woman who charges she was gang-raped at a party where Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was present, Julie Swetnick, had a lawsuit filed against her by a former employer that alleged she engaged in "unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct" towards two male co-workers, according to court documents obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

WebTrends, a web analytics company headquartered in Portland, filed the defamation and fraud lawsuit against Swetnick in Oregon in November 2000 and also alleged that she lied about graduating from Johns Hopkins University.

Swetnick alleged Wednesday that she was gang raped at a party where Kavanaugh was present in the early 1980s. Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the allegation.

Swetnick is represented by Michael Avenatti , the lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels, who claims she had an affair with President Donald Trump.

WebTrends voluntarily dismissed its suit after one month. Avenatti told The Daily Caller News Foundation that the case was ended because it was "completely bogus."

Swetnick's alleged conduct took place in June 2000, just three weeks after she started working at WebTrends, the complaint shows. WebTrends conducted an investigation that found both male employees gave similar accounts of Swetnick engaging in "unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct" toward them during a business lunch in front of customers, the complaint said.

Swetnick denied the allegations and, WebTrends alleged, "in a transparent effort to divert attention from her own inappropriate behavior [made] false and retaliatory allegations" of sexual harassment against two other male co-workers.

"Based on its investigations, WebTrends determined that Swetnick had engaged in inappropriate conduct, but that no corroborating evidence existed to support Swetnick's allegations against her coworkers," the complaint said.

After a WebTrends human resources director informed Swetnick that the company was unable to corroborate the sexual harassment allegations she had made, she "remarkably" walked back the allegations, according to the complaint.

In July, one month after the alleged incident, Swetnick took a leave of absence from the company for sinus issues, according to the complaint. WebTrends said it made short-term disability payments to her until mid-August that year. One week after the payments stopped, WebTrends received a note from Swetnick's doctor claiming she needed a leave of absence for a "nervous breakdown."

The company said it continued to provide health insurance coverage for Swetnick, despite her refusal provide any additional information about her alleged medical condition.

In November, the company's human resources director received a notice from the Washington, D.C. Department of Unemployment that Swetnick had applied for unemployment benefits after claiming she left WebTrends voluntarily in late September.

"In short, Swetnick continued to claim the benefits of a full-time employee of WebTrends, sought disability payments from WebTrends' insurance carrier and falsely claimed unemployment insurance payments from the District of Columbia," the complaint states.

Swetnick allegedly hung up the phone on WebTrends managers calling to discuss why she applied for unemployment benefits, according to the complaint. She then sent letters to WebTrends' upper management, detailing new allegations that two male co-workers sexually harassed her and said that the company's human resources director had "illegally tired [sic] for months to get privileged medical information" from her, her doctor and her insurance company.

WebTrends also alleged that Swetnick began her fraud against the company before she was hired by stating on her job application that she graduated from John Hopkins University. But according to the complaint, the school had no record of her attendance.

An online resume posted by Swetnick makes no reference to John Hopkins University. It does show that she worked for WebTrends from December 1999 to August 2000.

It's unclear what transpired after the complaint was filed against Swetnick. One month after WebTrends filed the action, the company voluntarily dismissed the action with prejudice.

The complaint against his client was "[c]ompletely bogus which is why it was dismissed almost immediately," Avenatti told TheDCNF in an email. "The lawsuit was filed in retaliation against my client after she pursued claims against the company."

WebTrends did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

In March 2001, three months after WebTrends dismissed its action, Swetnick's ex-boyfriend, Richard Vinneccy, filed a restraining order against Swetnick, claiming that she threatened him after he ended their four-year relationship.


vulcanraven , 1 hour ago

Looks like Avenatti has his work cut out for him, he sure knows how to pick the winners. By the way, this is not the first time we have seen a woman claim "sexual harassment" after being turned down.

maxblockm , 25 minutes ago

Potiphar's wife.

Now Joseph was well-built and handsome, 7 and after a while his master's wife took notice of Joseph and said, "Come to bed with me!"

8 But he refused. "With me in charge," he told her, "my master does not concern himself with anything in the house; everything he owns he has entrusted to my care. 9 No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?" 10 And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.

11 One day he went into the house to attend to his duties, and none of the household servants was inside. 12 She caught him by his cloak and said, "Come to bed with me!" But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house.

13 When she saw that he had left his cloak in her hand and had run out of the house, 14 she called her household servants."Look," she said to them, "this Hebrew has been brought to us to make sport of us!He came in here to sleep with me, but I screamed. 15 When he heard me scream for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house."

16 She kept his cloak beside her until his master came home. 17 Then she told him this story: "That Hebrew slave you brought us came to me to make sport of me. 18 But as soon as I screamed for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house."

19 When his master heard the story his wife told him, saying, "This is how your slave treated me," he burned with anger. 20 Joseph's master took him and put him in prison, the place where the king's prisoners were confined.

But while Joseph was there in the prison, 21 the Lord was with him

Buck Shot , 1 hour ago

I think all three of the accusers are lying psychopaths. I get tired of all this pining for women. Plenty of women have done a lot of horrible things including these three liars. There are millions of lying skeezers out there, especially in the USA.

Seal Team 6 , 1 hour ago

Yeah...whatever. No one is talking about Swatnick including the Dems. While Ford is just unbelievable, Zwetnik's story requires major hits of psychedelics that haven't been invented yet.

TeraByte , 1 hour ago

"A courageous survivor", yet an untrustworthy lunatic.

Dickweed Wang , 2 hours ago

Text book Fatal Attraction bitch.

Piss her off enough and she'll sneak in at night and cut off your ****. Then she'll file attempted rape charges against you, claiming the **** chopping was in self defense. And she'll get away with it because, well . . . she's a woman.

HowardBeale , 1 hour ago

"Fatal attraction..."

That's my hypothesis on this clearly mentally unstable "Professor" Ford: She is exacting revenge because she was enamored over Kavanaugh in high school; she attended several parties where he was present; and she was so insignificant in his mind -- being hideous to look at and listen to -- that he never even saw her...

Dickweed Wang , 1 hour ago

Pretty good hypothesis. It's hard not to think that looking at her, either back then or now.

eurotrash96 , 1 hour ago

Please! Most women are not like her. Most women, the muted female majority, are perfectly aware that men are men and we love it! Please do not think the majority of women are like those who currently prevail in MSM.

legalize , 2 hours ago

This woman has a 14-page resume with her contact information blasted across the top of every page. In every hiring situation I've been in, such a resume would be a red flag in and of itself.

LoveTruth , 2 hours ago

She definitely needs to either be fined for defamation, or be put in jail even if it is for a month or two.

RiotActing , 2 hours ago

She sounds completely credible.... whats the problem?

HowardBeale , 1 hour ago

I am surprised that nobody has picked up on/mentioned in the media the issues with her memory or inability to understand common English words; for example, her memory of "the event" changed live before our eyes, as at one point in the questioning she said "someone pushed me from behind into a bedroom...," and a short time later she said "Kavanaugh pushed me into a bedroom."

Watch her testimony and see for yourself.

aloha_snakbar , 2 hours ago

She should write resumes for a living...LOL..."Drupal / Wordpress Architect"....if you can use a word processor, you can be an 'architect' on either one of those platforms...

Mzhen , 2 hours ago

This is the guy hired in D.C. to represent Deborah Ramirez -- William Pittard. They are out to force Kavanaugh to withdraw over perjury in testimony, since he said he had never harassed anyone past the age of 18. The civil attorney in Boulder will be trying to cash in from another angle.

https://www.kaiserdillon.com/attorneys/william-pittard/

Prior to joining KaiserDillon, Bill served in the Office of General Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives for more than five years, including most recently as the Acting General Counsel. In that role, he acted as legal counsel to Members, committees, officers, and employees of the House on matters related to their official duties. He also represented the House itself in litigation and other matters in which it had an institutional interest. The Congressional Record summarizes, in part: "Mr. Pittard provided frequent and invaluable legal advice and representation to Members of the House . . . , the officers of the House, the committees of the House, and the leadership of the House -- most often in connection with their interactions with the other branches of the Federal Government. He did so professionally and without regard to partisan identity and, as a result, we came to rely on his expertise and guidance."

MauiJeff , 2 hours ago

These women live in a world were sexual harassment is ubiquitous. They see sexual harassment everywhere because sexual harassment is anything they think it is, it is purely based on their perception. If you subtract a conscience and personal integrity from your psyche you can interpret anything as sexual harassment you get a post Frankfurt School of psychology masterpiece like Swetnick. She can only destroy and cannot create.

SDShack , 3 hours ago

"Unwelcome sexual conduct", and later "a nervous breakdown". LOL! Yesterday I said on another thread that I bet she was a hedonist.

TBT or not TBT , 3 hours ago

Swetnick says she went to a dozen high school parties, as an adult, where gang rapes were organized by high school boys, including one time on her.

Banana Republican , 3 hours ago

I wonder why she stopped going?

divingengineer , 2 hours ago

she sounds like a sport

MoreFreedom , 2 hours ago

I'll bet she didn't even bother to think that people might wonder:

Instead, she seems to think people would just believe her lies. Truth is a wonderful thing. and the actions of people say a lot about them. Her actions show she doesn't care about real victims of sexual abuse, she's willing to lie for her benefit, and she has no problem bearing false witness against others.

It's so easy to make up false plausible accusations. Ford is obviously a more intelligent liar.

[Sep 27, 2018] Hiding in Plain Sight Why We Cannot See the System Destroying Us

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... But strangely most of us are much readier to concede the corrupting influence of the relatively small power of individuals than we are the rottenness of vastly more powerful institutions and structures. We blame the school teacher or the politician for abusing his or her power, while showing a reluctance to do the same about either the education or political systems in which they have to operate. ..."
"... It is relatively easy to understand that your line manager is abusing his power, because he has so little of it. His power is visible to you because it relates only to you and the small group of people around you ..."
"... It is a little harder, but not too difficult, to identify the abusive policies of your firm – the low pay, cuts in overtime, attacks on union representation ..."
"... It is more difficult to see the corrupt power of large institutions, aside occasionally from the corruption of senior figures within those institutions, such as a Robert Maxwell or a Richard Nixon ..."
"... But it is all but impossible to appreciate the corrupt nature of the entire system. And the reason is right there in those aphorisms: absolute power depends on absolute control over knowledge, which in turn necessitates absolute corruption. If that were not the case, we wouldn't be dealing with serious power – as should be obvious, if we pause to think about it ..."
"... The current neoliberal elite who effectively rule the planet have reached as close to absolute power as any elite in human history. And because they have near-absolute power, they have a near-absolute control of the official narratives about our societies and our "enemies", those who stand in their way to global domination ..."
"... What is clear, however, is that the British intelligence services have been feeding the British corporate media a self-serving, drip-drip narrative from the outset – and that the media have shown precisely no interest at any point in testing any part of this narrative or even questioning it. They have been entirely passive, which means that we their readers have been entirely passive too ..."
"... Journalists typically have a passive relationship to power, in stark contrast to their image as tenacious watchdog. But more fundamental than control over narrative is the ideology that guides these narratives. Ideology ensures the power-system is invisible not only to us, those who are abused and exploited by it, but also to those who benefit from it. ..."
"... It is precisely because power resides in structures and ideology, rather than individuals, that it is so hard to see. And the power-structures themselves are made yet more difficult to identify because the narratives created about our societies are designed to conceal those structures and ideology – where real power resides – by focusing instead on individuals ..."
"... Before neoliberalism there were other systems of rule. There was, for example, feudalism that appropriated a communal resource – land – exclusively for an aristocracy. It exploited the masses by forcing them to toil on the land for a pittance to generate the wealth that supported castles, a clergy, manor houses, art collections and armies. For several centuries the power of this tiny elite went largely unquestioned ..."
"... Neoliberalism, late-stage capitalism, plutocratic rule by corporations – whatever you wish to call it – has allowed a tiny elite to stash away more wealth and accrue more power than any feudal monarch could ever have dreamt of. And because of the global reach of this elite, its corruption is more endemic, more complete, more destructive than any ever known to mankind ..."
"... A foreign policy elite can destroy the world several times over with nuclear weapons. A globalised corporate elite is filling the oceans with the debris from our consumption, and chopping down the forest-lungs of our planet for palm-oil plantations so we can satisfy our craving for biscuits and cake. And our media and intelligence services are jointly crafting a narrative of bogeymen and James Bond villains – both in Hollywood movies, and in our news programmes – to make us fearful and pliable ..."
"... The system – whether feudalism, capitalism, neoliberalism – emerges out of the real-world circumstances of those seeking power most ruthlessly. In a time when the key resource was land, a class emerged justifying why it should have exclusive rights to control that land and the labour needed to make it productive. When industrial processes developed, a class emerged demanding that it had proprietary rights to those processes and to the labour needed to make them productive. ..."
"... In these situations, we need to draw on something like Darwin's evolutionary "survival of the fittest" principle. Those few who are most hungry for power, those with least empathy, will rise to the top of the pyramid, finding themselves best-placed to exploit the people below. They will rationalise this exploitation as a divine right, or as evidence of their inherently superior skills, or as proof of the efficiency of the market. ..."
"... And below them, like the layers of ball bearings, will be those who can help them maintain and expand their power: those who have the skills, education and socialisation to increase profits and sell brands. ..."
"... None of this should surprise us either. Because power – not just the people in the system, but the system itself – will use whatever tools it has to protect itself. It is easier to deride critics as unhinged, especially when you control the media, the politicians and the education system, than it is to provide a counter-argument. ..."
"... so neoliberalism is driven not by ethics but the pursuit of power and wealth through the control of the planet. ..."
"... The only truth we can know is that the western power-elite is determined to finish the task of making its power fully global, expanding it from near-absolute to absolute. It cares nothing for you or your grand-children. It is a cold-calculating system, not a friend or neighbour. It lives for the instant gratification of wealth accumulation, not concern about the planet's fate tomorrow. ..."
Sep 27, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

I rarely tell readers what to believe. Rather I try to indicate why it might be wise to distrust, at least without very good evidence, what those in power tell us we should believe.

We have well-known sayings about power: "Knowledge is power", and "Power tends to corrupt, while absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely." These aphorisms resonate because they say something true about how we experience the world. People who have power – even very limited power they hold on licence from someone else – tend to abuse it, sometimes subtly and unconsciously, and sometimes overtly and wilfully.

If we are reasonably self-aware, we can sense the tendency in ourselves to exploit to our advantage whatever power we enjoy, whether it is in our dealings with a spouse, our children, a friend, an employee, or just by the general use of our status to get ahead.

This isn't usually done maliciously or even consciously. By definition, the hardest thing to recognise are our own psychological, emotional and mental blind spots – and the biggest, at least for those born with class, gender or race privileges, is realising that these too are forms of power.

Nonetheless, they are all minor forms of power compared to the power wielded collectively by the structures that dominate our societies: the financial sector, the corporations, the media, the political class, and the security services.

But strangely most of us are much readier to concede the corrupting influence of the relatively small power of individuals than we are the rottenness of vastly more powerful institutions and structures. We blame the school teacher or the politician for abusing his or her power, while showing a reluctance to do the same about either the education or political systems in which they have to operate.

Similarly, we are happier identifying the excessive personal power of a Rupert Murdoch than we are the immense power of the corporate empire behind him and on which his personal wealth and success depend.

And beyond this, we struggle most of all to detect the structural and ideological framework underpinning or cohering all these discrete examples of power.

Narrative control

It is relatively easy to understand that your line manager is abusing his power, because he has so little of it. His power is visible to you because it relates only to you and the small group of people around you.

It is a little harder, but not too difficult, to identify the abusive policies of your firm – the low pay, cuts in overtime, attacks on union representation.

It is more difficult to see the corrupt power of large institutions, aside occasionally from the corruption of senior figures within those institutions, such as a Robert Maxwell or a Richard Nixon.

But it is all but impossible to appreciate the corrupt nature of the entire system. And the reason is right there in those aphorisms: absolute power depends on absolute control over knowledge, which in turn necessitates absolute corruption. If that were not the case, we wouldn't be dealing with serious power – as should be obvious, if we pause to think about it.

Real power in our societies derives from that which is necessarily hard to see – structures, ideology and narratives – not individuals. Any Murdoch or Trump can be felled, though being loyal acolytes of the power-system they rarely are, should they threaten the necessary maintenance of power by these interconnected institutions, these structures.

The current neoliberal elite who effectively rule the planet have reached as close to absolute power as any elite in human history. And because they have near-absolute power, they have a near-absolute control of the official narratives about our societies and our "enemies", those who stand in their way to global domination.

No questions about Skripals

One needs only to look at the narrative about the two men, caught on CCTV cameras, who have recently been accused by our political and media class of using a chemical agent to try to murder Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia back in March.

I don't claim to know whether Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov work for the Russian security services, or whether they were dispatched by Vladimir Putin on a mission to Salisbury to kill the Skripals.

What is clear, however, is that the British intelligence services have been feeding the British corporate media a self-serving, drip-drip narrative from the outset – and that the media have shown precisely no interest at any point in testing any part of this narrative or even questioning it. They have been entirely passive, which means that we their readers have been entirely passive too.

That there are questions about the narrative to be raised is obvious if you turn away from the compliant corporate media and seek out the views of an independent-minded, one-time insider such as Craig Murray.

A former British ambassador, Murray is asking questions that may prove to be pertinent or not. At this stage, when all we have to rely on is what the intelligence services are selectively providing, these kinds of doubts should be driving the inquiries of any serious journalist covering the story. But as is so often the case, not only are these questions not being raised or investigated, but anyone like Murray who thinks critically – who assumes that the powerful will seek to promote their interests and avoid accountability – is instantly dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or in Putin's pocket.

That is no meaningful kind of critique. Many of the questions that have been raised – like why there are so many gaps in the CCTV record of the movements of both the Skripals and the two assumed assassins – could be answered if there was an interest in doing so. The evasion and the smears simply suggest that power intends to remain unaccountable, that it is keeping itself concealed, that the narrative is more important than the truth.

And that is reason enough to move from questioning the narrative to distrusting it.

Ripples on a lake

Journalists typically have a passive relationship to power, in stark contrast to their image as tenacious watchdog. But more fundamental than control over narrative is the ideology that guides these narratives. Ideology ensures the power-system is invisible not only to us, those who are abused and exploited by it, but also to those who benefit from it.

It is precisely because power resides in structures and ideology, rather than individuals, that it is so hard to see. And the power-structures themselves are made yet more difficult to identify because the narratives created about our societies are designed to conceal those structures and ideology – where real power resides – by focusing instead on individuals.

That is why our newspapers and TV shows are full of stories about personalities – celebrities, royalty, criminals, politicians. They are made visible so we fail to notice the ideological structures we live inside, which are supposed to remain invisible.

News and entertainment are the ripples on a lake, not the lake itself. But the ripples could not exist without the lake that forms and shapes them.

Up against the screen

If this sounds like hyperbole, let's stand back from our particular ideological system – neoliberalism – and consider earlier ideological systems in the hope that they offer some perspective. At the moment, we are like someone standing right up against an IMAX screen, so close that we cannot see that there is a screen or even guess that there is a complete picture. All we see are moving colours and pixels. Maybe we can briefly infer a mouth, the wheel of a vehicle, a gun.

Before neoliberalism there were other systems of rule. There was, for example, feudalism that appropriated a communal resource – land – exclusively for an aristocracy. It exploited the masses by forcing them to toil on the land for a pittance to generate the wealth that supported castles, a clergy, manor houses, art collections and armies. For several centuries the power of this tiny elite went largely unquestioned.

But then a class of entrepreneurs emerged, challenging the landed artistocracy with a new means of industrialised production. They built factories and took advantage of scales of economy that slightly widened the circle of privilege, creating a middle class. That elite, and the middle-class that enjoyed crumbs from their master's table, lived off the exploitation of children in work houses and the labour of a new urban poor in slum housing.

These eras were systematically corrupt, enabling the elites of those times to extend and entrench their power. Each elite produced justifications to placate the masses who were being exploited, to brainwash them into believing the system existed as part of a natural order or even for their benefit. The aristocracy relied on a divine right of kings, the capitalist class on the guiding hand of the free market and bogus claims of equality of opportunity.

In another hundred years, if we still exist as a species, our system will look no less corrupt – probably more so – than its predecessors.

Neoliberalism, late-stage capitalism, plutocratic rule by corporations – whatever you wish to call it – has allowed a tiny elite to stash away more wealth and accrue more power than any feudal monarch could ever have dreamt of. And because of the global reach of this elite, its corruption is more endemic, more complete, more destructive than any ever known to mankind.

A foreign policy elite can destroy the world several times over with nuclear weapons. A globalised corporate elite is filling the oceans with the debris from our consumption, and chopping down the forest-lungs of our planet for palm-oil plantations so we can satisfy our craving for biscuits and cake. And our media and intelligence services are jointly crafting a narrative of bogeymen and James Bond villains – both in Hollywood movies, and in our news programmes – to make us fearful and pliable.

Assumptions of inevitability

Most of us abuse our own small-power thoughtlessly, even self-righteously. We tell ourselves that we gave the kids a "good spanking" because they were naughty, rather than because we established with them early on a power relationship that confusingly taught them that the use of force and coercion came with a parental stamp of approval.

Those in greater power, from minions in the media to executives of major corporations, are no different. They are as incapable of questioning the ideology and the narrative – how inevitable and "right" our neoliberal system is – as the rest of us. But they play a vital part in maintaining and entrenching that system nonetheless.

David Cromwell and David Edwards of Media Lens have provided two analogies – in the context of the media – that help explain how it is possible for individuals and groups to assist and enforce systems of power without having any conscious intention to do so, and without being aware that they are contributing to something harmful. Without, in short, being aware that they are conspiring in the system.

The first :

When a shoal of fish instantly changes direction, it looks for all the world as though the movement was synchronised by some guiding hand. Journalists – all trained and selected for obedience by media all seeking to maximise profits within state-capitalist society – tend to respond to events in the same way.

The second :

Place a square wooden framework on a flat surface and pour into it a stream of ball bearings, marbles, or other round objects. Some of the balls may bounce out, but many will form a layer within the wooden framework; others will then find a place atop this first layer. In this way, the flow of ball bearings steadily builds new layers that inevitably produce a pyramid-style shape. This experiment is used to demonstrate how near-perfect crystalline structures such as snowflakes arise in nature without conscious design.

The system – whether feudalism, capitalism, neoliberalism – emerges out of the real-world circumstances of those seeking power most ruthlessly. In a time when the key resource was land, a class emerged justifying why it should have exclusive rights to control that land and the labour needed to make it productive. When industrial processes developed, a class emerged demanding that it had proprietary rights to those processes and to the labour needed to make them productive.

Our place in the pyramid

In these situations, we need to draw on something like Darwin's evolutionary "survival of the fittest" principle. Those few who are most hungry for power, those with least empathy, will rise to the top of the pyramid, finding themselves best-placed to exploit the people below. They will rationalise this exploitation as a divine right, or as evidence of their inherently superior skills, or as proof of the efficiency of the market.

And below them, like the layers of ball bearings, will be those who can help them maintain and expand their power: those who have the skills, education and socialisation to increase profits and sell brands.

All of this should be obvious, even non-controversial. It fits what we experience of our small-power lives. Does bigger power operate differently? After all, if those at the top of the power-pyramid were not hungry for power, even psychopathic in its pursuit, if they were caring and humane, worried primarily about the wellbeing of their workforce and the planet, they would be social workers and environmental activists, not CEOs of media empires and arms manufacturers.

And yet, base your political thinking on what should be truisms, articulate a worldview that distrusts those with the most power because they are the most capable of – and committed to – misusing it, and you will be derided. You will be called a conspiracy theorist, dismissed as deluded. You will be accused of wearing a tinfoil hat, of sour grapes, of being anti-American, a social warrior, paranoid, an Israel-hater or anti-semitic, pro-Putin, pro-Assad, a Marxist.

None of this should surprise us either. Because power – not just the people in the system, but the system itself – will use whatever tools it has to protect itself. It is easier to deride critics as unhinged, especially when you control the media, the politicians and the education system, than it is to provide a counter-argument.

In fact, it is vital to prevent any argument or real debate from taking place. Because the moment we think about the arguments, weigh them, use our critical faculties, there is a real danger that the scales will fall from our eyes. There is a real threat that we will move back from the screen, and see the whole picture.

Can we see the complete picture of the Skripal poisoning in Salisbury; or the US election that led to Trump being declared president; or the revolution in Ukraine; or the causes and trajectory of fighting in Syria, and before it Libya and Iraq; or the campaign to discredit Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour party; or the true implications of the banking crisis a decade ago?

Profit, not ethics

Just as a feudal elite was driven not by ethics but by the pursuit of power and wealth through the control of land; just as early capitalists were driven not by ethics but by the pursuit of power and wealth through the control of mechanisation; so neoliberalism is driven not by ethics but the pursuit of power and wealth through the control of the planet.

The only truth we can know is that the western power-elite is determined to finish the task of making its power fully global, expanding it from near-absolute to absolute. It cares nothing for you or your grand-children. It is a cold-calculating system, not a friend or neighbour. It lives for the instant gratification of wealth accumulation, not concern about the planet's fate tomorrow.

And because of that it is structurally bound to undermine or discredit anyone, any group, any state that stands in the way of achieving its absolute dominion.

If that is not the thought we hold uppermost in our minds as we listen to a politician, read a newspaper, watch a film or TV show, absorb an ad, or engage on social media, then we are sleepwalking into a future the most powerful, the most ruthless, the least caring have designed for us.

Step back, and take a look at the whole screen. And decide whether this is really the future you wish for your grand-children.

Jonathan Cook won the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are " Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" (Pluto Press) and " Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair " (Zed Books). His website is http://www.jonathan-cook.net/

[Sep 26, 2018] In several murder cases the perpetrators actually received direct orders from the woman

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... In several of these cases the perpetrators actually received direct orders from the woman. Something must be done. Do it. In some cases the pressure lasted for months. ..."
"... Recently I was reminded of something I read in 'The Devil's Dictionary' (by Ambrose Bierce). I just found it: ..."
"... A beautiful and attractive young woman, in wickedness a league beyond the devil. ..."
"... But as to Ambrose Bierce's second definition, yes, to me the wickedness was astounding in one case. It is an accurate definition. But there was a BPD in the case also-- a Borderline Personality Disorder. In my view, psychopathy overrides everything--I mean by that, everything moral, ethical, lawful, decent, even common sense, even the most basic prudence about deadly dangerous things. ..."
"... Recently I looked back into M. Scott Peck's 'People of the Lie'. There are some good lines in it. "Mental health is an ongoing process of dedication to reality at all costs." ..."
Sep 26, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Tidewater , 15 hours ago

Of eight murder cases in Virginia in the eighties and nineties that I know something about, seven were capital murder. The men involved--they were all men, the actual perpetrators.

These were: Clagett, Elliott, Thomas, Lester, Tate, Soering, Shambaugh (and Hyman uncharged.) Hulbert was first degree, life without parole. The cases all had something in common.

The crimes happened because of a man's obsessive love or empathy for a girl or a woman. Hulbert told me that himself. "I am an empath." It has been adjudicated that Clagett, Thomas, Hulbert, Tate and Soering committed the murders after having been asked and agreeing, or after having been pressured into it. ("If at first you don't succeed, cry, cry again.")

In several of these cases the perpetrators actually received direct orders from the woman. Something must be done. Do it. In some cases the pressure lasted for months.

In Lester's case his accomplice stood trial but was acquitted of the most serious charges. She is free and has gone on to better things. In two of these cases, Elliott's and Hyman/Shambaugh's, the women for whom it was done would never have wanted it to happen. There were children involved and it is fair to say they have paid a price. The men were military types in the Shambaugh case, and Hyman seems to have gone ballistic at the challenge from a son-in-law. So it was not exactly about empathy. It was also Jew versus Pole.

He hired Shambaugh to do a contract killing for $20,000. When he saw he had made some fatal mistakes, and was going to be charged, he committed suicide, killing his wife moments before he turned the shotgun on himself. Shambaugh was convicted as an accessory and could very well have been paroled last year. Hulbert, Lester, Tate, and Soering are serving very long prison terms. Perhaps some of them will never get out of prison alive. Clagett, Elliott, Thomas were executed. Clagett had terrible remorse. I knew him fairly well.

Recently I was reminded of something I read in 'The Devil's Dictionary' (by Ambrose Bierce). I just found it:

"Witch, n. (1) Any ugly and repulsive old woman, in a wicked league with the devil.

(2) A beautiful and attractive young woman, in wickedness a league beyond the devil."

There is always the question in these cases, of course, of psychopathy. It runs all through the eight cases. And I , for one, do not forget that it has been speculated that the selective murder of independent women who wanted to live alone outside the mainstream of life in Medieval Germany with their gardens, herbals, birds and cats somehow weakened the character of the population, clamping on a kind of leaden conformism.

Johannes Kepler's mother was accused of witchcraft in Freiburg, and for six years this brilliant astronomer was obsessed with keeping his mother from being burned alive. Finally, they worked out a deal, because it was becoming an embarrassment to the authorities. Kepler's mother was told that she was free to go and that the charges were being dropped. But she must go into exile, away from Freiburg. She flatly refused to leave her home. I forget how it ended.

But as to Ambrose Bierce's second definition, yes, to me the wickedness was astounding in one case. It is an accurate definition. But there was a BPD in the case also-- a Borderline Personality Disorder. In my view, psychopathy overrides everything--I mean by that, everything moral, ethical, lawful, decent, even common sense, even the most basic prudence about deadly dangerous things.

So there were ways that I understood one of these women, one who accepted me as a visitor. Needless to say, a number of them are in the DOC. But that's not quite what I am talking about.

Recently I looked back into M. Scott Peck's 'People of the Lie'. There are some good lines in it. "Mental health is an ongoing process of dedication to reality at all costs."

He considers the possibility of making evil a subcategory or special variant of the DSM manual!

Just one little thing. In one case I felt something spooky --just as they tell you in the story books. Where? Well, say in Henry James, for example, as in 'The Turn of the Screw'. What I mean is: I felt real evil. I had a couple of long conversations. Very attractive. Whatever it was, I just dropped the whole thing.

[Sep 25, 2018] Kavanausea We Are Living Nineteen Eighty-Four...

Sep 25, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Victor Davis Johnson via NationalReview.com,

Truth, due process, evidence, rights of the accused: All are swept aside in pursuit of the progressive agenda.

George Orwell's 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four is no longer fiction. We are living it right now.

Google techies planned to massage Internet searches to emphasize correct thinking. A member of the so-called deep state, in an anonymous op-ed, brags that its "resistance" is undermining an elected president. The FBI, CIA, DOJ, and NSC were all weaponized in 2016 to ensure that the proper president would be elected -- the choice adjudicated by properly progressive ideology. Wearing a wire is now redefined as simply flipping on an iPhone and recording your boss, boy- or girlfriend, or co-workers.

But never has the reality that we are living in a surreal age been clearer than during the strange cycles of Christine Blasey Ford's accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

In Orwell's world of 1984 Oceania, there is no longer a sense of due process, free inquiry, rules of evidence and cross examination, much less a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Instead, regimented ideology -- the supremacy of state power to control all aspects of one's life to enforce a fossilized idea of mandated quality -- warps everything from the use of language to private life.

Oceania's Rules

Senator Diane Feinstein and the other Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee had long sought to destroy the Brett Kavanaugh nomination. Much of their paradoxical furor over his nomination arises from the boomeranging of their own past political blunders, such as when Democrats ended the filibuster on judicial nominations, in 2013. They also canonized the so-called 1992 Biden Rule, which holds that the Senate should not consider confirming the Supreme Court nomination of a lame-duck president (e.g., George H. W. Bush) in an election year.

Rejecting Kavanaugh proved a hard task given that he had a long record of judicial opinions and writings -- and there was nothing much in them that would indicate anything but a sharp mind, much less any ideological, racial, or sexual intolerance. His personal life was impeccable, his family admirable.

Kavanaugh was no combative Robert Bork, but congenial, and he patiently answered all the questions asked of him, despite constant demonstrations and pre-planned street-theater interruptions from the Senate gallery and often obnoxious grandstanding by "I am Spartacus" Democratic senators.

So Kavanaugh was going to be confirmed unless a bombshell revelation derailed the vote. And so we got a bombshell.

Weeks earlier, Senator Diane Feinstein had received a written allegation against Kavanaugh of sexual battery by an accuser who wished to remain anonymous. Feinstein sat on it for nearly two months, probably because she thought the charges were either spurious or unprovable. Until a few days ago, she mysteriously refused to release the full text of the redacted complaint , and she has said she does not know whether the very accusations that she purveyed are believable. Was she reluctant to memorialize the accusations by formally submitting them to the Senate Judiciary Committee, because doing so makes Ford subject to possible criminal liability if the charges prove demonstrably untrue?

The gambit was clearly to use the charges as a last-chance effort to stop the nomination -- but only if Kavanaugh survived the cross examinations during the confirmation hearing. Then, in extremis , Feinstein finally referenced the charge, hoping to keep it anonymous, but, at the same time, to hint of its serious nature and thereby to force a delay in the confirmation. Think something McCarthesque, like "I have here in my hand the name . . ."

Delay would mean that the confirmation vote could be put off until after the midterm election, and a few jeopardized Democratic senators in Trump states would not have to go on record voting no on Kavanaugh. Or the insidious innuendos, rumor, and gossip about Kavanaugh would help to bleed him to death by a thousand leaks and, by association, tank Republican chances at retaining the House. (Republicans may or may not lose the House over the confirmation circus, but they most surely will lose their base and, with it, the Congress if they do not confirm Kavanaugh.)

Feinstein's anonymous trick did not work. So pressure mounted to reveal or leak Ford's identity and thereby force an Anita-Hill–like inquest that might at least show old white men Republican senators as insensitive to a vulnerable and victimized woman.

The problem, of course, was that, under traditional notions of jurisprudence, Ford's allegations simply were not provable. But America soon discovered that civic and government norms no longer follow the Western legal tradition. In Orwellian terms, Kavanaugh was now at the mercy of the state. He was tagged with sexual battery at first by an anonymous accuser, and then upon revelation of her identity, by a left-wing, political activist psychology professor and her more left-wing, more politically active lawyer.

Newspeak and Doublethink

Statue of limitations? It does not exist. An incident 36 years ago apparently is as fresh today as it was when Kavanaugh was 17 and Ford 15.

Presumption of Innocence? Not at all. Kavanaugh is accused and thereby guilty. The accuser faces no doubt. In Orwellian America, the accused must first present his defense, even though he does not quite know what he is being charged with. Then the accuser and her legal team pour over his testimony to prepare her accusation.

Evidence? That too is a fossilized concept. Ford could name neither the location of the alleged assault nor the date or time. She had no idea how she arrived or left the scene of the alleged crime. There is no physical evidence of an attack. And such lacunae in her memory mattered no longer at all.

Details? Again, such notions are counterrevolutionary. Ford said to her therapist 6 years ago (30 years after the alleged incident) that there were four would-be attackers, at least as recorded in the therapist's notes.

But now she has claimed that there were only two assaulters: Kavanaugh and a friend. In truth, all four people -- now including a female -- named in her accusations as either assaulters or witnesses have insisted that they have no knowledge of the event, much less of wrongdoing wherever and whenever Ford claims the act took place. That they deny knowledge is at times used as proof by Ford's lawyers that the event 36 years was traumatic.

An incident at 15 is so seared into her lifelong memory that at 52 Ford has no memory of any of the events or details surrounding that unnamed day, except that she is positive that 17-year-old Brett Kavanaugh, along with four? three? two? others, was harassing her. She has no idea where or when she was assaulted but still assures that Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge were drunk, but that she and the others (?) merely had only the proverbial teenage "one beer." Most people are more likely to know where they were at a party than the exact number of alcoholic beverages they consumed -- but not so much about either after 36 years.

Testimony? No longer relevant. It doesn't matter that Kavanaugh and the other alleged suspect both deny the allegations and have no memory of being in the same locale with Ford 36 years ago. In sum, all the supposed partiers, both male and female, now swear, under penalty of felony, that they have no memory of any of the incidents that Ford claims occurred so long ago. That Ford cannot produce a single witness to confirm her narrative or refute theirs is likewise of no concern. So far, she has singularly not submitted a formal affidavit or given a deposition that would be subject to legal exposure if untrue.

Again, the ideological trumps the empirical. "All women must be believed" is the testament, and individuals bow to the collective. Except, as in Orwell's Animal Farm, there are ideological exceptions -- such as Bill Clinton, Keith Ellison, Sherrod Brown, and Joe Biden. The slogan of Ford's psychodrama is "All women must be believed, but some women are more believable than others." That an assertion becomes fact due to the prevailing ideology and gender of the accuser marks the destruction of our entire system of justice.

Rights of the accused? They too do not exist. In the American version of 1984 , the accuser, a.k.a. the more ideologically correct party, dictates to authorities the circumstances under which she will be investigated and cross-examined: She will demand all sorts of special considerations of privacy and exemptions; Kavanaugh will be forced to return and face cameras and the public to prove that he was not then, and has never been since, a sexual assaulter.

In our 1984 world, the accused is considered guilty if merely charged, and the accuser is a victim who can ruin a life but must not under any circumstance be made uncomfortable in proving her charges.

Doublespeak abounds. "Victim" solely refers to the accuser, not the accused, who one day was Brett Kavanaugh, a brilliant jurist and model citizen, and the next morning woke up transformed into some sort of Kafkaesque cockroach. The media and political operatives went in a nanosecond from charging that she was groped and "assaulted" to the claim that she was "raped."

In our 1984, the phrase "must be believed" is doublespeak for "must never face cross-examination."

Ford should be believed or not believed on the basis of evidence , not her position, gender, or politics. I certainly did not believe Joe Biden, simply because he was a U.S. senator, when, as Neal Kinnock's doppelganger, he claimed that he came from a long line of coal miners -- any more than I believed that Senator Corey Booker really had a gang-banger Socratic confidant named "T-Bone," or that would-be senator Richard Blumenthal was an anguished Vietnam combat vet or that Senator Elizabeth Warren was a Native American. (Do we need a 25th Amendment for unhinged senators?) Wanting to believe something from someone who is ideologically correct does not translate into confirmation of truth.

Ford supposedly in her originally anonymous accusation had insisted that she had sought "medical treatment" for her assault. The natural assumption is that such a term would mean that, soon after the attack, the victim sought a doctor's or emergency room's help to address either her physical or mental injuries -- records might therefore be a powerful refutation of Kavanaugh's denials.

But "medical treatment" now means that 30 years after the alleged assault, Ford sought counseling for some sort of "relationship" or "companion" therapy, or what might legitimately be termed "marriage counseling." And in the course of her discussions with her therapist about her marriage, she first spoke of her alleged assault three decades earlier. She did not then name Kavanaugh to her therapist, whose notes are at odds with Ford's current version.

Memory Holes

Then we come to Orwell's idea of "memory holes," or mechanisms to wipe clean inconvenient facts that disrupt official ideological narratives.

Shortly after Ford was named, suddenly her prior well-publicized and self-referential social-media revelations vanished, as if she'd never held her minor-league but confident pro-Sanders, anti-Trump opinions . And much of her media and social-media accounts were erased as well.

Similarly, one moment the New York Times -- just coming off an embarrassing lie in reporting that U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley had ordered new $50,000 office drapes on the government dime -- reported that Kavanaugh's alleged accomplice, Mark Judge, had confirmed Ford's allegation. Indeed, in a sensational scoop, according to the Times , Judge told the Judiciary Committee that he does remember the episode and has nothing more to say. In fact, Judge told the committee the very opposite: that he does not remember the episode . Forty minutes later, the Times embarrassing narrative vanished down the memory hole.

The online versions of some of the yearbooks of Ford's high school from the early 1980s vanished as well. At times, they had seemed to take a perverse pride in the reputation of the all-girls school for underage drinking, carousing, and, on rarer occasions, "passing out" at parties. Such activities were supposed to be the monopoly and condemnatory landscape of the "frat boy" and spoiled-white-kid Kavanaugh -- and certainly not the environment in which the noble Ford navigated. Seventeen-year-old Kavanaugh was to play the role of a falling-down drunk; Ford, with impressive powers of memory of an event 36 years past, assures us that as a circumspect 15-year-old, she had only "one beer."

A former teenage friend of Ford's sent out a flurry of social-media postings, allegedly confirming that Ford's ordeal was well known to her friends in 1982 and so her assault narrative must therefore be confirmed. Then, when challenged on some of her incoherent details (schools are not in session during summertime, and Ford is on record as not telling anyone of the incident for 30 years), she mysteriously claimed that she no longer could stand by her earlier assertions, which likewise soon vanished from her social-media account. Apparently, she had assumed that in 2018 Oceania ideologically correct citizens merely needed to lodge an accusation and it would be believed, without any obligation on her part to substantiate her charges.

When a second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, followed Ford seven days later to allege another sexual incident with the teenage Kavanaugh, at Yale 35 years ago, it was no surprise that she followed the now normal Orwellian boilerplate : None of those whom she named as witnesses could either confirm her charges or even remember the alleged event. She had altered her narrative after consultations with lawyers and handlers. She too confesses to underage drinking during the alleged event. She too is currently a social and progressive political activist. The only difference from Ford's narrative is that Ramirez's accusation was deemed not credible enough to be reported even by the New York Times , which recently retracted false stories about witness Mark Judge in the Ford case, and which falsely reported that U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley had charged the government for $50,000 office drapes.

As in 1984 , "truths" in these sorts of allegations do not exist unless they align with the larger "Truth" of the progressive project. In our case, the overarching Truth mandates that, in a supposedly misogynist society, women must always be believed in all their accusations and should be exempt from all counter-examinations.

Little "truths" -- such as the right of the accused, the need to produce evidence, insistence on cross-examination, and due process -- are counterrevolutionary constructs and the refuge of reactionary hold-outs who are enemies of the people. Or in the words of Hawaii senator Mazie Hirono:

Guess who's perpetuating all of these kinds of actions? It's the men in this country. And I just want to say to the men in this country, "Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing, for a change."

The View 's Joy Behar was more honest about the larger Truth: "These white men, old by the way, are not protecting women," Behar exclaimed. "They're protecting a man who is probably guilty." We thank Behar for the concession "probably."

According to some polls, about half the country believes that Brett Kavanaugh is now guilty of a crime committed 36 years ago at the age of 17. And that reality reminds us that we are no longer in America . We are already living well into the socialist totalitarian Hell that Orwell warned us about long ago.


NiggaPleeze , 10 seconds ago

National Review? Really? Does it get more evil than them?

Debt Slave , 16 seconds ago

According to some polls, about half the country believes that Brett Kavanaugh is now guilty of a crime committed 36 years ago at the age of 17.

Well half the country are idiots but the important thing to remember in our democracy is that the idiots have the right to vote. And here we are today.

No wonder the founders believed that democracy was a stupid idea. But we know better than they did, right?

Jkweb007 , 37 seconds ago

It is hard for me to believe 50% when in America you are presumed innocent till proven guilty. Is this the spanish inquizition or salem witch trials. If he floats he was innocent. I am shocked that people in congress would make statements, she must be believed, I believe he is guilty. These are people who represent and stand for the constitution that many died in the defense of life liberty and the persuit of happiness. It may be time for that mlilitia that our founding fathers endorsed. If Kavanaugh is rebuked for these accusation our freedom, free speech may be next.

herbivore , 1 minute ago

Peter Griffin knows what's what:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jiog8hrzigk

GOSPLAN HERO , 4 minutes ago

Just another day in USSA.

THORAX , 6 minutes ago

One more confirmation that the so called "social justice warriors" -like last night's goons' who shamefully interrupted Senator Cruz's night out with his wife at a private restaurant- are Orwell's projected fascists!

opport.knocks , 20 minutes ago

Bush 2 was in the big chair when he and his cabinet started the USA down the full Orwellian path (Patriot Act, post 911). Kavanaugh and his wife were both members of that government team.

If there is any reason to dismiss him, that would be it, not this post-pubescent sex crap.

If I was a cynical person, I would say this whole exercise is to deflect attention away from that part of his "swampy" past.

Aubiekong , 23 minutes ago

We lost the republic when we allowed the liberals to staff the ministry of education...

CheapBastard , 15 minutes ago

My neighbor is a high school teacher. I asked her if she was giving students time off to protest this and she looked at me and said, "Just the opposite. I have given them a 10 page seminar paper to write on the meaning of Due Process."

So there IS hope.

my new username , 23 minutes ago

This is criminal contempt for the due lawful process of the Congress.

These are unlawful attempts and conspiracies to subvert justice.

So we need to start arresting, trying, convicting and punishing the criminals.

BlackChicken , 23 minutes ago

Truth, due process, evidence, rights of the accused: All are swept aside in pursuit of the progressive agenda.

This needs to end, not later, NOW.

Be careful what you wish for leftists, I'll dedicate my remaining years to torture you with it.

Jus7tme , 22 minutes ago

>>the socialist totalitarian Hell that Orwell warned us about long ago.

I think Orwell was in 1949 was warning about a fascist totalitarian hell, not a socialist one, but nice try rewriting history.

Duc888 , 29 minutes ago

WTF ever happened to "innocent until PROVEN guilty"?

CheapBastard , 19 minutes ago

Schumer said before the confirmation hearings even began he would not let Kavanaugh become SC justice no matter what.

Dems are so tolerant, open minded and respectful of due process, aren't they.

[Sep 25, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis Man freed in Maine after false conviction by a conspiracy of women

Sep 25, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Man freed in Maine after false conviction by a conspiracy of women Mainerape

"Besides filing a federal civil lawsuit against police officers, prosecutors and other witnesses in his case, Filler filed a complaint about former prosecutor Mary Kellett with the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, which resulted in Kellett becoming the first prosecutor in recent memory to be publicly sanctioned by the state over prosecutorial misconduct. Kellett, who now works as a defense attorney, prosecuted Filler at his first trial in 2009.

Filler, who now lives in suburban Atlanta, was contacted via email but declined to say how much money he is getting in the settlement.

"I am grateful to all my attorneys but most of all I am grateful for my strong family and my two amazing children who I have been blessed to see grow up," Filler wrote in a statement Monday night." Bangor Daily News

------------

Ok folks, this fellow, in the back in this picture, has so far received $375,000 in damages from various parties in Maine for having been railroaded by his ex-wife and her friends, who included the woman prosecutor, in his rape trial in 2009.

The review process decided that his wife lied about him to gain revenge in a custody case over their two children and that the prosecutor who has now been sanctioned for prosecutorial misconduct withheld exculpatory evidence to obtain a conviction . A friend of the wife, a female RN, coached the wife to cry in court so as to make "it seem more real." The RN has been sued by the now vindicated ex-husband. I hope she loses every cent she might ever have.

Several here on SST have maintained that women seldom falsely accuse men. What a joke!

"... the Female of Her Species is more deadly than the Male." Kipling

https://bangordailynews.com/2018/09/25/news/hancock/man-reaches-settlement-with-maine-officials-after-suing-over-rape-allegations/

Posted at 06:58 PM in Justice | Permalink | 2 Comments

[Sep 15, 2018] Another issue is that Williams deliberately puts on a tantrum and then claims the tantrum is normal emotional behaviour. On top of that, she tries to pass off this spoilt-brat outburst as characteristic of how strong, feminist women behave

Female sociopaths are very skillful in playing identity politics.
Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

James lake September 10, 2018 at 10:12 pm

I agree with Martina Navratilova on Serena Williams conduct

" Navratilova went so far as to write an editorial for the New York Times in which she claimed that, in complaining post-match that Ramos would not have reacted the same way to an argumentative male player, Williams was "missing the point" and would have been better served conducting herself with "respect for the sport we love so dearly."

"I don't believe it's a good idea to apply a standard of 'If men can get away with it, women should be able to, too,' " Navratilova said of Williams in her editorial. "Rather, I think the question we have to ask ourselves is this: What is the right way to behave to honor our sport and to respect our opponents?"

Serena Williams behaviour ruined the experience of victory for Naomi Osaka, if you get a chance to see film of the whole debacle with the booing crowd! She looked like the most miserable winner in ever.

Jen September 11, 2018 at 3:58 am
Another issue is that Williams deliberately puts on a tantrum and then claims the tantrum is normal emotional behaviour. On top of that, she tries to pass off this spoilt-brat outburst as characteristic of how strong, feminist women behave. All done as much to deny Osaka the joy of winning her first major championship as to attack the umpire.

And people who should know better swallow Williams' idiocy hook, line and sinker.

[Sep 15, 2018] The PC drones are rather mentally deficient. They respond to trigger phrases and not to concepts or principles.

Sep 15, 2018 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

kirill September 10, 2018 at 6:48 pm

As commented elsewhere, all her screeching about double standards for women are utter BS. She broke the rules while playing against another woman and not a man. The men's tennis league is utterly irrelevant since she may as well have compared her league to men's football. She failed by the standards of her league and not those of another. It was clear that she was breaking the rules of her league and she was the one that escalated the conflict. It has nothing to do with women's rights.

The PC drones are rather mentally deficient. They respond to trigger phrases and not to concepts or principles.

Jen September 10, 2018 at 6:49 pm
Australian cartoonist Mark Knight is in trouble with J K Rowling and other self-styled guardians of who may portray Serena Williams in meltdown and who may not. The offending drawing below:

[Sep 11, 2018] A Victim's Guide to Surviving a Narcissist-Sociopath by Sereena Nightshade

This is rather weak, but still useful (eBook)
Narcissists built a wall between himself and truth and decency. One way to understand them is to look at mafia bosses
Notable quotes:
"... While the common wisdom dictates that the sociopath/sociopath type predator goes after only those who are of little or no worth, the stupid, the uneducated and perhaps the hopelessly poor/ignorant the reality is oftentimes the polar opposite. The average in-home/family man/family woman sociopath predator goes after someone who is not a predator while that someone does have a lot to offer the sociopath/sociopath type. ..."
"... The predator wants a partner or spouse that offers a great deal of value to strip-mine away ..."
Sep 11, 2018 | www.barnesandnoble.com

"Pretty is as pretty does, and while it's true that money makes the world go round, nice is what makes it habitable." The Victim's Guide to Surviving the Narcissist/Sociopath is a quick guide book describing what a typical narcissist/sociopath is and what his/her typical victim is.

While the common wisdom dictates that the sociopath/sociopath type predator goes after only those who are of little or no worth, the stupid, the uneducated and perhaps the hopelessly poor/ignorant the reality is oftentimes the polar opposite. The average in-home/family man/family woman sociopath predator goes after someone who is not a predator while that someone does have a lot to offer the sociopath/sociopath type.

The predator wants a partner or spouse that offers a great deal of value to strip-mine away . An uneducated moron frequently does not appeal to a sociopath predator that is looking at more than an extremely short-term quick gain.

This book provides readers with a fast get-down-to-it look at what a narcissist/sociopath is, what one of these predators does and it gives readers some basic nutshell advice that is surprisingly hard to come by. A must read for victims and prospective victims alike whether not yet captured by a narcissist/sociopath or already captured and beginning to figure out, perhaps, that as a victim or prospective victim you may be in trouble.

This book tells all, for its brevity, starting with the warning signs to the final war plan with all most of the ugly details included. Photos herein are taken from more than one city location.

[Sep 11, 2018] 2018 US Open Highlights Serena Williams' dispute overshadows Naomi Osaka's final win ESPN

Video tutorial of narcissist rage.
Over the years, Serena has exhibited unpleasant and bizarre on-court behavior that may be attributed to "roid rage" - that caused her to forfeit a Wimbledon doubles match due to poor co-ordination, death threats that she aimed at a line judge during a 2009 US Open semifinal, breaking racquets, a tirade against an umpire during the 2011 US Open final etc. Some think that this might be the result of using performance enhancing drugs. See ROID RAGE -- #1 Question In Women's Tennis Has Serena Williams Been Doping With Steroids – The Millennium Report and Is Serena Williams on steroids - Quora and Serena Williams Denies Being Drunk or On Drugs During Wimbledon Meltdown The Fix
Notable quotes:
"... What an absolute bully. She consistently belittles and threatens the umpires, purposefully exasperates her opponents, shows no respect for the sporting venue/court or the equipment, hypes up the crowd to boost her self-image and personal views (fully aware that she is a crowd "favorite"), and has not an ounce of humility on the court or when being interviewed. I honestly believe she only put her arm around Ms. Osaka during the award ceremony so that she would appear more caring. There was nothing genuine about it. ..."
"... The Fact Serena Williams Didn't shake the umpires hand ..."
"... I love how she claims sexism, but she attacks him the entire time. Calling him a liar and saying he attacked her, using her power against him. ..."
Sep 11, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Reddama , 4 hours ago

What an absolute bully. She consistently belittles and threatens the umpires, purposefully exasperates her opponents, shows no respect for the sporting venue/court or the equipment, hypes up the crowd to boost her self-image and personal views (fully aware that she is a crowd "favorite"), and has not an ounce of humility on the court or when being interviewed. I honestly believe she only put her arm around Ms. Osaka during the award ceremony so that she would appear more caring. There was nothing genuine about it.

Nancy Loaiza , 4 hours ago

It's funny to see how she says she was not receiving coaching and demanding an apology here... and then 10 mins later her coach accepted he was coaching her. Naomi was just better in EVERY way during this match... This was so classless from SW

alex atack , 5 hours ago

I feel really bad for Osaka... Serena ruined her first title

yaggle fraggle , 6 hours ago

"I have never cheated. Apologize!" *coach later admits he was coaching* dindu nuffin

MrMSouts , 3 hours ago

The Fact Serena Williams Didn't shake the umpires hand shows. she is ungrateful and a bad sport.

sassiebrat , 2 days ago

I hope SW watches this and realizes what an entitled fool she looks like and sounds like! More than happy Osaka won!

Amayzinone , 3 hours ago

I love how she claims sexism, but she attacks him the entire time. Calling him a liar and saying he attacked her, using her power against him.

She did get coaching, because the coach admitted to it. And she clearly broke her racket. What a poor display. I'm more distraught that she claimed sexism in a female game? Plus this ump has docked Nadal for the same thing? I'd get her out of tennis, what a drama queen. She makes tennis look bad

Get a Job , 1 hour ago

Nasty, spiteful, and childish

Andrew Rivas , 3 hours ago

What an entitled loser. Glad she got shown who's boss.

hurricane watcher , 4 hours ago

Most disgusting display of unsportsmanlike conduct I've ever seen in any sport. Despicable. Hopefully this is the highlight this embarrassment of a role model will be remembered for for the rest of her life. Thank God Osaka won

SquareEarth1 , 4 hours ago (edited)

Serena tried everything in the 'poor me' book. She was being outplayed, plain and simple! Other players do this sort of crap to unsettle their opponent. It is just a shame she ruined the match for Osaka who was extremely professional throughout. Well done to her on her first major win. I don't have anything good to say about the crowd either....the booing was pathetic.

travis bickel , 5 hours ago

Always playing the race card

duckduckmoose , 1 day ago (edited)

How is it that she's blaming the him cause she's a woman? With that logic the person they're helping which is Serena's oppenent IS A WOMAN.

Brian Clark , 6 hours ago

she went full ratchet.

Alex A. Gholizadeh , 5 hours ago

It's sad seeing SJWs defend this spoiled brat

City Grunt , 2 days ago (edited)

EVERYONE IS CAUGHT UP IN THIS MEDIA STORM. Serena was dominated plain and simple. Osaka won this plain and simple. Game over.

[Sep 11, 2018] Narcissists Tend to Become Leaders

Narcissism, destroys the ability of a person to form healthy, long term relationship. While initially seen as chanrming, narsissists can't stop from using person to his/her advantage and hurt the relationship, often destroying it in a long run.
Notable quotes:
"... Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin ..."
"... Another dimension of narcissism -- the desire for attention -- was not as strongly linked with leadership roles in the groups. ..."
Oct 07, 2008 | www.livescience.com

Narcissists like to be in charge, so it stands to reason that a new study shows individuals who are overconfident about their abilities are most likely to step in as leaders, be they politicians or power brokers. However, their initiative doesn't mean they are the best leaders. The study also found narcissists don't outperform others in leadership roles.

Narcissists tend to be egotistical types who exaggerate their talents and abilities, and lack empathy for others. The researchers stress that narcissism is not the same as high self-esteem.

"A person with high self-esteem is confident and charming, but they also have a caring component and they want to develop intimacy with others," said lead researcher Amy Brunell, a psychologist at Ohio State University at Newark. "Narcissists have an inflated view of their talents and abilities and are all about themselves. They don't care as much about others."

She added, "It's not surprising that narcissists become leaders . They like power, they are egotistical, and they are usually charming and extraverted. But the problem is, they don't necessarily make better leaders."

Born leaders?

The results, which will be detailed in an upcoming issue of the journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , come from three studies, two with students and the other with business managers.

In one study, 432 undergraduate students completed surveys that measured various personality traits, including aspects of narcissism. Then, the students were put in groups of four and told to assume they were a committee of senior officers of the student union. Their task was to elect next year's director.

Results showed that students who scored higher on one dimension of narcissism -- the desire for power -- were more likely to say they wanted to lead the group. The narcissists were also more likely to say they did lead the group discussion and more likely to be viewed as leaders by the other group members.

Another dimension of narcissism -- the desire for attention -- was not as strongly linked with leadership roles in the groups.

... ... ...

"Many people have observed that it takes a narcissistic person to run for president of the United States," Brunell said. "I would be surprised if any of the candidates who have run weren't higher than average in narcissism."

Wall Street traders could also have a high dose of narcissism, she suggested. "There have been a lot of studies that have found narcissistic leaders tend to have volatile and risky decision-making performance and can be ineffective and potentially destructive leaders."

Brunell does hedge though, saying that not all troubles in Washington and Wall Street can be blamed on narcissists, and of course, you can't boil everything down to personalities.

[Sep 11, 2018] Have We Become a Nation of Narcissists by Ronald Pies, M.D

Notable quotes:
"... Rudeness and Civility ..."
"... The Culture of Narcissism ..."
"... The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement ..."
"... Journal of Personality ..."
"... Everything Has Two Handles: The Stoic's Guide to the Art of Living ..."
"... Ronald Pies MD is Professor of Psychiatry and Lecturer on Bioethics and Humanities at SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse NY; Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston; and Editor-in-Chief, Psychiatric Times. He is the author of Everything Has Two Handles: The Stoic's Guide to the Art of Living . This article was provided by PsychCentral.com . ..."
Sep 21, 2009 | www.livescience.com
What do rapper Kanye West, tennis star Serena Williams, and Congressman Joe Wilson have in common, besides lots of publicity over their recent public outbursts?

It doesn't take a psychiatrist to conclude that all three individuals placed their momentary emotional needs over the feelings and wishes of others -- and that they failed to play by the proverbial rules of the game. Though their intrusive behavior may be rationalized as "off the cuff" or "from the heart," the fact remains that each of these individuals performed a calculation over a period of seconds, minutes, or perhaps hours: they calculated that their anger or resentment was more important than the decorum others expected of them.

Sure, we all "lose it" from time to time, and impolite outbursts have probably been with us since our Neanderthal forebears first learned to growl. Furthermore, the impression that manners have gotten worse and worse over the years may not be supported by historical data. John F. Kasson, in his book, Rudeness and Civility , points out that people in medieval times behaved far more boorishly than our modern-day, "It's all about me!" crowd. Citing the work of sociologist Norbert Elias, Kasson writes that, compared to more recent times, " people in the late Middle Ages expressed their emotions -- joy, rage, piety, fear, even the pleasure of torturing and killing enemies -- with astonishing directness and intensity."

Maybe so -- but the recent tripleheader of West, Williams and Wilson made many of us wonder if we are turning into a nation of self-absorbed boors. (A Boston Globe editorial on 9/15/09 proclaimed, "Shouting is the New Opining.") This thesis is hardly new. Thirty years ago, Christopher Lasch put forward essentially the same argument, in his book The Culture of Narcissism . But Lasch's claims were mainly impressionistic. Now, however, a number of researchers and mental health professionals point to studies showing that, indeed, excessive self-absorption is on the increase.

For example, in their book, The Narcissism Epidemic: Living in the Age of Entitlement , Jean M. Twenge, Ph.D and W. Keith Campbell, Ph.D. provide ample evidence for what they term "the relentless rise of narcissism in our culture." Twenge and Campbell identify several social trends that have contributed to this problem, including what they term "the movement toward self-esteem " that began in the late 1960s; and the movement away from "community-oriented thinking" that began in the 1970s. But the root causes go far deeper. For example, in a chapter entitled "Raising Royalty," Twenge and Campbell point to " the new parenting culture that has fueled the narcissism epidemic." In effect, the authors argue, there has been a shift away from limit-setting toward letting the child get whatever he or she wants.

Twenge and her colleagues have empirical data to back up their claims. For example, in a paper published in the August 2008 Journal of Personality , the authors report on 85 samples of American college students, studied between 1979 and 2006. The subjects were evaluated using an instrument called the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI). Compared with their peers in the 1979-85 period, college students in 2006 showed a 30 percent increase in their NPI score. That's "the bad news.". If there is some good news, it might be this: Twenge and her colleagues Sara Konrath, Joshua D. Foster, W. Keith Campbell, and Brad J. Bushman point to a rise in several "positive traits" correlated with narcissism, such as self-esteem, extraversion, and assertiveness. Of course, a cynic might reply that these traits are "positive" only up to a point: When someone's idea of "assertiveness" involves jumping up on stage and grabbing the microphone from an award-winning singer, assertiveness has arguably crossed the line into loutishness.

Twenge and Campbell take pains to knock down the myth that all narcissists are basically insecure folks with very low self-esteem. Their research suggests otherwise -- most narcissists seem to have a heaping helping of self-esteem! But Twenge and Campbell focus mainly on individuals they call the "socially savvy narcissists who have the most influence on the culture." These high-fliers may be the sort one of my colleagues had in mind when he defined a narcissist as "somebody who, at the moment of peak sexual bliss, cries out his own name!"

These celebrity narcissists are not, for the most part, the kind of individuals I have treated in my own psychiatric practice. My patients tended to fall into the group Twenge and Campbell call "vulnerable narcissists." These unfortunate souls seem to cloak themselves in a mantle of gold, while feeling that, on the inside, they are nothing but rags. They suffer, to be sure -- but they also induce suffering in others, by acting out their insecurities in a thousand provocative ways. And, like some of their celebrity counterparts, these vulnerable narcissists are prone to outbursts of anger, verbal abuse, or just plain rudeness -- usually when they feel rejected, thwarted, or frustrated. They remind one of philosopher Eric Hoffer's observation that "rudeness is the weak man's imitation of strength."

If we are indeed producing increasingly self-obsessed individuals in our society, what can we do about it? There is clearly no simple prescription for what are evidently deep-seated cultural and familial ills. There is almost certainly no "Prozac for Narcissists" anywhere on the pharmacy shelves. As Twenge and Campbell argue, there is much in the way that we raise our children that may need to change. In my view, it is not simply a matter of refusing to spoil or over-indulge our children. Rather, we must also instill positive values that will help inoculate our children against narcissism.

In my book, Everything Has Two Handles: The Stoic's Guide to the Art of Living , I argue that the values of the ancient Stoics can help us achieve personal happiness. I believe that these same values can help our children grow into strong, responsible, and resilient citizens. And what are Stoic values? It's not just a matter of keeping a stiff upper lip, nor does Stoicism hold that you should tamp down all your feelings. Rather, Stoics believed that the good life is one characterized by virtuous beliefs and actions -- in brief, a life based on duty, discipline, and moderation. The Stoics also believed in the importance of taking life on its own terms–what they would have described as "living in harmony with nature."

Stoics did not whine when they were passed over for an award, nor did they throw a hissy fit when they didn't get their way. As the Stoic philosopher, Seneca (106-43 BCE) put it, "All ferocity is born of weakness." Perhaps most important, Stoics understood the tremendous value of gratitude -- not only for the gifts we have received, but also for the grief we have been spared. Maybe if more children were inculcated with these teachings, we would find our celebrities showing more gratitude and less "attitude."

Ronald Pies MD is Professor of Psychiatry and Lecturer on Bioethics and Humanities at SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse NY; Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston; and Editor-in-Chief, Psychiatric Times. He is the author of Everything Has Two Handles: The Stoic's Guide to the Art of Living . This article was provided by PsychCentral.com .

[Sep 11, 2018] It's not easy to call out a complete narcissist. They're highly manipulative in turning the tables and making themselves the victim leaving the righteous accuser or critic holding the bag

Sep 11, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Circe , Sep 11, 2018 12:06:20 PM | link

@156

It's not easy to call out a complete narcissist. They're highly manipulative in turning the tables and making themselves the victim leaving the righteous accuser or critic holding the bag. It takes skill and gravitas not to fall into their trap but they should especially not be allowed to slither behind legitimate causes to excuse their nasty behaviour and then be glorified as a brave champion of the oppressed. Mostly it's how they twist the truth and get away with it that's scary. They'll inflate the minutest legitimacy to make their accuser appear like the ogre and so emerge vindicated by society. Imo that's a form of bullying. Again, it takes skill to expose them.

Circe , Sep 11, 2018 10:57:00 AM | link

@148

Times have changed not just in tennis. Increasingly devious bad behavior is excused and I would even say even glorified in sports and everywhere else. Look how long it took for Americans to admit Armstrong, cancer survivor cycling hero, was cheating. There too the ego-worship and American public's denial of the truth was nauseating. What about the American student who probably got away with murder in Italy and was so portrayed as the victim of European justice? Even when kissing her boyfriend while the coroner took the real victim out in a body bag they were making excuses with her psychological state. Awh,poor thing...it was her way of cleansing/releasing the stress of the whole tragedy! There's also the basketball players who got away with a spree of theft and vandalism in Asia and hardly suffered any accountability.

Devious bad behavior is tolerated everywhere now and narcissism viewed as strength when it's only making society more and more ignorant, insensitive and intolerable. Humility and honor have become weaknesses and the truth a necessary casualty.

I would say Americans are the worst offenders, but the trend they're setting is becoming rampant and it's degrading society everywhere. Kids are emulating it. That's why it needs to be called out for what it really is, depraved; wherever, whenever, so it doesn't become the acceptable normal and the excusable new hip normal for kids.

[Sep 11, 2018] The Entitled and Narcissistic Petulance of Serena Williams (THE SAAD TRUTH_720)

Now we have a video tutorial how a narcissist behave when he/she is losing, a lesson how to identify a narcissistic bully. Anyone who has not experienced first hand the wrath of a narcissistic bully should watch this as a training session. Such a behaviour is triggered when he/she cannot manipulate people like they think they should be able to. The scenario is simple: if somebody disagrees with them, or worse yet, attempts to call the out for a wrongdoing, they will immediately ratchet things up by: insisting that the other person is wrong and try to influence their decision making in their favour (admin that you are wrong~); (2) becoming outraged that the person dares to accuse them of the wrongdoing; (3) instantly "turn the tables": portray yourself as the victim; (4) use "crocodile tears" to garner sympathy; (5) demand an apology (king of gaslighting, inducing feeling of a guild without any reason); (6) try to intimidate and threaten the person into giving in
Sep 09, 2018 | www.youtube.com

I found out from the Twitter mob that it is forbidden to criticize Ms. Williams because bruh "sexism and racism." The Entitled and Narcissistic Petulance of Serena Williams (THE SAAD TRUTH_720)

The truth can hurt. The truth can set you free. But you can't hide from THE SAAD TRUTH. Why are men the majority of Ferrari owners? Why do women prefer tall men? What is evolutionary psychology? How does one apply biology in understanding consumer behaviour? What is the current state of intellectual diversity on university campuses? Are all religions equally violent/peaceful? What is at the root of political correctness and the thought police? These issues and countless others are addressed in my YouTube channel. My goal is to engage folks in a fun and informative manner. Please subscribe and spread the word. Cheers. Rating is available when the video has been rented. This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.

I found out from the Twitter mob that it is forbidden to criticize Ms. Williams because bruh "sexism and racism."
_________________________________

Support THE SAAD TRUTH via Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/GadSaad

Support THE SAAD TRUTH via PayPal: https://www.paypal.me/GadSaad

THE SAAD TRUTH online store: http://www.teespring.com/stores/the-s...

Like my Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/Dr.Gad.Saad

Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/GadSaad (@GadSaad)


Marky Whitemale , 2 days ago

"Narcissistic Petulance" and "Self-Entitled" is such a perfect way of describing Princess Serena.

Molly Whipple

Does anyone else see the sort of behavior that Serena exhibited in this instance as a very public example of the same sort of ingrained entitled narcissism that seems to be part and parcel of the psychology of the SJW mindset?

H.J. Indy Nuding

The generation now coming out of Western schools is unable to distinguish good from bad. Even those words are unacceptable. This results in impaired thinking ability. ~Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Gérard Mentor

Justin Hénin is a close cousin of mine, you wouldn't believe the stories I heard a bout the Williams sisters...these two are absolute scumbags who'll do anything to win.

Bode Etemadi

Agree with you 100%. This was not sexism nor racism. It was a matter of conduct and violation of rules. Serena acted poorly and stole the moment from Osaka. Shame on those who are celebrating her for her actions yesterday and shame on those who claim victimhood on her behalf. Lastly shame on Serena

Bronwyn Doyle

In her uncontrolled temper she broke her racket in three places, in the game and screamed herself into a state of hysterics. However, another athlete, Jose Bautista hit the ball out of the park and while running to first base he executed the Famous Bat Flip and he was criticized for over a year for that-he was in good spirits and it was a harmless bat flip but received no end of criticism. Williams should have been escorted from the court and penalized for her disgraceful behaviour and using the game for her Soapbox. She ruined the game for her opponent as well. Selfish, conceited woman.

Gad Saad , 2 days ago

I'm not sure why my latest SAAD TRUTH clip is solely audio. I taped it via my camera as an audiovisual video. In any case, I won't upload it again, as the message is perhaps better retained if you are not distracted by my outlandish good looks.

Feta Cheezz , 1 day ago

"Entitled" "Narcissistic Petulance".................sounds like the perfect candidate for the next Nike ad campaign.

Brian Donovan , 2 days ago

She actually accused the umpire of being SEXIST He's umpiring a match between two women so ???

Earl Greystoke , 2 days ago

Thank goodness Serena's opponent & tennis referee weren't "white", otherwise all hell would've broken loose! She played the woman card but couldn't really let loose with the poor oppressed black card.

Lttlemoi , 2 days ago (edited)

The whole ordeal was so sad for Osaka. As a child, Serena was one of her idols and she had always looked forward to playing against her. Today was the day that dream finally came true* after years of hard work and her (now former?) idol turned it into a total nightmare. Williams even refused to shake her hand after the match! She disrespected the umpire. She disrespected the audience. She disrespected the ideals of sportsmanship and above all, she greatly disrespected Osaka. *edit: Apparently this was the second game between the two, thanks Zeeker for pointing that out.

Michael Valenzuela , 2 days ago

I'm just happy she didn't lose to Maria Sharapova or some other lighter skinned tennis player. The MSM would be salivating at the mouth screaming,' WHITE PATRIARCHY!!!' And cue the new NIKE ads.

[Sep 07, 2018] Timothy Hagios

Sep 07, 2018 | disqus.com

2 hours ago I believe that John McCain was a clinical psychopath.

Clinical psychopathy is defined by: 1) a general lack of empathy, 2) an inclination to make rash, often violent decisions, and 3) a profound desire for attention, good or bad. McCain's "maverick" personality with its contradictions fits right in. Psychopaths are often charming and tend to make their perverse impulses look virtuous (I've heard him fantastically called "the conscience of the Senate"). Whenever they appear to stand for something positive, such as his nominal opposition to torture, it's done to attract attention rather than out of genuine conviction.

[Sep 01, 2018] NARCISSISTS DOMINATE WASHINGTON WITH A GOOD MANY SOCIOPATHS THROWN IN by John Chuckman

Notable quotes:
"... 'What happens when a narcissist is being threatened with the loss of power and control? The answer is something psychologists call "narcissistic injury."' ..."
Aug 29, 2018 | chuckmanwordsincomments.wordpress.com

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE ON ALTERNET

'What happens when a narcissist is being threatened with the loss of power and control? The answer is something psychologists call "narcissistic injury."'

Sorry, but the kind of stuff in this article is as poor as anything Trump's crowd throws out at us.

What's special about Trump's being a narcissist? That characteristic almost comes with the territory of national American politics. Good God, Hillary Clinton? Barack Obama? Newt Gingrich? John McCain? Narcissists all, by any meaningful definition of the word.

I'm almost inclined to think that in pounding-fist, noisy imperial America, narcissists are the only people who can even hope to maneuver in Washington.

Although, we can move a notch up the spectrum of disorders to sociopaths, of which I have little doubt we've had more than a few. The ability to smile and project charm while killing, and on a large scale, surely is a recognizable trait in Washington. It absolutely characterizes Obama and Clinton.

My own view of quoting psychologists on almost anything is that it is a game. There are almost as many views and theories as there are practitioners. Psychology is not a science, it is a social science, and not a particularly rigorous one.

So, what is the purpose of calling someone like Trump a name such as "narcissist" and getting a psychologist to give an opinion about what happens when such people lose power? This is just a game, a game of words.

I dislike Trump intensely and certainly do not defend him, but I do like to defend truth, and the truth is that this kind of analysis is "a crock."

[Aug 27, 2018] On a difference between ruthless ambition with psychopathy. They have similar features, but are not the same

Aug 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

another fred , says: July 7, 2018 at 2:31 am GMT

@Cold N. Holefield

I believe you may be confusing ruthless ambition with psychopathy. They have similar features, but are not the same. This argument is not on completely solid ground as there is no complete agreement on what psychopathy is, but the consensus is that there is something wrong with a psychopath's brain.

The ruthless can be mentally intact, they see the same world we do, they just don't care enough about others to restrain their own ambition. This is often learned, they've been hardened by the world, but can sometimes be just a result of excessive ambition or peer pressure. They can be quite pro-social among their peers. They manipulate or punish for gain, not for the kick of manipulating or punishing others.

Psychopaths don't often make it to the top (board level) of organizations, they're too anti-social to get along with other board members. They manipulate and punish for the kick they get out of it. Psychopaths are abundant among the self-made and at lower levels of organizations where they are used and discarded.

[Aug 17, 2018] But if you have ever managed to think yourself into the criminal mind, you will understand that it is precisely the fact that he was NOT subject to any comeback that made the whole thing such fun

Notable quotes:
"... ...Bush Jr. was able to make a White House Correspondents Dinner joke about those derned elusive WMDs – and get laughs – *one year* after the invasion of Iraq. Why would this time be any different? ..."
"... People often wonder why psychopathic sadists enjoy torturing their victims, when presumably they have enough cognitive empathy to appreciate how terrible the suffering is. ..."
"... But that is WHY the sadists enjoy their activities so much. What they do to their victims is so unendurable, yet someone is having to endure it – and that somebody is not the perpetrator. ..."
Aug 17, 2018 | consortiumnews.com

David G August 14, 2018 at 2:45 am ...Bush Jr. was able to make a White House Correspondents Dinner joke about those derned elusive WMDs – and get laughs – *one year* after the invasion of Iraq. Why would this time be any different? Reply


AnthraxSleuth , August 14, 2018 at 4:07 am

"Bush Jr. was able to make a White House Correspondents Dinner joke about those derned elusive WMDs – and get laughs" – *one year* after the invasion of Iraq. Why would this time be any different?

Yup, got lots of laughs from his fellow members of the club that were coconspirators.

Had he tried that joke around veterans and the families of casualties of that whole criminal adventure I doubt he would have made it out alive.

Tom Welsh , August 14, 2018 at 8:57 am

Had he tried that joke around any of the millions of victims of his criminal aggression or their familes and friends, I am sure he would not have made it out alive.

But if you have ever managed to think yourself into the criminal mind, you will understand that it is precisely the fact that he was NOT subject to any comeback that made the whole thing such fun.

People often wonder why psychopathic sadists enjoy torturing their victims, when presumably they have enough cognitive empathy to appreciate how terrible the suffering is.

But that is WHY the sadists enjoy their activities so much. What they do to their victims is so unendurable, yet someone is having to endure it – and that somebody is not the perpetrator.

AnthraxSleuth , August 15, 2018 at 4:51 am

I've never tried to think myself into the criminal mind. And, I thank you for the insight. I have had someone try to kill me. Someone that has killed at least one person before by his own admission. It changes you forever.

[Jul 30, 2018] Some Youtube video on psychopaths and toxic manager topics

Take with a grain of slat...
Jul 30, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Narsissism

Gaslighting

Love bombing

Other dirty tricks:

[Jul 29, 2018] The maximizing shareholder value myth turns people into sociopath

That's questionable. But what is true is that neoliberal enterprise makes it easier to sociopath to climb the ladder
Notable quotes:
"... As I approach 40, having only realized in recent years that the constant soul-ache I've lived with my whole life is not some inherent flaw in my being, but a symptom of a deeply ill society, I desperately wish I could share in the glimmer of hope at the end of this post. ..."
"... We have been commodified since before we were even born, to the point where opportunities for what Lave and Wenger would call "legitimate peripheral participation" in the kinds of work that yield real, humane, benefits to our communities are scant to nonexistent for most of us. Something has gone deeply awry in this core social function at the worst possible time in human history. ..."
"... Neoliberalism, the economic policy that is private sector "free market" driven, giving the owners of capital free, unfettered reign. Created by libertarians like Fredrich von Hayek and Milton Friedman, they sold it to the nation but failed to mention that little peccadillo about how privatization of government would usher in economic fascism. ..."
"... "An extreme form of laissez-faire individualism that developed in the writings of Hayek, Friedman and Nozick they are also referred to as libertarians. They draw on the natural rights tradition of John Locke and champion's full autonomy and freedom of the individual." ..."
"... What they meant was ECONOMIC freedom. They despise social freedom (democracy) because civil, labor, health, food safety, etc., rights and environmental protections put limits on their profits. ..."
"... The "maximizing shareholder value" myth turns people into psychopaths . The entire neoliberal economic policy of the past 40 years is based on the false assumption that self-interest is the driving evolution of humanity. We're not all psychopaths, turns out. We're social beings that have mainly used cooperation to get us through these thousands of years of existence. ..."
"... "If the IMF is to shake its image as an inward-looking, out-of-touch boys club, it needs to start taking the issue seriously. The effect of the male dominance in macroeconomics can be seen in the policy direction of the organisation: female economists are more likely to be in favour of Government-backed redistribution measures than their male counterparts. ..."
"... Of course, the parochial way in which economics is perceived by the IMF, as nothing more than the application of mathematical models, is nothing new. In fact, this is how mainstream economics frequently is taught in universities all over the world. Is it any wonder that the IMF has turned out as it is?" ..."
"... "Economics students are forced to spend so much time with this complex calculus so that they can go to work on Wall St. that there's no room in the course curriculum for the history of economic thought. ..."
"... So all they know about Adam Smith is what they hear on CNN news or other mass media that are a travesty of what these people really said and if you don't read the history of economic thought, you'd think there's only one way of looking at the world and that's the way the mass media promote things and it's a propagandistic, Orwellian way. ..."
"... The whole economic vocabulary is to cover up what's really happening and to make people think that the economy is getting richer while the reality is they're getting poorer and only the top is getting richer and they can only get rich as long as the middle class and the working class don't realize the scam that's being pulled off on them." ..."
Jul 29, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

funemployed , July 26, 2018 at 12:19 pm

As I approach 40, having only realized in recent years that the constant soul-ache I've lived with my whole life is not some inherent flaw in my being, but a symptom of a deeply ill society, I desperately wish I could share in the glimmer of hope at the end of this post.

But I cannot. What drives me to despair is not the fragile, corrupt, and unsustainable social/political/economic system we're inheriting; nor is it the poisoned and increasingly harsh planet, nor the often silent epidemic of mental and emotional anguish that prevents so many of us from becoming our best selves. I retain great faith in the resilience and potential of the human spirit. And contrary to the stereotypes, I think my generation and those who have come after are often more intellectually and emotionally mature than our parents and grandparents. At the very least, we have a powerful sense of irony and highly tuned BS detectors.

What drives me to despair is so pathetically prosaic that I want to laugh and cry all at once as I type this. To put it as simply as I know how, a core function of all functional human societies is apprenticeship, by which I mean the basic process whereby deep knowledge and skills are transferred from the old to the young, where tensions between tradition and change are contested and resolved, and where the fundamental human need to develop a sense of oneself as a unique and valuable part of a community can flourish.

We have been commodified since before we were even born, to the point where opportunities for what Lave and Wenger would call "legitimate peripheral participation" in the kinds of work that yield real, humane, benefits to our communities are scant to nonexistent for most of us. Something has gone deeply awry in this core social function at the worst possible time in human history.

I was born with the 80s, and shortly thereafter I was deemed to be someone with unusually high potential. Had I been born a few decades earlier, I would have been snatched up in my teens or early 20s by persons and institutions, and offered long-term security and real opportunities to do real work in exchange for my commitment and efforts to carry on a legacy with deep roots and meaningful history.

But I was a child of the 80s, so what was I offered? Education, education, and more education, in exchange for the promise of, someday, a "good jawb." I was very good at this education, so I learned that the most valuable qualities a person can have are unquestioning deference, conformity, and the ability to produce nauseatingly superficial performances on demand by which I would be judged inferior or superior to my peers.

Eventually I got a good jawb (though somehow, someway, I was not only still quite poor, but a debt-slave too, primarily because I refused to enter professions that struck me as either quite obviously evil -- e.g. finance -- or were good but would occupy all of my time and energy and then some for at least a few decades -- e.g. medicine).

I dove into this jawb with much enthusiasm and ambition. My bosses and coworkers treated me like a rube for this. As I became saddled with more and more responsibilities outside of my job description, and which rightly belonged to people making more than triple my salary (and who frequently lacked very basic competencies in spite of their impressive looking resumes); as it slowly dawned on me that those in my field did not want to actually help people, but to convince others (i.e. people with money) that they were noble helpers while doing as little actual work as possible; and as I started feeling every day like the one person who doesn't get the joke, I became frustrated and, quite professionally, began to advocate for compensation and authority commensurate with the responsibilities I'd been given.

This was a mistake, apparently, because there is nothing more threatening to a complacent and incompetent gang of managerial types than someone who is both capable and knows their worth. So I was stuck in a metaphorical closet and condescended to at every opportunity. (There was one exception worth noting: the most capable person in the organization tried to take me under her wing, but she was quite old a relic of a previous generation, and died a few months into my tenure).

Still naïve and idealistic, rinsed and repeated in a few jobs, until I learned that real financial success in a field that didn't require me to work 80 hours a week 50-52 weeks a year required developing my ability to BS and take advantage of other people. Some quirk of my psychology means doing those things creates an irresistible urge in me to slowly poison myself with alcohol and tobacco.

So I took out more debt and got more education, so I could become an educator, of course. Too late, I learned that becoming an educator meant not only financial sacrifice, which I could bear (provided I not produce offspring, anyhow), but social condescension and about as much autonomy as an assembly line worker in a Tesla plant, which I could not bear. Indeed, few things invite institutional wrath in America more than attempts to grant a meaningful and empowering education to young people (i.e. one that values other things more than compliance and conformity).

So here I am, nearing 50, broke, broken, indebted, addicted, and alienated, writing an excessively long and tardy comment to the only place where I feel real community and comradeship, even when I only lurk. I'm good at several things, but I am not exceptional at any one thing of real social value. I have not spent my last decade and a half cutting my teeth in the nitty gritty and learning anything that makes me not expendable. I think many of us feel that way: expendable. Because we know we are, and those of us who are not are often among the most amoral, shallow, self-absorbed, and sycophantic of our generation.

As I've closely followed Ms. Ocasio-Cortez's remarkable rise, I keep thinking of another uniquely talented politician elected to the HOR at age 28: Lyndon Baines Johnson. Over the next 30 years of his life, he became the most brilliantly, ruthlessly effective politician of a generation. But how? Well, he had Sam Rayburn and Richard Russell, among others, to show him the ropes, watch his back, and enable his rise -- taking the risk that he would (as he did) eventually stab them in the back and take their power. How will AOC's experience compare? Whatever it is, she won't have people like Rayburn and Russell to guide her, because people like that no longer serve as our representatives (I know, they weren't great people, and Bernie is very skilled and experienced, and may mentor her, but his has been a career at the margins. Rayburn and Russell were among the most powerful people in the world for much of their adult lives.)

We live in an age where our very lives are based on extraordinarily fragile and complex systems. How can we truly reform those systems into something better without burning the house down? We don't know. Sure, many of us know in the abstract, but we, for the most part, lack the deep institutional knowledge of what is that would be necessary to not only build something better, but to keep the ship afloat during the transition.

In any case, no-one can truly predict the future, and humanity is nothing if not full of surprises. Yet hope, for me these days, seems a privilege of a bygone age.

Gayle, July 26, 2018 at 5:11 pm

"Some quirk of my psychology means doing those things creates an irresistible urge in me to slowly poison myself with alcohol and tobacco."

I think those things and drugs are conscience oblivators. Try gardening. Touch the earth. Grow actual food. Not hemp. Back away from the education racket.

Good luck. Quit the poison.

David May, July 26, 2018 at 5:16 pm

That was a wonderful post, very moving, thank you. These kind of testimonies are very important because they show the real human cost of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is truly a death cult. Please find an alternative to alcohol. Music, art, nature, etc.

ChiGal in Carolina, July 26, 2018 at 7:08 pm

Thank you for sharing your compelling story. As someone who could be your mother, it is painful to me not only that this is your experience, but that you are so acutely aware of it. No blinders. Hence, I guess, the need for alcohol.

You write beautifully. Hope is hard to come by sometimes.

ambrit, July 26, 2018 at 9:58 pm

At least you are self aware. Most people are not. As for the Ship of Status, let it sink. Find a lifeboat where you feel comfortable and batten down for the Roaring (20)40s yet to come. Once you find something to work for, the bad habits will lose much of their hold on you. As long as you don't slide into alcoholism, you have a chance.

Unfettered Fire , , July 26, 2018 at 12:25 pm

Life was kinder just 40 years ago, not perfect but way more mellow than it is today. Kids were listening to Peter Frampton and Stevie Wonder, not punk, grunge, rap and industrial music. What changed? Neoliberalism, the economic policy that is private sector "free market" driven, giving the owners of capital free, unfettered reign. Created by libertarians like Fredrich von Hayek and Milton Friedman, they sold it to the nation but failed to mention that little peccadillo about how privatization of government would usher in economic fascism.

"An extreme form of laissez-faire individualism that developed in the writings of Hayek, Friedman and Nozick they are also referred to as libertarians. They draw on the natural rights tradition of John Locke and champion's full autonomy and freedom of the individual."

What they meant was ECONOMIC freedom. They despise social freedom (democracy) because civil, labor, health, food safety, etc., rights and environmental protections put limits on their profits.

The "maximizing shareholder value" myth turns people into psychopaths . The entire neoliberal economic policy of the past 40 years is based on the false assumption that self-interest is the driving evolution of humanity. We're not all psychopaths, turns out. We're social beings that have mainly used cooperation to get us through these thousands of years of existence.

There's nothing wrong with wanting government to protect the public sector from predatory capitalists. Otherwise, society's value system turns upside down sick people are more valued than healthy violent are more valued to fill up the prison factories war becomes a permanent business a filthy, toxic planet is good for the oil industry a corporate governance with no respect for rights or environmental protections is the best capitalism can offer?

Thanks, but no thanks.

The easily manipulated right are getting the full assault. "Run for your lives! The democratic socialists want to use the government bank for everyone, not just the 1%!! They understand how the economy really works and see through our lies!! Before you know it, everyone will be enjoying a better quality of life! AAAAGHHH!!"

Even the IMF is getting a scolding for being so out-of-touch with reality. Isn't economics supposed to factor in conscience?

"If the IMF is to shake its image as an inward-looking, out-of-touch boys club, it needs to start taking the issue seriously. The effect of the male dominance in macroeconomics can be seen in the policy direction of the organisation: female economists are more likely to be in favour of Government-backed redistribution measures than their male counterparts.

Of course, the parochial way in which economics is perceived by the IMF, as nothing more than the application of mathematical models, is nothing new. In fact, this is how mainstream economics frequently is taught in universities all over the world. Is it any wonder that the IMF has turned out as it is?"

Michael Hudson, as usual, was right:

"Economics students are forced to spend so much time with this complex calculus so that they can go to work on Wall St. that there's no room in the course curriculum for the history of economic thought.

So all they know about Adam Smith is what they hear on CNN news or other mass media that are a travesty of what these people really said and if you don't read the history of economic thought, you'd think there's only one way of looking at the world and that's the way the mass media promote things and it's a propagandistic, Orwellian way.

The whole economic vocabulary is to cover up what's really happening and to make people think that the economy is getting richer while the reality is they're getting poorer and only the top is getting richer and they can only get rich as long as the middle class and the working class don't realize the scam that's being pulled off on them."

[Jul 23, 2018] Neoliberalism has brought out the worst in us by Paul Verhaeghe

Not only "An economic system that rewards psychopathic personality traits has changed our ethics and our personalities", it crushes the will to resist presenting psychopathic dictate in forms that make it difficult. Such as performance reviews waterboarding or putting individual in the way too complex and self-contradictory Web of regulations.
Notable quotes:
"... An economic system that rewards psychopathic personality traits has changed our ethics and our personalities. ..."
"... Bullying used to be confined to schools; now it is a common feature of the workplace. This is a typical symptom of the impotent venting their frustration on the weak – in psychology it's known as displaced aggression. There is a buried sense of fear, ranging from performance anxiety to a broader social fear of the threatening other. ..."
"... Constant evaluations at work cause a decline in autonomy and a growing dependence on external, often shifting, norms. This results in what the sociologist Richard Sennett has aptly described as the "infantilisation of the workers". Adults display childish outbursts of temper and are jealous about trivialities ("She got a new office chair and I didn't"), tell white lies, resort to deceit, delight in the downfall of others and cherish petty feelings of revenge. This is the consequence of a system that prevents people from thinking independently and that fails to treat employees as adults. ..."
"... Our society constantly proclaims that anyone can make it if they just try hard enough, all the while reinforcing privilege and putting increasing pressure on its overstretched and exhausted citizens. An increasing number of people fail, feeling humiliated, guilty and ashamed. We are forever told that we are freer to choose the course of our lives than ever before, but the freedom to choose outside the success narrative is limited. Furthermore, those who fail are deemed to be losers or scroungers, taking advantage of our social security system. ..."
"... The current economic system is bringing out the worst in us. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

An economic system that rewards psychopathic personality traits has changed our ethics and our personalities.

Thirty years of neoliberalism, free-market forces and privatisation have taken their toll, as relentless pressure to achieve has become normative. If you're reading this sceptically, I put this simple statement to you: meritocratic neoliberalism favours certain personality traits and penalises others.

There are certain ideal characteristics needed to make a career today. The first is articulateness, the aim being to win over as many people as possible. Contact can be superficial, but since this applies to most human interaction nowadays, this won't really be noticed.

It's important to be able to talk up your own capacities as much as you can – you know a lot of people, you've got plenty of experience under your belt and you recently completed a major project. Later, people will find out that this was mostly hot air, but the fact that they were initially fooled is down to another personality trait: you can lie convincingly and feel little guilt. That's why you never take responsibility for your own behaviour.

On top of all this, you are flexible and impulsive, always on the lookout for new stimuli and challenges. In practice, this leads to risky behaviour, but never mind, it won't be you who has to pick up the pieces. The source of inspiration for this list? The psychopathy checklist by Robert Hare , the best-known specialist on psychopathy today.

This description is, of course, a caricature taken to extremes. Nevertheless, the financial crisis illustrated at a macro-social level (for example, in the conflicts between eurozone countries) what a neoliberal meritocracy does to people. Solidarity becomes an expensive luxury and makes way for temporary alliances, the main preoccupation always being to extract more profit from the situation than your competition. Social ties with colleagues weaken, as does emotional commitment to the enterprise or organisation.

Bullying used to be confined to schools; now it is a common feature of the workplace. This is a typical symptom of the impotent venting their frustration on the weak – in psychology it's known as displaced aggression. There is a buried sense of fear, ranging from performance anxiety to a broader social fear of the threatening other.

Constant evaluations at work cause a decline in autonomy and a growing dependence on external, often shifting, norms. This results in what the sociologist Richard Sennett has aptly described as the "infantilisation of the workers". Adults display childish outbursts of temper and are jealous about trivialities ("She got a new office chair and I didn't"), tell white lies, resort to deceit, delight in the downfall of others and cherish petty feelings of revenge. This is the consequence of a system that prevents people from thinking independently and that fails to treat employees as adults.

More important, though, is the serious damage to people's self-respect. Self-respect largely depends on the recognition that we receive from the other, as thinkers from Hegel to Lacan have shown. Sennett comes to a similar conclusion when he sees the main question for employees these days as being "Who needs me?" For a growing group of people, the answer is: no one.

Our society constantly proclaims that anyone can make it if they just try hard enough, all the while reinforcing privilege and putting increasing pressure on its overstretched and exhausted citizens. An increasing number of people fail, feeling humiliated, guilty and ashamed. We are forever told that we are freer to choose the course of our lives than ever before, but the freedom to choose outside the success narrative is limited. Furthermore, those who fail are deemed to be losers or scroungers, taking advantage of our social security system.

A neoliberal meritocracy would have us believe that success depends on individual effort and talents, meaning responsibility lies entirely with the individual and authorities should give people as much freedom as possible to achieve this goal. For those who believe in the fairytale of unrestricted choice, self-government and self-management are the pre-eminent political messages, especially if they appear to promise freedom. Along with the idea of the perfectible individual, the freedom we perceive ourselves as having in the west is the greatest untruth of this day and age.

The sociologist Zygmunt Bauman neatly summarised the paradox of our era as: "Never have we been so free. Never have we felt so powerless." We are indeed freer than before, in the sense that we can criticise religion, take advantage of the new laissez-faire attitude to sex and support any political movement we like. We can do all these things because they no longer have any significance – freedom of this kind is prompted by indifference. Yet, on the other hand, our daily lives have become a constant battle against a bureaucracy that would make Kafka weak at the knees. There are regulations about everything, from the salt content of bread to urban poultry-keeping.

Our presumed freedom is tied to one central condition: we must be successful – that is, "make" something of ourselves. You don't need to look far for examples. A highly skilled individual who puts parenting before their career comes in for criticism. A person with a good job who turns down a promotion to invest more time in other things is seen as crazy – unless those other things ensure success. A young woman who wants to become a primary school teacher is told by her parents that she should start off by getting a master's degree in economics – a primary school teacher, whatever can she be thinking of?

There are constant laments about the so-called loss of norms and values in our culture. Yet our norms and values make up an integral and essential part of our identity. So they cannot be lost, only changed. And that is precisely what has happened: a changed economy reflects changed ethics and brings about changed identity. The current economic system is bringing out the worst in us.


tocq1 , 7 Aug 2014 22:21

Panic attacks, anxiety attacks, nervous breakdowns, depression, suicidal thoughts alienation, cancers, withdrawal are all symptoms of the de-humanizing aspects of a market-driven life. In its worst forms it manifests periodically in mass shootings at strangers. So what do people do to cope? Drugs, pain killers, shrinks, alcohol, potato chips and soda. They then develop obesity, diabetes and heart diseases and cancers. How to save a human species terminally intoxicated with technology and enslaved by the market while the inner spirit is running empty may not be possible given the advanced nature of the disease.
Gary Walker -> NotForTurning , 7 Aug 2014 19:59
...what?
You fail to really acknowledge that time and again we've failed to exercise constrain within the capitalist models. The the meritorious are often inadequately rewarded - when any person in work cannot afford to home and feed themselves and their family then a reasonable balance has not been struck - in that sense at no time in history has capitalism functioned adequately.
To suggest that socialism is anti-human is to ignore how and why as a species we formed societies at all, we come together precisely because there is a mutual benefit in so doing; to help another is to help oneself - the model itself fails to operate in practice for the same reason that capitalism does - the greed of the power holder.

You reserve your sharpest barbs for socialism, but at least within the socialist agenda there is a commitment to the protection of the citizen, whoever they are, even the 'unmerited' as you describe them - a capitalist's paraphrase for 'those that create no value'.

The socialist at least recognises that whilst the parent may be 'unmerited' their dependants should be entitled to receive equality of opportunity and protection from the 'law-of-the-jungle' i.e., the greed of others.

The ability to generate wealth, simply by already having wealth and therefore being able to thrive off the labour of others carries little merit as far as I can tell and does indeed create the soul-crushing command-and-control empires of the capitalism that millions around the world experience daily.

zii000 , 7 Aug 2014 18:25
Neoliberalism is indeed a huge self-serving con and ironically the Thatcher/Regan doctrine which set out to break the status quo and free the economy from the old elitist guard has had exactly the opposite effect.
camllin , 7 Aug 2014 17:58
Capitalism cannot differentiate between honest competition and cheating. Since humans will cheat to win, capitalism has become survival of the worst not the best.
TheBBG , 7 Aug 2014 17:51
The bottom line is the basic human condition prizes food, shelter, sex, and then goes directly to greed in most modern societies. It was not always that way, and is not that way in ever fewer societies. As it is, greed makes the world go around.

In capitalistic societies greed has been fed by business and commerce; in communist societies it has been "some pigs are more equal then others"; and in dictatorships or true monarchies (or the Australian Liberal Party) there is the born to rule mentality where there are rulers and serfs.

Jon Allan , 7 Aug 2014 17:44
Nobody ever seems to address the paradox of the notion of an absolute free market: that within a free market, those who can have the freedom to exploit do exploit, thereby thus eliminating the freedom of the exploited, which thence paradoxically negates the absoluteness of the free market. No absolute freedom truly exist in a free market.

As such, the free market is pipe dream - a con - to eliminate regulations and create economic freedoms only where they benefit the elite. The free market does not exist, is impossible, and therefore should cease to be held as the harbinger of a progressive socio economic reality.

If we are to accept the Christian assumption that we, humans, are all self-serving and acquisitive, then we must, therefore, negate the possibility of an absolutely "free" market, since exploitation is a naturally occurring byproduct of weak-strong interactions. Exploitation negates freedom, and therefore, it must be our reality, as it is in all peoples' best interests, to accept directly democratic regulations as the keystone to any market.

Colin Bennett , 7 Aug 2014 17:06
It sounds very like the Marxist critique of capital. And similarly, points to real problems, but doesn't seek evidence for why such a sick situation not only persists, but is so popular - except by denigrating 'the masses'.

Surely what is particular about our time, about industrialisation generally, is the fragmenting of long term social structures, and orientation around the individual alone. It seems to me the problem of our times is redeveloping social structures which balance the individual and the socials selves, as all not merely stable but thriving happy creative societies, have always done.

pinkrobbo -> Jim Greer , 7 Aug 2014 16:06
Their propaganda is the same- an obsessive hatred of the state in any form, a semi-religious belief in the power of the individual operating in the free-market to solve humanity's ills.

Granted, they aren't social libertarians, but then, in the US, libertarians don't seem to be either.

makingtime -> YoungPete , 7 Aug 2014 13:28

Pretty typical that the assumption is the Marx "nailed it" and any dissenters are just "scared".


I'm scared by it too, as I said, it's a sensible fear of change. The question remains. What if Marx's analysis, just the analysis, is broadly correct? What if markets really are the road to ruination of our planet, morality and collective welfare in roughly the way that he explained?

It's not a trivial question, and clearly the current economic orthodoxy has failed to explain some recent little problems we've been having, while Marx explains how these problems are structurally embedded and only to be expected. It is intellectual cowardice to compulsively avoid this, in my view. Better minds than ours have struggled with it.

So beware of the fallacious argument from authority - 'You are stupid while I am axiomatically very clever, because I say so, hence I must be correct and you must shut it.' It goes nowhere useful, though we are all prone to employing it.

But it is not 'sixth form' thinking, surely, to consider these problems as being worth thinking about in a modern context. It is a plain fact that Stalinism didn't work as planned. We know it, but it doesn't make the problems it was intended to solve disappear to say so.

If you believe human nature can be changed by enforcing your interpretation of Marx's road to human freedom (a quasi-religious goal) you condemn millions to starvation, slaughter, gulags, misery etc.


Please read what I actually wrote about that. I'm not remotely quasi-religious, nor do I seek to enforce anything. My intention is only to expose a particularly damaging mythology. The extent of my crimes is persuasion as a prelude to consensual change before necessity really bites us all.

Markets conjure up the exact forms of misery you describe. Totalitarians of the right are highly undesirable too. I am against totalitarians, as are you, but an admirer of Marx's work. Do I fit into your simplistic categories? Does anyone? The freedoms we are permitted serve the market before they serve people. Markets are a social construct, as is capital, that we can choose to modify or squash. A child starving in a slum for lack of competitiveness, for its inability to serve the interests of capital, is less abstract perhaps.

Richard McDonough , 7 Aug 2014 13:20
Clintons are neoliberalss and about to be embraced by the neocons in foreign policy.
Reagan lives in a pan suit.
Serpentsarecreeps , 7 Aug 2014 12:15
The thing about selfishness and a brutal form of dog eat dog capitalism.

You see, it is a truth axiomatic that we human beings, as all living beings, are fundamentally selfish. We have to be in order to survive, and excel, and advance and perpetuate.

It is not theory but hard biology. You breathe for yourself, eat for yourself, love for yourself, have a family for yourself and so on. People are most affected and hurt if something happens to something or someone who means something to them personally. This is why concepts such as religion and nationality have worked so well, and will continue to even if they evolve in different ways, for they tap into a person's conception of theirself. Of their identity, of their self-definition. People tend to feel worse if something bad happens to someone they know than to a stranger; people tend to feel less bad when something happens to a cockroach than to a dog, simply because we relate better to dogs than to insects...So even our compassion is selfish after a fashion.

Capitalism and Socialism are two ends of the the same human spectrum of innate and hardwired selfishness. One stresses on the individual and the other on the larger group. It's always going to be hard to find the right balance because when you vest excessive power in any selfish ideology, it will begin to eat into the other type of selfishness..

The world revolves around competing selfishnesses...

yourmiddleclassfarce , 7 Aug 2014 11:46
The global economy is based upon wasting lives and material resources.

Designer landfill is no longer an option and neo-liberalism, which places importance of the invention called money over that of people (which is a dehumanising process), was never an option.

It is time for the neo-liberal fake politicians (that is 99.99% of them) to take up politics.

It really is, as ever since it is only another word for change, time for revolution.

Serpentsarecreeps , 7 Aug 2014 11:34
Excellent article by one of my favourite writers on this site! :)
steverandomno -> richterscalemadness , 7 Aug 2014 11:32

By extension, moving away from a system the shuns those who 'fail' people would be emotionally better off, and with the removal of the constant assessment and individualistic competition, people may feel better able to relate to one another. This would imply that healthy communities would be more likely to flourish, as people would be less likely to ignore those on lower income or of 'lower status'.

Move to what system? What system would achieve this?

Whether you agree or not, it is pretty clear what was being said.

Of course it's clear. George and his followers dislike market based systems. It couldn't be clearer. Even when the subject has little to do with the market, George and his followers always blame it for everything that is wrong with this world. That's pretty much the whole point of this article.

What's never clear is what alternative George and his followers propose that wouldn't result in all of the same flaws that accompany market driven systems. How can they be so sure some of those problems won't be worse? They always seem a bit sketchy, which is remarkable given the furor with which they relentlessly critique the market. We are told of alternatives concepts painted in the broadest of brushes, rich with abstract intangible idealism, but lacking in any pragmatism. We are invited to consider the whole exercise simply as academically self-indulgent navel gazing by the priviledged overeducated minority that comprise much of the Guardian's readership. It's quite disappointing. This article correctly details much of the discontent in the world. But this isn't a revelation. Where are the concrete ideas that can actualy be implemented now?
frontalcortexes at least makes a stab at something a bit more practicle than a 17 paragraph esoteric essay citing ancient Greek.

LastNameOnTheShelf , 7 Aug 2014 11:27
One of the worst thing is that the winners in the market race are showered with things which are fundamentally valueless and far in excess of what they could consume if they weren't, while bare necessities are withheld from the losers.
fractals -> Guardiansofwhatnow , 7 Aug 2014 11:12
of course, the nature of 'the market' means that all of our ipads and television sets will be obsolete within a year or 2.

[Jul 23, 2018] Sick of this market-driven world You should be George Monbiot Opinion The Guardian

Notable quotes:
"... The workplace has been overwhelmed by a mad, Kafkaesque infrastructure of assessments, monitoring, measuring, surveillance and audits, centrally directed and rigidly planned, whose purpose is to reward the winners and punish the losers ..."
"... The same forces afflict those who can't find work. They must now contend, alongside the other humiliations of unemployment, with a whole new level of snooping and monitoring. All this, Verhaeghe points out, is fundamental to the neoliberal model, which everywhere insists on comparison, evaluation and quantification. We find ourselves technically free but powerless. Whether in work or out of work, we must live by the same rules or perish. All the major political parties promote them, so we have no political power either. In the name of autonomy and freedom we have ended up controlled by a grinding, faceless bureaucracy. ..."
Jul 23, 2018 | www.theguardian.com

I was prompted to write it by a remarkable book, just published in English, by a Belgian professor of psychoanalysis, Paul Verhaeghe. What About Me? The Struggle for Identity in a Market-Based Society is one of those books that, by making connections between apparently distinct phenomena, permits sudden new insights into what is happening to us and why.

We are social animals, Verhaeghe argues, and our identities are shaped by the norms and values we absorb from other people. Every society defines and shapes its own normality – and its own abnormality – according to dominant narratives, and seeks either to make people comply or to exclude them if they don't.

Today the dominant narrative is that of market fundamentalism, widely known in Europe as neoliberalism. The story it tells is that the market can resolve almost all social, economic and political problems. The less the state regulates and taxes us, the better off we will be. Public services should be privatised, public spending should be cut, and business should be freed from social control. In countries such as the UK and the US, this story has shaped our norms and values for around 35 years: since Thatcher and Reagan came to power. It is rapidly colonising the rest of the world.

Verhaeghe points out that neoliberalism draws on the ancient Greek idea that our ethics are innate (and governed by a state of nature it calls the market) and on the Christian idea that humankind is inherently selfish and acquisitive. Rather than seeking to suppress these characteristics, neoliberalism celebrates them: it claims that unrestricted competition, driven by self-interest, leads to innovation and economic growth, enhancing the welfare of all.

At the heart of this story is the notion of merit. Untrammelled competition rewards people who have talent, work hard, and innovate. It breaks down hierarchies and creates a world of opportunity and mobility.

The reality is rather different. Even at the beginning of the process, when markets are first deregulated, we do not start with equal opportunities. Some people are a long way down the track before the starting gun is fired. This is how the Russian oligarchs managed to acquire such wealth when the Soviet Union broke up. They weren't, on the whole, the most talented, hardworking or innovative people, but those with the fewest scruples, the most thugs, and the best contacts – often in the KGB.

Even when outcomes are based on talent and hard work, they don't stay that way for long. Once the first generation of liberated entrepreneurs has made its money, the initial meritocracy is replaced by a new elite, which insulates its children from competition by inheritance and the best education money can buy. Where market fundamentalism has been most fiercely applied – in countries like the US and UK – social mobility has greatly declined .

If neoliberalism was anything other than a self-serving con, whose gurus and thinktanks were financed from the beginning by some of the world's richest people (the US multimillionaires Coors, Olin, Scaife, Pew and others), its apostles would have demanded, as a precondition for a society based on merit, that no one should start life with the unfair advantage of inherited wealth or economically determined education. But they never believed in their own doctrine. Enterprise, as a result, quickly gave way to rent.

All this is ignored, and success or failure in the market economy are ascribed solely to the efforts of the individual. The rich are the new righteous; the poor are the new deviants, who have failed both economically and morally and are now classified as social parasites.

The market was meant to emancipate us, offering autonomy and freedom. Instead it has delivered atomisation and loneliness.

The workplace has been overwhelmed by a mad, Kafkaesque infrastructure of assessments, monitoring, measuring, surveillance and audits, centrally directed and rigidly planned, whose purpose is to reward the winners and punish the losers . It destroys autonomy, enterprise, innovation and loyalty, and breeds frustration, envy and fear. Through a magnificent paradox, it has led to the revival of a grand old Soviet tradition known in Russian as tufta . It means falsification of statistics to meet the diktats of unaccountable power.

The same forces afflict those who can't find work. They must now contend, alongside the other humiliations of unemployment, with a whole new level of snooping and monitoring. All this, Verhaeghe points out, is fundamental to the neoliberal model, which everywhere insists on comparison, evaluation and quantification. We find ourselves technically free but powerless. Whether in work or out of work, we must live by the same rules or perish. All the major political parties promote them, so we have no political power either. In the name of autonomy and freedom we have ended up controlled by a grinding, faceless bureaucracy.

These shifts have been accompanied, Verhaeghe writes, by a spectacular rise in certain psychiatric conditions: self-harm, eating disorders, depression and personality disorders.

Of the personality disorders, the most common are performance anxiety and social phobia: both of which reflect a fear of other people, who are perceived as both evaluators and competitors – the only roles for society that market fundamentalism admits. Depression and loneliness plague us.

The infantilising diktats of the workplace destroy our self-respect. Those who end up at the bottom of the pile are assailed by guilt and shame. The self-attribution fallacy cuts both ways: just as we congratulate ourselves for our success, we blame ourselves for our failure, even if we have little to do with it .

So, if you don't fit in, if you feel at odds with the world, if your identity is troubled and frayed, if you feel lost and ashamed – it could be because you have retained the human values you were supposed to have discarded. You are a deviant. Be proud.

[Jul 22, 2018] We Prefer Our Sociopaths Well Dressed and Spoken

Jul 22, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

A confidence game depends upon artificially induced confidence to elicit consent from the conned. And the consent is almost always gained by convincing the conned they will receive an unearned gain in exchange for their consent. In other words, the con plays off the conned person's greed and vice.

Other more complicated cons (such as those played by the sociopath powers that be) may introduce fear and anger into the equation. Regardless of the leverage applied, the conned plays an integral part in the con. While we helpfully label the conned as an ego soothing victim of a crime , the word ' victim' begs the question of what exactly is a victim if the victim played into, and along with, the overall con.

Maybe we should say we were seduced. You know, change the name to make it more palatable. It sounds so much better thinking we were compelled beyond our control by an irresistible force to give our consent.

There is an implicit and (usually) unspoken agreement between those running the con and those taken by the con which promises the conned will be rewarded for his, her or their participation. And the word rewarded doesn't necessarily mean receiving a gain. The reward could actually mitigate or remove an already expected or threatened loss, real or imaginary.

If we were to give those last few sentences some deeper thought, the reader might begin to understand how governments, multinational corporations and even so-called nonprofit organizations, controlled by a few key sociopaths, manipulate our artificially inflated fears along with our dreams (aka the carrot and the stick) to induce consent, or at least no resistance, to their destructive (and profitable) socioeconomic policies.


implicitsimplicit -> Cognitive Dissonance Sun, 07/22/2018 - 10:57 Permalink

Enjoyed the article. When someone expresses thoughts that I agree with so readily, I try to find things that I would make clearer for me. It is almost like if someone thinks exactly like me, I look for differences that declare my own individuality.

It is difficult to explain the way you think and feel about the world, and I appreciate your efforts. My nature is to fight back against it all, arduous task as I get older. It is a lot easier to say to yourself that you just don't care anymore.

""Life is crazy, people are strange, locked in tight but I'm out of range, I used to care, but things have changed."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwrHU2yyC-c

Winston Churchill -> tion Sun, 07/22/2018 - 11:40 Permalink

You must be blind to not see that sociopathy, not wealth, has trickled down from the top.

Same as it ever was, but its normally cloaked with words like immorality when describing the Fall of

Empires,none dare call it what it truly is.

Urban Roman -> Cognitive Dissonance Sun, 07/22/2018 - 12:01 Permalink

As Gloria Steinem used to say, "The truth shall set you free. But first, it will piss you off."

Cog, I have tried to say what you said, in other fora, and it's always met with gasps of disbelief. I tell them "So, you're saying you just don't like his management style, because you didn't complain about Obama's lies, war crimes, corruption, etc." usually in reply to someone's comment that the president is stipid, crazy, and/or generally wrong... I may bookmark this for future reference on such occasions.

Here we are in the future. Now where did I leave my rocket belt?

[Jul 18, 2018] Psychoanalysing NATO Gaslighting Zero Hedge

Jul 18, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Patrick Armstrong via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

NOTE: Because "NATO" these days is little more than a box of spare parts out of which Washington assembles "coalitions of the willing" , it's easier for me to write "NATO" than "Washington plus/minus these or those minions".

Home Secretary Sajid Javid has called on Russia to explain "exactly what has gone on" after two people were exposed to the Novichok nerve agent in Wiltshire. ( BBC )

The Russian state could put this wrong right. They could tell us what happened. What they did. And fill in some of the significant gaps that we are trying to pursue. We have said they can come and tell us what happened. I'm waiting for the phone call from the Russian state. The offer is there. They are the ones who could fill in all the clues to keep people safe. ( UK security minister Ben Wallace )

Leaving aside their egregious flouting of the elemental principle of English justice, note that they're uttering this logical idiocy: Russia must have done it because it hasn't proved it didn't . Note also, in Javid's speech, the amusing suggestion that Russia keeps changing its story; but to fit into the official British story "novichok" must be an instantly lethal slow acting poison which dissipates quickly but lasts for months .

This is an attempt to manipulate our perception of reality . In a previous essay I discussed NATO's projection of its own actions onto Russia. In this piece I want to discuss another psychological manipulation – gaslighting .

The expression comes from the movie Gaslight in which the villain manipulates her reality to convince his wife that she is insane. Doubt the official Skripal story and it is you – you "Russian troll" – who is imagining things. Only Russian trolls would question Litvinenko's deathbed accusation written in perfect English handed to us by a Berezovskiy flunky; or the shootdown of MH17; or the invasion of Ukraine; or the cyber attack on Estonia. Only a Russian troll would observe that the fabulously expensive NATO intelligence agencies apparently get their information from Bellingcat. Argumentum ad trollem is everywhere: count the troll accusations here or admire the clever anticipatory use of the technique there .

This is classic gaslighting – I'm telling the truth, you're the crazy one.

We may illustrate the eleven signs of "gaslighting" given in Psychiatry Today by Stephanie A. Sarkis with recent events.

They tell blatant lies.

The Skripals were poisoned by an incredibly deadly nerve agent that left them with no visible symptoms for hours but not so deadly that it killed them; at least not at Easter; nor the policeman; a nerve agent that could only have been made in Russia although its recipe was published in the open media ; that poison having been administered on a doorknob that each had to have touched at the exact same minute that no one else touched; a nerve agent so deadly that they only bothered to clean up the sites 51 days later. And so on: a different story every day. But your mind must be controlled by Putin if you smell a falsehood at any point. And, now we have it all over again: apparently the fiendishly clever Russian assassins smeared the doorknob and then, rather than getting out of town ASAP, sauntered over into a park to toss the container . (Remember the fiendishly clever Russian assassins who spread polonium everywhere?)

And, speaking of proven, long term, repeating liars: remember when accusing the British government of complicity in torture renditions was a conspiracy theory ? Well, it turns out the conspiracy was by the other side . "Conspiracy Theorist" is the perfect gaslighting accusation, by the way: you're the crazy one.

They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.

The Skripal case gives a perfect illustration: here's the UK Foreign Secretary saying Porton Down told him it was Russian ("absolutely categorical" ) And here's the UK Foreign Office disappearing the statement: We never said Porton Down confirmed the origin. It's rare to get such a quick exposure of a lie, so it's useful to have this example. Here is an obvious fake from Bellingcat . Already the Douma story is being re-polished now that the OPCW has said no organophosphates .

Most of the time it takes years to reveal the lie: gaslighters know the details will be forgotten while the impression remains. 64 years later we learn the "conspiracy theorists" were right about the CIA/UK involvement in the Iran coup . It's rather amazing how many people still believe the proven liars this time around.

They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.

Russians cheat at the sports you follow, scatter nerve agents and radioactive material in places you could be in, sneak into the voting booth with you, blow up airplanes you might be on and tear up the " very fabric of our democracy ." Your favourite actor tells you " we are at war with Russia ".

And the children! The boy on the beach . The boy in the ambulance . Bana from Aleppo . Miraculous recoveries . Dramatic rescues with camera! Dead children speaking . And finally, the little girl, Trump and the Time cover .

If it's a child, they're gaslighting you.

They wear you down over time.

Skripal story fading? How about a CW attack in Syria? No? Back to MH17: same story with one new obviously suspicious detail . Pussy Riot is forgotten and Pavlenskiy an embarrassment , but " Russian bear in Moscow World Cup parade video sparks PETA outrage "! This is what is known as a Gish Gallop : the gaslighter makes 47 assertions, while you're thinking about the first, he makes 20 more: in former times it was recognised by the the folk saying that "a fool can ask more questions than ten wise men can answer". But the fools quickly come up with more: dead dogs in Russia: without tuk-tuks , with tuk-tuks ; your choice.

You are worn down by ten new fake outrages every month: all expressed in simplistic terms. How much context is stuffed into this imbecilic headline? The Plot Against Europe: Putin, Hungary and Russia's New Iron Curtain . How many thousand words, how many hours to discuss it intelligently? Too late! Time for " Trump and Putin's Too-Friendly Summit " (NYT 28 June). Forget that! " Sexism at Russia World Cup the worst in history as female fans and broadcasters are harassed ". (Telegraph 30 June). Gone! " We already gave Syria to Putin, so what's left for Trump to say? " (WaPo 5 July) Stop wondering! " Amesbury poisoning: Here's what we know about the novichok victims " (Sky News 6 July). No! Trumputin again! " Will Trump Be Meeting With His Counterpart -- Or His Handler? " (NY Mag 8 July). Gish Gallop. The sheer volume of easily-made accusations forces two conclusions: they're right and you're wrong (smoke: fire) or, more simply, eventually you – you crazy one! – give up.

Their actions do not match their words.

They bomb hospitals on purpose , we bomb them by accident . Discussed further here but the essence of the point is that

it would be physically impossible for Russia to be more destructive than NATO is.

If you want a single word to summarize American war-making in this last decade and a half, I would suggest rubble.

They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.

There are direct rewards of course: cue Udo Ulfkotte ; many benefits to swimming with the stream; swimming the other way, not so many. It's only after they retire that British generals question the story, the cynic observes. German generals too . Maybe even US generals .

But for the rest of us, NATO bathes us in gush: "NATO's Enduring Mission – Defending Values, Together" . Together , our values: we – you and I – have the good values. NATO loves to praise itself " the Alliance also contributes to peace and stability through crisis management operations and partnerships. " Remember Libya? " A model intervention " said the NATO GenSek of the time. Here is the view on the ground . Most of the "migrants" tearing Europe apart are fleeing the destruction of NATO's wars. NATO backs (plus/minus minions) the intervention in Mali , a country destabilised by its destruction of Libya. Cue the positive reinforcement: " Projecting Stability: an agenda for action ". In NATOland the gaslight burns bright: " Nato chief: Vladimir Putin 'weaponising' refugee crisis to 'break' Europe ". NATO keeps pouring butterscotch sauce on the rubble: " NATO is based on some core values – democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty " (25 June).

All I can say, over and over again, is Libya . NATO destroyed Libya, weird as it was, killed Qaddafi, weird as he was, and smugly congratulated itself: " NATO's Victory in Libya: The Right Way to Run an Intervention ". Ubi solitudinum faciunt pacem appelant. But should that thought occur to you, you're part of " Russia's secret plan to destroy EU and NATO ".

They know confusion weakens people.

Remember PropOrNot ? Sites that do not agree with the Establishment are Russian bots! Authenticated experts! 100% reliable! The WaPo published the list; when under attack even from proponents of the Putindunnit hysteria , it feebly backtracked: it "does not itself vouch for the validity". Vermont power grid hack? WaPo fell for that one too . Confusion from the endless Gish Gallop about Putin: in December 2015 I compiled a number: Aspergers, pychopath, slouching and on and on and on .

You may be confused but the gaslighter isn't: Russia's to blame for whatever-it-was!

They project.

NATO projects all the time and this headline from the NYT is classic: " Russia's Military Drills Near NATO Border Raise Fears of Aggression ". I discuss NATO's projection here .

They try to align people against you.

NATO exerts a continual pressure for unanimity. Again, the Skripal story is a good example: London accused Russia and, " in solidarity ", Russian diplomats were expelled all over the world. Allies took its word for it. Now the doubts: in Germany especially . Sanctions must be imposed on Russia because we must be in solidarity with Kiev. "Solidarity" on migrants . " Solidarity " is perhaps the greatest virtue in NATOland. We will hear more pleas for solidarity as NATO dies : when mere "solidarity" is the only reason left; there's no reason left.

They tell you or others that you are crazy.

It also must be said that when elected officials -- including members of Congress -- and media platforms amplify propaganda disseminated by Russian trolls, they are aiding the Russians in their efforts.

The goal is to undermine democracy. So you want America to look unstable and Americans not to trust each other.

How Russian Trolls Won American Hearts andMinds

An " existential threat posed by digitally accelerated disinformation ". So no forgiveness to you, crazy Putin trolls. And don't dare doubt that American democracy is so feeble that it can be directed by a few Facebook ads. Never forget that NATO's opponents are crazy: Putin is a " madman "; Qaddafi was " crazy "; Saddam Hussein " insane "; Milosevic " rabid ". Only crazy people would defend crazy people.

They tell you everyone else is a liar.

Honest people don't have to tell you they're trustworthy, and neither, once upon a time, did the BBC . The Atlantic Council smoothly moves from " Why Is the Kremlin So Fixated on Phantom Fascists? " in May 2017 to " Ukraine's Got a Real Problem with Far-Right Violence (And No, RT Didn't Write This Headline) " in June 2018. But it still calls Russia the liar: " Why the Kremlin's Lies Stick " (May 2018). The Atlantic Council hopes you're dumb enough not to notice that Russia hasn't changed its line but the gaslighters have. (Remember O'Brien and two plus two?)

Russian Federation is not the USSR.

I said it the last time: the USSR did lots of things in its time – influencing, fiddling elections, fake news, gaslighting and so on. But, in those days the Communist Party was the " leading and guiding force " but today it's the opposition . Things have changed in Moscow, but NATO rolls on.

Some hope, though.

While many people are still taken in by the gaslighters, there are hopeful signs. Once upon a time Internet versions of the mass media allowed comments. Gradually, one by one, they shut down their comments sections because of "trolls", "fake news" and offended "standards" but really because of disagreement. Perhaps the most famous case is that of the Guardian: an entire website , has been created by people whose comments were rejected because they violated "community standards". I always read the comments in the Daily Mail, especially the best rated, and on the Skripal stories, the comments are very sceptical indeed of the official story. For example .

This is rather encouraging: for gaslighting really to work, the gaslighter either has to be in such a position of power that he can completely control the victim's surroundings or in such a position of authority that the victim cannot imagine doubting what he says. Those days are gone.

[Jul 17, 2018] Doesn't the Universe work in such a way that *good* is constitutionally unable to successfully confront *evil*

Notable quotes:
"... Still, doesn't the Universe work in such a way that *good* is constitutionally unable to successfully confront *evil*? Doesn't evil-fighting-evil and destroying a worse-evil leave a little less evil in this world? ..."
Jul 17, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Circe | Jul 17, 2018 6:25:12 PM | 135

...You can't put lipstick on an American fascist pig only because he pretends detente with Russia. It's tantamount to selling one's soul for an illusion. It's tantamount to treason if you live anywhere except in the U.S. OR Israel! And even if you live in the U.S. you are enabling the 1% and Zionist power.

That's it. I'm tired of Trumpgod can do no wrong when everything he stands for is wrong. Get the snow out of your eyes!

Guerrero | Jul 17, 2018 7:21:47 PM | 149

Circe @135

For sure I am in agreement: the "Trumpgod" is a shamanistic construction of a demoralized population.

Still, doesn't the Universe work in such a way that *good* is constitutionally unable to successfully confront *evil*? Doesn't evil-fighting-evil and destroying a worse-evil leave a little less evil in this world?

If that is how this Universe really works, and one has only force to work with, in the material realm, Donald Trump would seem well enough suited to the role of either lesser or greater-evil; either-way, hopefully leading-to dimunition of error, self-deception, and suffering of the children of Eve and Adam.

Activist Potato , Jul 17, 2018 9:13:30 PM | 164

@149 Guerrero said: "Still, doesn't the Universe work in such a way that *good* is constitutionally unable to successfully
confront *evil*?"

Not often one sees metaphysics enter the realm of geo-political debate in this or any political forum. But, heck, why not? The unseen forces guiding the survival instincts of the universe (of which the Earth is a part) may indeed be at work. Trump - whatever one sees in him - seems to be the man for the times. Paradigms are bending, cracking, the conversation is changing.

I'll never forget the shock in the MSM, almost to the point of stupefaction, at Trump accusing Obama during the election campaign of being the "founder of ISIS."

What was even more amazing was how weak Obama's response was. I don't think anybody posting here would disagree that ISIS was Obama's baby - whether through adoption or progeny.

But what serious candidate for President before Trump would ever say such a thing publicly - even if he knew it to be true? Whether by design or through blundering, boorish idiocy born of whatever flaws and motives you want to ascribe to him, Trump is very boisterously upsetting the political apple cart and with it the entire world order.

If it is indeed for show as the world elites close their grip on the people of the planet - it is quite a show. But I don't think so...

[Jul 09, 2018] Most people are both repelled and intrigued by the images of cold-blooded, conscienceless murderers that increasingly populate our movies, television programs, and newspaper headlines.

Jul 09, 2018 | www.guilford.com

[Jul 06, 2018] Pathological liars and a diplomacy lesson from a school principal

Notable quotes:
"... Instead she suggested pointing out that "Little Donald tends to draw the line between Fact and Fantasy in a Different Place that you and I might." ..."
Jul 06, 2018 | www.nytimes.com

Upwising

Empire of Debt and Illusions July 1

As a teacher I once had a 4th grader who was an inveterate liar. One could never believe a word that came out of his mouth yet the Principal, ever the Diplomat and Mistress of Understatement, counseled against referring to the child as a Pathological Liar during parent conferences (even though it was true, she agreed).

Instead she suggested pointing out that "Little Donald tends to draw the line between Fact and Fantasy in a Different Place that you and I might."

[Jul 06, 2018] Capitalism doesn't induce psychopathy, but it has tendency to select psychopaths for higher levels of hierarchy

That's a difference with landed aristocracy...
Jul 06, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

UPDATE "How Wealth Reduces Compassion" [ Scientific American ].

"Who is more likely to lie, cheat, and steal -- the poor person or the rich one? It's temping to think that the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to act fairly. After all, if you already have enough for yourself, it's easier to think about what others may need. But research suggests the opposite is true: as people climb the social ladder, their compassionate feelings towards other people decline ."

• This is a review of the literature from 2012 ( 2016 ; 2017 ; 2018 ).

My question is this: Will something like "Capital-Induced Empathy Deficit" go into the next version of "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" ? If not, why not?


WobblyTelomeres , July 5, 2018 at 2:28 pm

Re: "Capital-Induced Empathy Deficit"

Capital doesn't induce psychopathy, it selects for it. There is a difference.

False Solace , July 5, 2018 at 3:48 pm

There's tons of research that demonstrates when people gain high status they lose empathy for people of low status. In our society, having lots of capital also grants lots of status, so calling it "capital-induced" is accurate. Being a sociopath to start with is just a bonus.

Jeremy Grimm , July 5, 2018 at 5:43 pm

I hope that ton of research contains a more convincing demonstration than the candy experiment.

Richard , July 5, 2018 at 7:25 pm

Not sure what the candy experiment was, but I believe there have been studies showing a correlation between income/class and how likely someone was to pick up on social cues related to empathy (face or body showing distress or need). I now want to go look this up!

I suppose I'm less skeptical about this, or have a touch of confirmation bias, because well why wouldn't I be? Like every other human I've seen or heard from countless millionaires and billionaires. It's almost like they surround me with their ideas, values and aethetic on purpose! So all day long they preen, ponder, whine, pontificate and PRETEND in front of me. The quite natural result? I know a lot more about them than they know about me. And I wouldn't be surprised in the least if full access to the cash spigot turned off your empathy
But luckily for them, there's an easy way to win it back.

OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL , July 5, 2018 at 9:00 pm

Best laugh of my day, by far:

the enlightened self-interest of the billionaire class"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
+100

stop it yer killin' me

WobblyTelomeres , July 5, 2018 at 9:53 pm

When/If I ever encounter a peer-reviewed study showing the percentage of psychopaths in the population of $10M+ lottery winners is significantly greater than the percentage of psychopaths in, say, a run-of-the-mill southern baptist congregation, then I might believe you. Short of that, I suspect that psychopathy is, to some degree, inheritable which reinforces my assertion.

[Jun 27, 2018] Holmes, Uncle Clunk, and and Epic Con Job, by Fred Reed - The Unz Review

Notable quotes:
"... Wall Street Journal. ..."
Jun 27, 2018 | www.unz.com

OK, book report time. I have just finished reading Bad Blood , by John Carreyrou of the Wall Street Journal. Good read, fascinating story. It is the saga of Elizabeth Holmes, founder of Theranos, the miraculous blood-testing company of Silicon Valley. Holmes, formerly said to be worth $4.5 billion, ended up under criminal indictment for fraud as of 2015. I suppose many have heard vaguely of Theranos, as I had, but the actual story is astonishing.

Holmes, 19, drops out of Stanford to start a medical-instrumentation company. She is very smart, very driven, very self-confident, very glib, very cold-blooded, very manipulative, very willing to take risks, very pretty, and very ruthless. Everything about her is very. If the foregoing resembles the clinical description of a psychopath, there is a reason.

She also knows almost nothing of the sciences, and nothing at all of electronic or mechanical engineering, or of medical instrumentation. That is, she has no qualifications in the field. She is just very–that word again–smart and pretty and talks a swell show. And yet ye gods and little catfishes, what she managed to do.

Her goal was to invent a medical blood-analyzer that could do a large number of tests on a single drop of blood from a pricked finger. It was a bright idea. If it had worked, it would have been a (very) big deal. This of course is also true of anti-gravity space shps and perpetual motion machines. Making it work required nothing beyond difficult mechanical engineering, electronic engineering, programming, microfluidics, and a few things that were impossible. She knew none of these fields.

But holy smack-and-kerpow, Batman, could she talk. Soon she had investment money pouring in. On her board she got–yes–Henry everlovin' Kissinger and James Mattis (uh-huh, that one,) and former Secretaries of State and Defense and just about every heavy hitter except Pope Francis. More money rained down. I mean with people like that vouching for her, Hank the Kiss and Mad Dog Mattis, it had to be legit–right? She even managed to cozy up to the Clintons and Obama.

Meanwhile the wretched blood gizmo wouldn't, didn't, and couldn't as it turned out, work. It was a metal box with inside it a glue-gun robot arm out of Jersey–I am not inventing this–that made grinding noises and could do only a few tests with wildly unreliable results. You might think of it as Uncle Clunk. Just the thing you want your life to depend on. And lives do depend on good lab results.("OK, lady, Uncle Clunk says you got brain cancer. We have to remove your brain.") Heh. Oops.

So Holmes, who could talk the bark off a tree, faked it. To be fair, she probably thought it would work or hoped it might and turned to chicanery only when it didn't. Anyway, many of her deceptions were clearly fraudulent–well, clearly if you knew about them. For example, most of her results were obtained using commercial analyzers from outfits like Siemens instead of Uncle Clunk. Financial projections were wildly dishonest. Many employees quit over ethhical concerns–but they were bound by sharp-fanged nondisclosure agreements they had to sign to be hired. It was nonsense. Nothing worked. But nobody knew.

Thing was, across America there was a terrific will to believe. Her story was just too good to pass up. People wanted a female Steve Jobs, a girl to join the boys in a startup world of wunderkind guys like Gates and Jobs and Wozniak and Zuckerberg and all. There just weren't any girls. Sure, a few, sort of, a little bit, like Marissa Mayer at Google, but Page and Bryn were the real starters-up. Holmes was beautiful, smart, so very appealing and just a dynamite entrepreneur. She had this astonishingly successful company.

Which didn't have a product.

Note that most of the dazzling university dropouts who became billionaires are in software, not biological sciences. The few in hardware brilliantly put together readily comprehended pieces, like CPUs and memory chips. There is a reason for this. Programming takes a lot of brains and little knowledge. Medicine takes reasonable intelligence and lots of knowledge. Molecular biology takes a lot of brains and a lot of knowledge. A (very) bright kid can learn Python or C-plus-plus in a couple of months in mommy's basement and actually be a programmer. It doesn't work with complicated multidisciplinary computerized micro-fluidized gadgets involving robotic glue-arms. At least, it didn't work.

I wonder why nobody thought of this. When asked for evidence, she ducked, dodged, lied, said the check was in the mail, and any day now.

The non-disclosure agreements saved her, for a while. All employees had to sign them. Her lawyer, who was also on her board, was the scary super lawyer David Boies. If you were a midlevel lab worker, and knew that reagents were out of date, that bad results were being hidden, that Uncle Clunk didn't work–and said so, a savage law firm with unlimited funds and, as events proved, not a lot of ethics, would litigate you into sleeping in alleys. Consequently much was known, but little was said.

Meanwhile–this is crazier than Aunt Sadie, that we kept in the attic–she got freaking Safeway and Walgreens to bite on putting Theranos booths in their stores so customers could get quick finger-prick analyses for very little money. Both companies bought into this, and actually built the booths at considerable expense, without insisting on seeing proof of her claims. I wonder what she was thinking. The scam obviously was going to collapse at some point. And did.

A better question might be what her board members and the chain-store executives were thinking. They were bosses of huge corporations and presumably astute. How did she get away with it? I will guess. Most of those gulled were old men, or nearly so. Note that old men, powerful men, rich men, and famous men, are nevertheless men. Holmes was a honey, slender, very pretty, well-groomed, appealing, smart, and maybe the daughter or girlfriend or mistress that her prey would have liked.

Andrea Dworkin. Finally, a cure for self-abuse. Would the old guys on Elizabeth's board have been as smitten by Andrea?

As the Wall Street Journal closed in, and Theranos got wind of it, things became ethically interesting. Holmes of course knew that Theranos was endangering lives, and had already established a lack of morality. Some of the board came to suspect and quietly bailed. The employees were intimidated, though several talked to the Journal anonymously.

But superlawyer David Boies and his associate Heather King among others at the firm knew. They tried every legal means, or maybe I mean lawyerly means, to block publication of the story. When federal regulatory agencies issued a long, detailed investigative report making it absolutely clear that Theranos did not even come close to legality, and was therefore endangering lives–Boies and King tried to suppress that too. Their success was not great as the Journal put the whole gorgeous taco online, but they tried. It is a curious fact, but a fact, that lawyers are often accessories to crime.

[May 28, 2018] The Seven Pillars of the Matrix by Robert Bonomo>

Notable quotes:
"... The weakest part of this piece is that it makes all kinds of suppositions about about the true nature of mankind, that remind me of paleo diet nonsense. Humans evolved constantly so we were selected for domestication. It changed us. We are not the great apes of the savannah, but agriculturalists living in complex societies. This is our true nature and the conflict in our societies is between those who are more domesticated and those who are less domesticated. ..."
"... This text shows us a little of the biblical allegory of Pandora's box, even though we know that it is based on the sins that are present inside the box. How is a short story, so I can invent upon an invention without a known author, that in fact as we open Pandora's Box, we will not spread hatred for Earth, there is no need to spread what is already widespread, but we will find the truth. And the truth is that we are animals like those we despise. Human culture is an illusion to keep sane people. ..."
"... "Oh, well, at least Bonobo–I mean, Bonomo–didn't use the word "sheeple," so I don't have to go ballistic on him. Condescending is much too weak a word to describe this mess. Arrogant and egomaniacal fit much better." ..."
"... Despite some glaring inaccuracies and over-generalizations, overall the piece is interesting and thought-provoking. ..."
"... Freedom is in inverse proportion to security. An individual in solitary-confinement in a maximum security prison has 100% security but 0% freedom. At the opposite extreme is the "hermit" living in self-imposed exile with 100% freedom but never entirely sure of when & where his next meal is coming from and if attacked by a predator, human or animal, he is entirely on his own. Between those two extremes there is a reasonable middle-ground. ..."
Jul 29, 2014 | www.unz.com

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free."
― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Contemporary baptized, corporatized and sanitized man rarely has the occasion to question his identity, and when he does a typical response might be, "I am product manager for a large retail chain, married to Betty, father of Johnny, a Democrat, Steelers fan and a Lutheran."

His answers imply not only his beliefs but the many responsibilities, rules and restrictions he is subjected to. Few if any of these were ever negotiated- they were imposed on him yet he still considers himself free.

But is free the right adjective for him, or would modern domesticated simian be more apt? He has been told what to do, believe, think and feel since he can remember. A very clever rancher has bred billions of these creatures around the globe and created the most profitable livestock imaginable. They work for him, fight for him, die for him, believe his wildest tales, laugh at his jokes and rarely get out of line. When domesticated man does break one of the rules there are armies, jailers, psychiatrists and bureaucrats prepared to kill, incarcerate, drug or hound the transgressor into submission.

One of the most fascinating aspects of domesticated man's predicament is that he never looks at the cattle, sheep and pigs who wind up on his plate and make the very simple deduction that he is just a talking version of them, corralled and shepherded through his entire life. How is this accomplished? Only animals that live in hierarchical groups can be dominated by man. The trick is to fool the animal into believing that the leader of the pack or herd is the person who is domesticating them. Once this is accomplished the animal is under full control of its homo sapien master. The domesticated man is no different, originally organized in groups with a clear hierarchy and maximum size of 150- it was easy to replace the leader of these smaller groups with one overarching figure such as God, King, President, CEO etc.

The methodology for creating this exceptionally loyal and obedient modern breed, homo domesticus, can be described as having seven pillars from which an immense matrix captures the talking simians and their conscious minds and hooks them into a complex mesh from which few ever escape. The system is so advanced that those who do untangle themselves and cut their way out of the net are immediately branded as mentally ill, anti-social, or simply losers who can't accept the 'complexity of modern life', i.e. conspiracy nuts.

Plato described this brilliantly in his Allegory of the Cave , where people only see man made shadows of objects, institutions, Gods and ideas:

"–Behold! human beings living in an underground cave here they have been from their childhood necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall "

It began with the word, which forever changed the ability of men to manipulate each other. Before language, every sensation was directly felt through the senses without the filter of words. But somewhere around 50,000 years ago language began to replace reality and the first pieces of code were put in place for the creation of the Matrix. As soon as the words began to flow the world was split, and from that fracturing was born man's angst and slavery. The words separated us from who we really were, creating the first screen onto which the images from Plato's cave were cast. Gurdjieff said it well, "Identifying is the chief obstacle to self-remembering. A man who identifies with anything is unable to remember himself."

It's no accident that in Hesiod's ages of man the Golden Age knew no agriculture, which appeared in the Silver age, and by the time we reach the Bronze age the dominant theme is toil and strife. The two key elements to the enslavement of man were clearly language and agriculture. In the hunter gatherer society, taking out the boss was no more complicated than landing a well placed fastball to the head. Only since the advent of farming was the possibility of creating full time enforcers and propagandists made possible, and hence enslavement inevitable.

The search for enlightenment rarely if ever bears fruits in those temples of words, our schools and universities. Almost all traditions point to isolation and silence as the only paths to awakening; they are the true antidotes to modern slavery. As Aristotle wrote, "Whosoever is delighted in solitude is either a wild beast or a god."

So from the institution from which we are mercilessly bombarded with words and enslaved to time, we begin our descent through the seven layers of the Matrix.

Education

There are things we are born able to do like eating, laughing and crying and others we pick up without much of an effort such as walking, speaking and fighting, but without strict institutional education there is no way that we can ever become a functioning member of the Matrix. We must be indoctrinated, sent to Matrix boot camp, which of course is school. How else could you take a hunter and turn him into a corporate slave, submissive to clocks, countless bosses, monotony and uniformity?

Children naturally know who they are, they have no existential angst, but schools immediately begin driving home the point of schedules, rules, lists and grades which inevitably lead the students to the concept of who they aren't. We drill the little ones until they learn to count money, tell time, measure progress, stand in line, keep silent and endure submission. They learn they aren't free and they are separated from everyone else and the world itself by a myriad of divides, names and languages.

It can't be stressed enough how much education is simply inculcating people with the clock and the idea of a forced identity. What child when she first goes to school isn't taken back to hear herself referred to by her full name?

It's not as if language itself isn't sufficiently abstract- nothing must be left without a category. Suzy can't just be Suzy- she is a citizen of a country and a state, a member of a religion and a product of a civilization, many of which have flags, mascots, armies, uniforms, currencies and languages. Once all the mascots, tag lines and corporate creeds are learned, then history can begin to be taught. The great epic myths invented and conveniently woven into the archetypes which have come down through the ages cement this matrix into the child's mind.

Even the language that she speaks without effort must be deconstructed for her. An apple will never again be just an apple- it will become a noun, a subject, or an object. Nothing will be left untouched, all must be ripped apart and explained back to the child in Matrixese.

We are taught almost nothing useful during the twelve or so years that we are institutionalized and conditioned for slavery- not how to cook, farm, hunt, build, gather, laugh or play. We are only taught how to live by a clock and conform to institutionalized behaviors that make for solid careers as slaveocrats.

Government

In the countries that claim to be democratic the concept of a government created to serve the people is often espoused. Government, and the laws they create and enforce are institutionalized social control for the benefit of those who have seized power. This has always been the case and always will be. In the pre-democratic era it was much clearer to recognize who had power, but the genius of massive democratic states are the layers upon layers of corporatocracy and special interests which so brilliantly conceal the identify of those who really manage the massive apparatus of control.

The functions of the state are so well ensconced in dogmatic versions of history taught in schools that almost no one questions why we need anything beyond the bare essentials of government to maintain order in the post-industrial age. The history classes never point the finger at the governments themselves as the propagators and instigators of war, genocide, starvation and corruption. In Hollywood's version of history, the one most people absorb, 'good' governments are always portrayed as fighting 'bad' ones. We have yet to see a film where all the people on both sides simply disengage from their governments and ignore the calls to violence.

The state apparatus is based on law, which is a contract between the people and an organism created to administer common necessities- an exchange of sovereignty between the people and the state. This sounds reasonable, but when one looks at the mass slaughters of the 20th century, almost without exception, the perpetrators are the states themselves.

The loss of human freedom is the only birthright offered to the citizens of the modern nation. There is never a choice. It is spun as a freedom and a privilege when it is in fact indentured servitude to the state apparatus and the corporatocracy that controls it.

Patriotism

Patriotism is pure abstraction, a completely artificial mechanism of social control. People are taught to value their compatriots above and beyond those of their own ethnic background, race or religion. The organic bonds are to be shed in favor of the great corporate state. From infancy children are indoctrinated like Pavlov's dogs to worship the paraphernalia of the state and see it as a mystical demigod.

What is a country? Using the United States as example, what actually is this entity? Is it the USPS, the FDA, or the CIA? Does loving one's country mean one should love the IRS and the NSA? Should we feel differently about someone if they are from Vancouver instead of Seattle? Loving a state is the same as loving a corporation, except with the corporations there is still no stigma attached to not showing overt sentimental devotion to their brands and fortunately, at least for the moment, we are not obligated at birth to pay them for a lifetime of services, most of which we neither need nor want.

Flags, the Hollywood version of history and presidential worship are drilled into us to maintain the illusion of the 'other' and force the 'foreigner/terrorist/extremist' to wear the stigma of our projections. The archaic tribal energy that united small bands and helped them to fend off wild beasts and hungry hordes has been converted into a magic wand for the masters of the matrix. Flags are waved, and we respond like hungry Labradors jumping at a juicy prime rib swinging before our noses. Sentimental statist propaganda is simply the mouthguard used to soften the jolt of our collective electroshock therapy.

Religion

As powerful as the patriotic sects are, there has always been a need for something higher. Religion comes from the Latin 're-ligare' and it means to reconnect. But reconnect to what? The question before all religions is, what have we been disconnected from? The indoctrination and alienation of becoming a card carrying slave has a cost; the level of abstraction and the disconnect from any semblance of humanity converts people into nihilistic robots. No amount of patriotic fervor can replace having a soul. The flags and history lessons can only give a momentary reprieve to the emptiness of the Matrix and that's why the priests are needed.

The original spiritual connection man had with the universe began to dissolve into duality with the onset of language, and by the time cities and standing armies arrived he was in need of a reconnection, and thus we get our faith based religions. Faith in the religious experiences of sages, or as William James put it, faith in someone else's ability to connect. Of course the liturgies of our mainstream religions offer some solace and connection, but in general they simply provide the glue for the Matrix. A brief perusal of the news will clearly show that their 'God' seems most comfortable amidst the killing fields.

If we focus on the Abrahamic religions, we have a god much like the state, one who needs to be loved. He is also jealous of the other supposedly non-existent gods and is as sociopathic as the governments who adore him. He wipes out his enemies with floods and angels of death just as the governments who pander to him annihilate us with cultural revolutions, atom bombs, television and napalm. Their anthem is, "Love your country, it's flag, its history, and the God who created it all"- an ethos force fed to each new generation.

Circus

The sad thing about circus is that it's generally not even entertaining. The slaves are told it's time for some fun and they move in hordes to fill stadiums, clubs, cinemas or simply to stare into their electrical devices believing that they are are being entertained by vulgar propaganda.

As long as homo domesticus goes into the appropriate corral, jumps when she is told to and agrees wholeheartedly that she is having fun, than she is a good slave worthy of her two days off a week and fifteen days vacation at the designated farm where she is milked of any excess gold she might have accumulated during the year. Once she is too old to work and put to pasture, holes are strategically placed in her vicinity so she and her husband can spend their last few dollars trying to get a small white ball into them.

On a daily basis, after the caffeinated maximum effort has been squeezed out of her, she is placed in front of a screen, given the Matrix approved beverage (alcohol), and re-indoctrinated for several hours before starting the whole cycle over again. God forbid anyone ever took a hallucinogen and had an original thought. We are, thankfully, protected from any substances that might actually wake us up and are encouraged stick to the booze. The matrix loves coffee in the morning, alcohol in the evening and never an authentic thought in between.

On a more primal level we are entranced with the contours of the perfect body and dream of 'perfect love', where our days will be filled with soft caresses, sweet words and Hollywood drama. This is maybe the most sublime of the Matrix's snares, as Venus's charms can be so convincing one willingly abandons all for her devious promise. Romantic love is dangled like bait, selling us down the path of sentimentally coated lies and mindless consumerism.

Money

Money is their most brilliant accomplishment. Billions of people spend most of their waking lives either acquiring it or spending it without ever understanding what it actually is. In this hologram of a world, the only thing one can do without money is breath. For almost every other human activity they want currency, from eating and drinking to clothing oneself and finding a partner. Religion came from innate spirituality and patriotism from the tribe, but money they invented themselves- the most fantastic and effective of all their tools of domestication.

They have convinced the slaves that money actually has some intrinsic value, since at some point in the past it actually did. Once they were finally able to disconnect money completely from anything other than their computers, they finally took complete control, locked the last gate and electrified all the fences. They ingeniously print it up out of the nothing and loan it with interest in order for 18-year-olds to spend four years drinking and memorizing propaganda as they begin a financial indebtedness that will most likely never end.

By the time the typical American is thirty the debt is mounted so high that they abandon any hope of ever being free of it and embrace their mortgages, credit cards, student loans and car loans as gifts from a sugar daddy. What they rarely asks themselves is why they must work to make money while banks can simply create it with a few key strokes. If they printed out notes on their HP's and loaned them with interest to their neighbors, they would wind up in a penitentiary, but not our friends on Wall Street- they do just that and wind up pulling the strings in the White House. The genius of the money scam is how obvious it is. When people are told that banks create money out of nothing and are paid interest for it the good folks are left incredulous. "It can't be that simple!" And therein lies the rub- no one wants to believe that they have been enslaved so easily .

Culture

"Culture is the effort to hold back the mystery, and replace it with a mythology."
– Terence McKenna

As Terence loved to say, "Culture is not your friend." It exists as a buffer to authentic experience. As they created larger and larger communities, they replaced the direct spiritual experience of the shaman with priestly religion. Drum beats and sweat were exchanged for digitized, corporatized noise. Local tales got replaced by Hollywood blockbusters, critical thinking with academic dogma.

If money is the shackles of the matrix, culture is its operating system. Filtered, centralized, incredibly manipulative, it glues all their myths together into one massive narrative of social control from which only the bravest of souls ever try to escape. It's relatively simple to see the manipulation when one looks at patriotism, religion or money. But when taken as a whole, our culture seems as natural and timeless as the air we breathe, so intertwined with our self conception it is often hard to see where we individually finish and our culture begins.

Escaping the Grip of Control

Some might ask why this all-pervasive network of control isn't talked about or discussed by our 'great minds'. Pre-Socratic scholar Peter Kingsley explains it well:

"Everything becomes clear once we accept the fact that scholarship as a whole is not concerned with finding, or even looking for, the truth. That's just a decorative appearance. It's simply concerned with protecting us from truths that might endanger our security; and it does so by perpetuating our collective illusions on a much deeper level than individual scholars are aware of."

Whoever discovered water, it certainly wasn't a fish. To leave the 'water', or Plato's cave takes courage and the knowledge that there is something beyond the web of control. Over 2,300 hundred years ago Plato described the process of leaving the Matrix in the Allegory of the Cave as a slow, excruciating process akin to walking out onto a sunny beach after spending years in a basement watching Kabuki.

How can this awakening be explained? How do you describe the feeling of swimming in the ocean at dusk to someone who has never even seen the sea? You can't, but what you can do is crack open a window for them and if enough windows are opened, the illusion begins to lose its luster.


rod1963 , August 3, 2014 at 12:03 am GMT

I'll take Neil Postman, Chesterton or C.S. Lewis over Bonomo any day.

His article merely takes a blowtorch to all and everything and worse showing very little understanding of the things he attacks is cringe worthy. There's no real analysis, no consideration of the ramifications for doing away with the state, community and faith. This is shoddy thinking at best.

And his last part "Escaping the Grip of Control" is just so much gibberish. It's not thought out at all.

Pseudonymic Handle , August 3, 2014 at 12:35 pm GMT
The weakest part of this piece is that it makes all kinds of suppositions about about the true nature of mankind, that remind me of paleo diet nonsense. Humans evolved constantly so we were selected for domestication. It changed us. We are not the great apes of the savannah, but agriculturalists living in complex societies. This is our true nature and the conflict in our societies is between those who are more domesticated and those who are less domesticated.
Bill , August 3, 2014 at 9:51 pm GMT

"I am product manager for a large retail chain, married to Betty, father of Johnny, a Democrat, Steelers fan and a Lutheran."

His answers imply not only his beliefs but the many responsibilities, rules and restrictions he is subjected to. Few if any of these were ever negotiated- they were imposed on him yet he still considers himself free.

Santoculto , August 4, 2014 at 8:17 pm GMT
To talk about themselves and their superiority as human beings, civilization and biology, we have an average of 50 or more reviews.

Have to discuss the illusion of the human ego, 12 comments, some of which were based on" not-so-children's arguments."

This text shows us a little of the biblical allegory of Pandora's box, even though we know that it is based on the sins that are present inside the box. How is a short story, so I can invent upon an invention without a known author, that in fact as we open Pandora's Box, we will not spread hatred for Earth, there is no need to spread what is already widespread, but we will find the truth. And the truth is that we are animals like those we despise. Human culture is an illusion to keep sane people.

The Plutonium Kid , August 7, 2014 at 6:50 pm GMT
Oh, well, at least Bonobo–I mean, Bonomo–didn't use the word "sheeple," so I don't have to go ballistic on him. Condescending is much too weak a word to describe this mess. Arrogant and egomaniacal fit much better.
Santoculto , August 8, 2014 at 1:40 pm GMT
"Oh, well, at least Bonobo–I mean, Bonomo–didn't use the word "sheeple," so I don't have to go ballistic on him. Condescending is much too weak a word to describe this mess. Arrogant and egomaniacal fit much better."

These "sensitive" people break my heart.

I think Mr. Bonhomme has the right to say whatever you want. Perhaps, the "descriptions" also served to you, what do you think ??

Mike , January 15, 2015 at 1:00 am GMT
It's sadly obvious that most of the negative replies to Mr. Bonomo's article, comes from complete tools.I can see that most, if not all of you tools have been thoroughly educated by sitting in front of your TV's and burping and farting large amount of odorous gases from your beer infused bodies.A friendly bit of advice, remove your collective heads from your asses and get a real life.
Stefano , February 3, 2015 at 1:57 pm GMT
@Plutonium Kid

Hahah.. did Bonomo's essay really scare you that much or did it merely strike such a chord of cognitive dissonance that it left you squirming in mental anguish? Lighten up dude!

Stefano , February 3, 2015 at 2:13 pm GMT
Despite some glaring inaccuracies and over-generalizations, overall the piece is interesting and thought-provoking.

"The system is so advanced that those who do untangle themselves and cut their way out of the net are immediately branded as mentally ill, anti-social, or simply losers who can't accept the 'complexity of modern life', i.e. conspiracy nuts."

Perhaps he means someone like a homeless person or pan-handler living on the street. Certainly few if anyone would consider a radical thinker like Noam Chomsky "mentally ill, anti-social, or simply losers".

Jeff77450 , July 21, 2015 at 5:27 pm GMT
Mr. Bonomo, interesting take on things but ultimately I don't quite agree. Here is the subparagraph of my worldview that addresses the whole free-versus-slave thing: Freedom is in inverse proportion to security. An individual in solitary-confinement in a maximum security prison has 100% security but 0% freedom. At the opposite extreme is the "hermit" living in self-imposed exile with 100% freedom but never entirely sure of when & where his next meal is coming from and if attacked by a predator, human or animal, he is entirely on his own. Between those two extremes there is a reasonable middle-ground.

The hunter-gatherers are (or were) about as free as it is possible to be and each individual not having to live as a hermit – but their lives were, as per Thomas Hobbs, "nasty, brutish and short." I've read that around the time of Christ the average lifespan was 20-22. (That's probably factoring in a lot of infant-mortality).

My life is clean, comfortable, reasonably if not perfectly safe and I'm on-track to live well into my eighties. But I'm a "wage-slave" to a job that I hate, despise and loath and frankly, at home, my wife rules the roost. If I protest too much she could divorce me and take much of what I've worked roughly thirty-four years for so she's got me over a barrel.

Hmmm, my day is ruined

thx1138 , February 11, 2017 at 1:49 am GMT
Well, years later I just want to thank you for this essay. It stated more clearly than I could the truth of the world. The only thing missing is the identity of the perpetrators, and many of us know who they are.

[May 28, 2018] Sociopathy and politics

May 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

RabbitOne -> SaudiMail Sun, 05/27/2018 - 08:01 Permalink

We don't blame the British people anymore than the world should blame the American people. It is these political machines filled with antisocial sociopaths and psychopaths that gravitate to government. These people have the following tendencies
- Power Monger - Regularly break or flouts the law
- Politician - Constantly lies and deceives others
- Conquer - Is impulsive and doesn't plan ahead
- Warlike - Can be prone to fighting and aggressiveness
- Destructive - Has little regard for the safety of others
- Deadbeat - Irresponsible, can't meet financial obligations
- Repressive - Doesn't feel remorse or guilt for what is done to people

CatInTheHat -> RabbitOne Sun, 05/27/2018 - 11:24 Permalink

They are all, first and foremost EXPLOITATIVE, manipulative, gas lighting, lacking EMPATHY, regret remorse or guilt, grandiose, haughty arrogant behavior, an overwhelming sense of entitlement, power addicted, ruthless (however every psychopath will describe this as 'determined'), pathological liars. Most psychopaths are NOT physically violent, the most successful ones pass in society and sit in positions of power over a few or millions of people. Psychopaths will only put out as little energy as it takes to exploit and manipulate a potential partner whether romantic or business but it's a succession of cronies and hangers on that do the work for them as psychopaths are notoriously LAZY.

Psychopaths hurt people because it gives them a sense of overwhelming power. The more the victim REACTS, the better for the psychopath. They are emotionally rewarded by the pain they cause.

Imagine the psychopath who has the ability to cause reactions in millions of people.

Hence, you're everyday psychopathic politician.

[May 16, 2018] Rex Tillerson Takes Shots at Donald Trump During Virginia Military Institute Commencement Speech

Notable quotes:
"... If our leaders seek to conceal the truth, or we as people become accepting of alternative realities that are no longer grounded in facts, then we as American citizens are on a pathway to relinquishing our freedom. ..."
"... "A responsibility of every American citizen to each other is to preserve and protect our freedom by recognizing what truth is and is not, what a fact is and is not and begin by holding ourselves accountable to truthfulness and demand our pursuit of America's future be fact-based -- not based on wishful thinking, not hoped-for outcomes made in shallow promises, but with a clear-eyed view of the facts as they are, and guided by the truth that will set us free to seek solutions to our most daunting challenges." ..."
May 16, 2018 | www.theroot.com

Tillerson was the country's top diplomat until March, when he was fired by Donald Trump and replaced by CIA Director Mike Pompeo. NBC News reports that Tillerson called on the graduates to maintain a "fierce defense of the truth."

"As I reflect upon the state of our American democracy, I observe a growing crisis in ethics and integrity," Tillerson said in his speech. " If our leaders seek to conceal the truth, or we as people become accepting of alternative realities that are no longer grounded in facts, then we as American citizens are on a pathway to relinquishing our freedom. "

He added, "When we as people, a free people, go wobbly on the truth, even on what may seem the most trivial of matters, we go wobbly on America."

"A responsibility of every American citizen to each other is to preserve and protect our freedom by recognizing what truth is and is not, what a fact is and is not and begin by holding ourselves accountable to truthfulness and demand our pursuit of America's future be fact-based -- not based on wishful thinking, not hoped-for outcomes made in shallow promises, but with a clear-eyed view of the facts as they are, and guided by the truth that will set us free to seek solutions to our most daunting challenges."

[May 16, 2018] Tillerson Delivers Loaded Speech, Warns of 'Growing Crisis'

May 16, 2018 | ijr.com

Tillerson Delivers Loaded Speech, Warns of 'Growing Crisis in Ethics And Integrity' WILLIAM STEAKIN | MAY 16, 2018 | 3:18 PM

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson delivered a pointed speech on Wednesday, warning of "a growing crisis in ethics and integrity" in American democracy months after President Donald Trump fired him over Twitter .

The former chief executive of ExxonMobil gave a firey commencement address at the Virginia Military Institute in Lexington, Virginia, on Wednesday, warning the graduating class that leaders who "conceal the truth" also risk damaging freedom.

"If our leaders seek to conceal the truth or we as people become accepting of alternative realities that are no longer grounded in facts, then we as American citizens are on a pathway to relinquishing our freedom," Tillerson said.

While the former secretary of state stayed away from mentioning President Donald Trump or any current leaders by name, many online quickly connected the dots regarding Tillerson's speech.

"A responsibility of every American citizen to each other is to preserve and protect our freedom by recognizing what truth is and is not, what a fact is and is not," Tillerson said.

"If we do not as Americans confront the crisis of ethics and integrity in our society and among our leaders in both the public and private sector -- and regrettably at times even the nonprofit sector -- then American democracy as we know it is entering its twilight years," he added .

[May 12, 2018] Neoliberal management and Zombies by Robert Bonomo

May 12, 2018 | www.unz.com

The most heinous thing a human can do is eat another human. Fear of cannibalism along with the other two great taboos, incest and inter-family violence, are the bedrocks of human culture. Without these taboos there is no human civilization, yet zombie cannibals are everywhere, from the most popular TV shows in the US and Europe to the most played PC games. Everywhere we look there is a zombie dragging his feet looking for human prey. The ubiquitous nature of this meme of semi-human creatures that survive only by breaking the most fundamental of human taboos is a clear indicator of a collective cultural pathology.

Humans must not only kill and eat plants and animals to survive, we must make sure they keep coming back so they can be killed and eaten again and again. Life needs death; we must kill to live, and eventually we all wind up as someone else's food. This paradox lies at the core of the world's religions and mythologies and the fear/repulsion of eating other humans is the keystone of our culture, without it we turn on ourselves and self-annihilation ensues. The zombie meme is a modern myth pointing to a deep fear of self-destruction.

The great psychologist and mystic Carl Jung was asked if a myth could be equated to a collective dream and he answered this way, "A myth is the product of an unconscious process in a particular social group, at a particular time, at a particular place. This unconscious process can naturally be equated with a dream. Hence anyone who 'mythologizes,' that is, tells myths, is speaking out of this dream."

If a person had a recurring nightmare that she was eating her family it would be a clear symptom of a profound psychological disturbance. Cultures don't dream, but they do tell stories and those stories can tell us much about the state of the collective psyche.

Many of the themes in our popular culture are conscious story telling devices with the definite purpose of social engineering/control, but others seem to just emerge from the collective unconscious like the stuff of dreams. The zombie meme is clearly of the latter variety. It's pointing to a fear that something has broken in our culture and what awaits us is a collective psychotic break of apocalyptic proportions.

[Apr 23, 2018] Cutting Capitalism Out of Our Relationships by William C. Anderson

This "Number one ism" that neoloiberalism promotes is really too unhealthy. There are people who coisouly sacrifies family and other value for the sake of achivement high status. But infection of this value of large part of the society is destructive.
Viewing people as commodity is defining feature of sociopaths. In a way we can say that neoliberalism promotes socipathy.
Notable quotes:
"... "People get so involved with playing the game of being important that they exhaust themselves and their time, and they don't do the work of actually organizing people." ..."
"... Too many people and too many entities get too comfortable fashioning themselves as leaders and viewing people as commodities... ..."
Apr 23, 2018 | www.truth-out.org

"People get so involved with playing the game of being important that they exhaust themselves and their time, and they don't do the work of actually organizing people." -- Ella Baker

[Neoliberalism] also infiltrates our interpersonal relationships...

The ongoing questions about how major tech corporations -- especially social media giants -- are reaching into our personal and private lives for the purpose of extraction raises questions about where else these sorts of intrusions take place. Too many people and too many entities get too comfortable fashioning themselves as leaders and viewing people as commodities...

... ... ...

Fame and fortune dictate far too much in our society. This happens so much that those who are famous regularly instigate public backlash for making uninformed comments about all sorts of issues. Media outlets invite popular celebrities to comment on a wide array of serious social issues not because they'll provide any sort of expertise, but because they are famous...

... .. ...

Fame and money do not automatically make a person insincere. The insincerity of this capitalist system, however, is certainly upheld in part by the extravagance of fame and money. We don't have to be broke and unpopular to be genuine, but if the logic we use to define our success resembles capitalism, we're going in a terrible circle. What separates us from the system that oppresses us?

[Mar 25, 2018] The West's Guilty Until Proven Innocent Mantra Is Wrecking Lives International Relations by Robert Bridge

Highly recommended!
Mar 23, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Robert Bridge, op-ed via RT.com,

Western society is flirting with a disturbing trend where people are being denied the time-honored 'presumption of innocence'. The same undemocratic method is even being used against nations in what is becoming a dangerous game.

Imagine the following scenario: You are a star football player at the local high school, with a number of college teams hoping to recruit you. There is even talk of a NFL career down the road. Then, overnight, your life takes an unexpected turn for the worse. The police show up at your house with a warrant for your arrest; the charges: kidnapping and rape. The only evidence is your word against the accuser's. After spending six years behind bars, the court decides you were wrongly accused.

That is the incredible story of Brian Banks, 26, who was released early from prison in 2012 after his accuser, Wanetta Gibson, admitted that she had fabricated injurious claims against the young man.

Many other innocent people, however, who have been falsely accused in the West for some crime they did not commit, are not as fortunate as Brian Banks. Just this week, for example, Ross Bullock was released from his private "hell" – and not due to an accuser with a guilty conscience, but by committing suicide.

"After a 'year of torment' Bullock hanged himself in the garage of the family home, leaving a note revealing he had 'hit rock bottom' and that with his death 'I'm free from this living hell,'" the Daily Mail reported .

There is a temptation to explain away such tragic cases as isolated anomalies in an otherwise sound-functioning legal system. After all, mistakes are going to happen regardless of the safeguards. At the same time, however, there is an irresistible urge among humans to believe those people who claim to have been victimized – even when the evidence suggests otherwise. Perhaps this is due to the powerful emotional element that works to galvanize the victim's story. Or it could be due to the belief that nobody would intentionally and unjustly condemn another human being. But who can really say what is inside another person's heart? Moreover, it can't be denied that every time we attempt to hunt down and punish another people, tribe, sex, religion, etc. for some alleged crimes against victims, there is a real tendency among Westerners to get carried away with moralistic zeal to the point of fanaticism.

A case in point is last year's scandal that rocked the entertainment industry as the movie mogul Harvey Weinstein was accused of sexually assaulting numerous women over the span of a 30-year career. Eventually, over 80 females, emboldened by the courage displayed by their peers, drove Weinstein straight out of Hollywood and into the rogue's gallery of sexual predators. Few could deny this was a positive thing.

But then something strange began to happen that has been dubbed the 'Weinstein effect.' Powered by the social media #MeToo movement, women from all walks of life began to publicly accuse men for all sorts of sexual violations, some from decades ago. Certainly, many of the claims were legitimate. However, in many cases they were not. Yet the mainstream media, which has taken great delight in providing breathless details of every new accusation, has shown little interest in pursuing those stories of men who went on to suffer divorce, ruined reputations, and the loss of jobs without so much as a fair hearing in a court of law.

As far as the mainstream media is concerned, and to be fair they don't seem that concerned, the victim's story is the only story that matters. Indeed, it was almost as if the victim had become judge, jury and executioner. This is, in reality, just one step from mob rule, and woe to anyone who questions the motives of the movement, as French star Catherine Deneuve discovered.

The (female) writer, D.C. McAllister, described the poisonous "environment of suspicion" that has beset relations between men and women.

"While women's willingness to hold men accountable for criminal sexual behavior is to be applauded, the scorched-earth approach we are seeing today is destructive because it undermines trust," McAllister wrote in The Federalist.

"When anything from a naive touch during a photo shoot to an innocent attempt at a kiss is compared to rape and sexual abuse, we are not healing society but infecting relationships with the poison of distrust."

[Mar 19, 2018] People are not human beings to a psychopath, they're instruments to be manipulated.

Mar 19, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Lore -> NoDebt Sun, 03/18/2018 - 23:51 Permalink

We're witnessing classic psychopathic warfare. Psychopaths play mind games. They make outrageous accusations and force you to spend thousands of hours spinning your wheels in an attempt to Prove A Negative.

I know because I worked for a psychopath who did it frequently, maintaining a culture of fear even among the executive board members. One nice fellow was so affected by the stress that he developed cancer and died. (The manipulative SOB didn't have the balls to attend the funeral. Too bad.)

Again, this is classic psychopathy. I was singled out at one point for something special, being accused in front of the Board of something "Too Horrible To Describe" (those exact words), but if I apologized for "it" then there would be an opportunity to make amends. Obviously, I had no idea, and got so rattled (I was a stupid kid) that I nearly burst into tears. A few minutes after I left, I heard them all laughing about it. People are not human beings to a psychopath, they're instruments to be manipulated.

... ... ...

Pi Bolar -> Lore Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:22 Permalink

I agree with you about the psychopaths. I have worked for and with several. They are emotionless pathological liars devoid of empathy and live each day trying to focus attention on themselves in any way possible to feed their ego. They are born with flawed genes but usually breed the most which is why there are so many out there, you can't avoid getting near them.

Pi Bolar -> Lore Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:22 Permalink

Psychopaths enjoy the thrill of lying and sowing discord amongst anyone they can bully, i.e. Staff in lower positions, (yes the chief burger flipper can be a psychopath to the junior burger flippers - it's not all about CEO's). They also bully anyone smaller, weaker or less fortunate than themselves. A lot of them do get locked up, but too many roam free.

SH_Resurrected -> DelusionsCrowded Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:18 Permalink

You might find this article beneficial:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-narcissus-in-all-us/200809/par

OverTheHedge -> bh2 Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:05 Permalink

I don't actually WANT a "plausible explanation". I want FACTS!

I have no interest in making up shit just to come up with something "plausible". What's wrong with supplying some real evidence?

Fucking politicians.

ilovetexas Mon, 03/19/2018 - 00:15 Permalink

Very well said. Russians endless hope of joining the West has given them endless pain and shame. They are such a slow learner. That's so unfortunate.

MilwaukeeMark Mon, 03/19/2018 - 00:26 Permalink

The end of the petrodollar effectively cancels the MIC's fiat credit card. They will be rummaging their sofas for spare change. Expect them to use whatever they can scrape together for their own last gasp battle of the bulge.

just the tip Mon, 03/19/2018 - 00:54 Permalink

the bulk of the article withstanding, i can't understand how someone who would put together this article would use a sequitur such as:

Novichok (the inventor of which, by the way, lives in the US),

what fucking difference does it make where he lives? he is russian. and when he invented the stuff he was working for the soviet union intelligence services. spots leopards. and said inventer makes the highlighted claim from the link below. so why bring the inventer of this stuff into the discussion. bad choice of research.

http://www.businessinsider.com/novichok-scientist-vil-mirzayanov-descri

He also said he is certain that Putin ordered the Skripal attack.

OverTheHedge -> just the tip Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:10 Permalink

And continued occupation of his million dollar house is entirely conditional on his telling the (((truth))).

Nice try though. He also said that it was either the Russians, or ANYONE WHO HAS READ HIS BOOK.

Perhaps you missed that that bit of his statement.

PhilofOz -> just the tip Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:37 Permalink

You think that someone that can reproduce this nerve agent who is now under full control of the CIA no doubt is someone that shouldn't be mentioned? You jest!!! Oh and he knows Putin ordered it!!! ROFLOL!!! You are full of shit up to your eyeballs!

quesnay Mon, 03/19/2018 - 01:02 Permalink

"Oceania was at war with Eastasia: Oceania had always been at war with
Eastasia."

[Mar 17, 2018] Asshole: Narcissist, sociopath, liar, thief, murderer, often sadistic, "special."

Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

jacques sheete , March 16, 2018 at 10:34 am GMT

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior

Depends. If you have little or no prior behavior to go on, then social status can be a good predictor as well.

The "higher" you go, the bigger the asshole*.

Trust me, I've experienced it aplenty.

Virtue cannot dwell with wealth either in a city or in a house.
-Diogenes of Sinope, quoted by Stobaeus, iv. 31c. 88

But if you will take note of the mode of proceedings of men, you will see that all those who come to great riches and great power have obtained them either by fraud or by force; and afterwards, to hide the ugliness of acquisition, they make it decent by applying the false title of earnings to things they have usurped by deceit or by violence.

- Niccolo Machiavelli , HISTORY OF FLORENCE AND OF THE AFFAIRS OF ITALY, Book 3 chap 3Para 8

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2464/2464-h/2464-h.htm#link2H_4_0022

Tom Paine too:

" wealth is no proof of moral character; nor poverty of the want of it. On the contrary, wealth is often the presumptive evidence of dishonesty; and poverty the negative evidence of innocence."

THOMAS PAINE, DISSERTATION ON FIRST-PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT, 1795

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/ecco/004809392.0001.000/1:2?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

*Asshole: Narcissist, sociopath, liar, thief, murderer, often sadistic, "special."

[Mar 17, 2018] A possible role of psychopath in human society

Mar 17, 2018 | www.unz.com

Kiza , March 17, 2018 at 2:06 am GMT @Seraphim

It took a long time for you to discover (in a 'commercial research') what was known for a much longer time, the application of these principles in advertising and propaganda 'discovered' by Edward Bernays and exposed in his 'influential book' "Propaganda" 1928. One of the techniques of propaganda is to make the recipients believe that the ideas instilled in their heads were their own discovery.
It did not take me as long as you think. As a marketing and advertising professional (with appropriate qualifications) I was always aware that emotional works better than rational, but I never had an idea by how much. My most extreme supposition was 2/3 to 1/3. To end up 10:1, I never expected that.

It appears that such high proportion enables the government's/manipulators to silence the rational fraction who oppose the dragging into a war. Without any firm evidence I do feel that if the proportion was 2/3 to 1/3 then such manipulation, leading subjects often to mass suicide, would not be possible.

Therefore, I posit that the human society consists of three strata:

What a good show the Scripal affair is to watch

[Mar 09, 2018] Chutzpah is NOT snobbishness. It is unbelievable gall. The classic example is the man who murdered his parents and pleaded for mercy from the court because he was an orphan

Mar 09, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jus' Sayin'... , March 6, 2018 at 11:16 pm GMT

@Svigor

Chutzpah is NOT snobbishness. It is unbelievable gall. The classic example is the man who murdered his parents and pleaded for mercy from the court because he was an orphan.

[Feb 25, 2018] It is not only managers, the whole workplace is becoming a toxic place

Notable quotes:
"... This will totally self-select [environment] for psychopaths in the workplace. They are excellent at hiding their inner thoughts and moods from the outside world, only they will thrive and be able to constantly have a cheery face outwards while inwardly plotting how to kill their supervisor. ..."
"... nervos belli was right. Only psychopaths will do well here. The same sort of people that can do well in the corporate scene so, future recruitment pool for MBAs? ..."
Feb 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

nervos belli , February 24, 2018 at 4:29 am

This will totally self-select [environment] for psychopaths in the workplace. They are excellent at hiding their inner thoughts and moods from the outside world, only they will thrive and be able to constantly have a cheery face outwards while inwardly plotting how to kill their supervisor.

The Rev Kev , February 24, 2018 at 4:49 am

I recognize what principle is at work here. This is the McNamara fallacy ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNamara_fallacy ). Well it didn't work for Robert McNamara during the Vietnam war and it didn't work for Donald Rumsfeld during the Iraq occupation so I doubt that it will work here. A quote from that page-

"The first step is to measure whatever can be easily measured. This is OK as far as it goes. The second step is to disregard that which can't be easily measured or to give it an arbitrary quantitative value. This is artificial and misleading. The third step is to presume that what can't be measured easily really isn't important. This is blindness. The fourth step is to say that what can't be easily measured really doesn't exist. This is suicide."

nervos belli was right. Only psychopaths will do well here. The same sort of people that can do well in the corporate scene so, future recruitment pool for MBAs?

Synoia , February 24, 2018 at 5:58 pm

1. Us shareholders want feedback on the Management of our investments. The management of all companies are required to prove their value to shareholders minute by minute.

2. Our elected representatives also must report them movements and actions daily, including a telephone log. Especially time spent of their business raising money on the phone at our expense.

In addition:

All MBA students should be subject to such surveillance.

We taxpayers are providing them loans for their degrees, and we want feedback on their use of our money.

Michael , February 24, 2018 at 4:49 am

I recently came across a project where a company wanted to build a solution using facial recognition during interviews to enable the interviewer to detect lying (and other emotions) in candidates' responses. All in real time. Besides the obvious ambiguities and false positives yielded by such a system, it seemed certain to lead to a change in the way the interviews were conducted, the types of questions, what the interviewer thinks is important, etc. Unfortunately, companies seem forever obsessed with the risks and costs of hiring "bad employees" while ignoring their role in providing a healthy workplace where workers can thrive.

Jen , February 24, 2018 at 6:56 am

One of the best ways to overcome the risk of hiring bad employees is to make the inevitable hiring mistakes and learn from them. The two worst hiring decisions I ever made were more instructive than any training sessions, possibly because HR cannot offer a class entitled "how to tell when your candidate is a toxic pathological liar and certified nut job."

The second best way to overcome that risk is to get rid of the bad employees when you find them, which is also an important part of providing a healthy work environment. And by get rid of, I mean fire them rather than pass them off to some other hapless department in ones own firm, which happens all too frequently.

Michael , February 24, 2018 at 11:16 am

The key idea here is that the term "bad employees" or "bad candidates" is rarely objectively measured or measurable. Management by Objective, often done hastily without reflection, distorts how employees should or would otherwise prioritize their activities. Management rarely spends time developing employee skills. Overly rigid processes lead to adaptive behavior that prevents better approaches. Hiring managers rather hire someone who can "hit the ground running" (i.e. deep contextual experience) rather than an employee who can learn and/or challenge with new ways of working. In my experience, "bad employee" is usually as much a management and company failure as it is the employee's fault.

Synoia , February 24, 2018 at 5:59 pm

Bad management makes bad employees.

Yves Smith Post author , February 24, 2018 at 11:05 pm

No, there are bad employees, such as people who are lazy and backstabbing. They aren't amenable to being "managed" into being better. I've had to fire that sort.

Michael O , February 25, 2018 at 6:14 am

Yeah – some people are just bad. Some aren't a good fit for a particular job but, if they're an otherwise good employee, they'll raise the issue before the problem becomes obvious. Same with good employees who are burnt out or turned off doing something: they'll bring it up and figure out a plan. But some are just liars, jerks, or all around creeps. They create a poison environment for the rest plus bring down overall work quality. They gotta go.

Craig H. , February 24, 2018 at 9:08 am

The last I heard the world's leading authority on picking up lying from microexpressions was Ekman and he was saying that the many experiments so far had practically proved this was impossible. Some humans could (.5% or a number like that) do it but nobody could tell how and for all practical purposes it could now be considered as a psychic power. I searched on (Ekman lying microexpression) but could not find the piece I remember reading.

[Feb 25, 2018] Any hierarchic system can and will be exploited by intelligent sociopaths

Notable quotes:
"... Democracy is not under stress – it's under aggressive attack, as unconstrained financial greed overrides public accountability ..."
Feb 25, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

albert , February 17, 2018 at 2:23 pm

" Democracy is not under stress – it's under aggressive attack, as unconstrained financial greed overrides public accountability ."

I request a lessatorium* on the term 'democracy', because there aren't any democracies. Rather than redefine the term, why not use a more accurate one, like 'plutocracy', or 'corporatocracy'.
-- -- -- -
* It's like a moratorium, you just do less of it.

[Feb 19, 2018] Any hierarchic system can and will be exploited by intelligent sociopaths

Notable quotes:
"... Any hierarchic system will be exploited by intelligent sociopaths. Systems will not save us. ..."
"... What I gleaned from my quick Wikiread was the apparent pattern of economic inequality causing the masses to huddle in fear & loathing to one corner – desperation, and then some clever autocrat subverts the energy from their F&L into political power by demonizing various minorities and other non-causal perps. ..."
"... Like nearly every past fascism emergence in history, US Trumpismo is capitalizing on inequality, and fear & loathing (his capital if you will) to seize power. That brings us to Today – to Trump, and an era (brief I hope) of US flirtation with fascism. Thank God Trump is crippled by a narcissism that fuels F&L within his own regime. Otherwise, I might be joining a survivalist group or something. :-) ..."
"... The West's current political establishments see the way forward as "staying the neoliberal course." Voters are saying "change course." ..."
Feb 19, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Lee Robertson , , February 17, 2018 at 11:42 am

Any hierarchic system will be exploited by intelligent sociopaths. Systems will not save us.

albert , , February 17, 2018 at 2:23 pm

" Democracy is not under stress – it's under aggressive attack, as unconstrained financial greed overrides public accountability ."

I request a lessatorium* on the term 'democracy', because there aren't any democracies. Rather than redefine the term, why not use a more accurate one, like 'plutocracy', or 'corporatocracy'.
-- -- -- -
* It's like a moratorium, you just do less of it.

Tomonthebeach , , February 17, 2018 at 4:30 pm

I had not given much thought to "Fascist" until the term was challenged as a synonym for "bully." So, I started reading Wikipedia's take on Fascismo. What I discovered was the foremost, my USA education did not teach jack s -- about Fascism – and I went to elite high school in libr'l Chicago.

Is Fascism right or left? Does it matter? What goes around comes around.

What I gleaned from my quick Wikiread was the apparent pattern of economic inequality causing the masses to huddle in fear & loathing to one corner – desperation, and then some clever autocrat subverts the energy from their F&L into political power by demonizing various minorities and other non-causal perps.

Like nearly every past fascism emergence in history, US Trumpismo is capitalizing on inequality, and fear & loathing (his capital if you will) to seize power. That brings us to Today – to Trump, and an era (brief I hope) of US flirtation with fascism. Thank God Trump is crippled by a narcissism that fuels F&L within his own regime. Otherwise, I might be joining a survivalist group or something. :-)

flora , , February 17, 2018 at 8:01 pm

Neoliberalism involves not the deregulation of the capitalist system, but the reregulation of it in the interest of capital. So, it involves moving from a system in which capital is regulated in the interests of stability and the many to regulation in a way that enhances capital.

Prominent politicians in the US and UK have spent their entire political careers representing neoliberalism's agenda at the expense of representing the voters' issues. The voters are tired of the conservative and [neo]liberal political establishments' focus on neoliberal policy. This is also true in Germany as well France and Italy. The West's current political establishments see the way forward as "staying the neoliberal course." Voters are saying "change course." See:

'German Politics Enters an Era of Instability' – Der Speigel http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-political-landscape-crumbling-as-merkel-coalition-forms-a-1193947.html

[Feb 07, 2018] Whole Foods Employees Miserable Seeing Someone Cry At Work Is Becoming Normal Zero Hedge

Feb 07, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Whole Foods' new inventory management system aimed at improving efficiency and cutting down on waste is taking a toll on employees, who say the system's stringent procedures and graded "scorecards" have crushed morale and led to widespread food shortages, reports Business Insider .

The new system, called order-to-shelf, or OTS, "has a strict set of procedures for purchasing, displaying, and storing products on store shelves and in back rooms. To make sure stores comply, Whole Foods relies on "scorecards" that evaluate everything from the accuracy of signage to the proper recording of theft, or "shrink."

Some employees, who walk through stores with managers to ensure compliance, describe the system as onerous and stress-inducing . Conversations with 27 current and recently departed Whole Foods workers, including cashiers and corporate employees -- some of whom have been with the company for nearly two decades -- say the system is seen by many as punitive. - BI

Terrified employees report constant fear over losing their jobs over the OTS "scorecards," which anything below 89.9% can qualify as a failing score - resulting in possible firings. Whole Foods employees around the country thought that was hilarious. One such disaffected West Coast supervisor said "On my most recent time card, I clocked over 10 hours of overtime, sitting at a desk doing OTS work," adding "Rather than focusing on guest service, I've had team members cleaning facial-care testers and facing the shelves, so that everything looks perfect and untouched at all times."

Many Whole Foods employees at the corporate and store levels still don't understand how OTS works, employees said.

"OTS has confused so many smart, logical, and experienced individuals, the befuddlement is now a thing, a life all its own," an employee of a Chicago-area store said. "It's a collective confusion -- constantly changing, no clear answers to the questions that never were, until now."

An employee of a North Carolina Whole Foods said: " No one really knows this business model, and those who are doing the scorecards -- even regional leadership -- are not clear on practices and consequently are constantly providing the department leaders with inaccurate directions. All this comes at a time when labor has been reduced to an unachievable level given the requirements of the OTS model. "


peddling-fiction -> SloMoe Feb 6, 2018 9:52 PM Permalink

Have they been Amazoned?

Robots will soon pick up the slack...

BabaLooey -> peddling-fiction Feb 6, 2018 9:58 PM Permalink

Dr. EvilBezos strikes again!

The shit fuck......

IH8OBAMA -> Cognitive Dissonance Feb 6, 2018 10:32 PM Permalink

From Amazon workers, delivery drivers and now Whole Foods workers, it sounds like the Beezer is a real tyrant to work for. I'm surprised unions haven't been able to penetrate that organization. It is certainly big enough.

erkme73 -> JimmyJones Feb 6, 2018 11:11 PM Permalink

Wife is an ER MD. The physician leasing firm that employs her, which has the contract at the local hospital, recently got bought out by a new group. Suddenly she has a new director who assigns quotas to everything, and grades every aspect of her performance. It is quite stressful, and takes much of what little joy there was in her profession, and flushes it away. She is actively entertaining head hunters' calls again.

A Nanny Moose -> erkme73 Feb 6, 2018 11:57 PM Permalink

Just finished a two-year project building a hospital's Information Security Program....everything heading toward performance metrics measured against some horseshit ticketing system. Such systems only encourage throwing of horseshit over the fence, by incapable amateurs, to the people who actually know how to think. This program was put in place by a CIO who was former Air Farce.

It now takes 5 fucking hours of bureaucratic horseshit to perform 1/2 hour of actual engineering/technical work. The next step is to automate technical work from within the change control and IT automation systems.

Mark my words....just wait until the vulnerabilities in these change control, and Information Security Automation systems are exploited. Wait for the flaws in the code used to automate creation of entire networks, sever farms, security policies, etc.

I don't want to be within 100 miles of anything modern when this all goes to shit.

[Feb 03, 2018] Foremost for the NPD afflicted is the need to try to satisfy the never satisfied ego.

Feb 03, 2018 | commons.commondreams.org

sbrownn May '17

It is all about Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Once you become familiar with the disorder and all of its behavioral implications all the questions are answered.

Foremost for the NPD afflicted is the need to try to satisfy the never satisfied ego. Every action and behavior first must address the needy ego and only after taking that into consideration can any of the rest of the motives be evaluated...

[Jan 10, 2018] Personality disorder is not mental illness. It's more like a disability - e.g. psychopaths don't have a conscience, narcissists can't help but think the whole world revolves around them.

Jan 10, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

freewheelingfrankie -> travellinglefty , 10 Jan 2018 18:29

You've answered your own comment.

Personality disorder is not mental illness. It's more like a disability - e.g. psychopaths don't have a conscience, narcissists can't help but think the whole world revolves around them.

No, intelligent people inform themselves of facts and are able to distinguish between said facts and populist fiction.

Substitute "thinking" for "intelligent" and I'd agree with you.

It's not about intelligence. It's about whether people use their rational brain and think. If they don't - pretty much de rigeur for Trump supporters though by no means exclusive to them - it doesn't mean they can't. Again, stop making excuses for them. They choose not to think, regardless of how intelligent or not they are.

[Dec 13, 2017] Gaslighting: The 'perfect' romance that became a nightmare

Nov 29, 2017 | www.bbc.com

Nicole spent years living with a charming man, but she always seemed to be doing something wrong. Eventually she began to realise that it wasn't her that was the problem, it was him - and when she met one of his previous girlfriends, Elizabeth, everything made sense. Here Nicole tells her story, followed by Elizabeth.

Other people seem to manage it, sharing a life with someone, content and peaceful in each other's company. But the thought of a relationship still terrifies me. Many years on, I still well up with panic at the mention of my ex's name - that charming man who I feared and adored in equal measure.

A charming, beautiful, successful man had made me his. He was everything I could ever dream of. He was a high-flyer, his charisma was magnetic and I was entranced. When I was with the charming man doors opened for us and the best tables suddenly became available. We travelled the world for his work, staying at the best hotels and eating at the finest restaurants. He seemed to be able to charm his way through life in any language.

But I failed him.

I ruined everything: dinners, conversations, evenings out, holidays - by mentioning an ex's name, getting my purse out in front of his friends or wanting to carry my own passport and money when we were overseas.

He could be furious for days. My inappropriate behaviour had shown him up, he didn't know if he could continue being with someone like me, he could do so much better.

I also ruined birthdays and Christmases, simply by being "too stupid and cruel" to understand what was best for him.

He wanted me to buy him expensive presents: "It's just £4,000, use your savings," he would say.

"But those are life savings," I replied. "I can't touch them, it's impossible. I want to make you happy but I can't afford that."

The charming man cried - I had let him down and nothing I did could make up for it.

He didn't sleep much, so neither did I. I was not allowed to "ruin his night" by going to sleep before him. If I did, he woke me in the early hours, wanting to talk about our relationship and what I was doing wrong. I was exhausted. I felt like I was going through life in a blur, catching sleep whenever and wherever I could. The disabled loo at work became a refuge for a lunchtime nap.

Why didn't I leave sooner? Well, he was charming and my family loved him. And I was at an age where life was a blur of engagements and weddings. Well-meaning relatives would tell me that I was next. The tick-tocking sound of my biological clock got louder as the weddings made way for christenings.

[Nov 10, 2017] Coworkers From Hell! by Sherrie Bourg Carter Psy.D.

Jul 11, 2017 | www.psychologytoday.com

Although there isn't one "right" way to handle CFHs, there are some ways that are likely to make the situation worse rather than better. Here are a few tips to avoid escalation:

[Nov 10, 2017] How to Deal With High-Maintenance People by Korin Miller

The high maintenance man or woman is the layman's term for someone with a Cluster B (antisocial, narcissistic, histrionic, or borderline) personality disorder or a subclinical version with those traits.
Manipulation (which is implied in the term "high maintenance" ) comes in many forms: There are whiners, bullies, the borderliners, and our main object of interest -- the sociopaths. Korin Miller gives s ome potentially useful advice of dealing with high maintenance drama queens at work... T hrowing a fit should get her nowhere .
You need also to understand the strengths and weaknesses or your own behavior (and analyze it via diary) so that you can adapt your communication style when necessary. Anticipate and be prepared. That greatly helps not to react too emotionally. Don't take anything personally. Consider such behaviour as a you view a bad weather. Drama queen behavior is pretty stereotypical and can be studied via sample of Netflix movies. Practice your responses.
Such people are not always low performers. More often they are high performers at the workplace.
Much depends of the "social order," that is, to what extent the society order social relations to a benefit narrow interests of the elite and how individuals are socialized into the ongoing social structure. Neoliberalism with its "greed is good" mantra is unhealthy society. That's for sure. It actually discourages bonds to society which prevent anti-social or openly delinquent behavior in humans. George Vincent, writing in the first volume of the American Journal of Sociology, defined social control as ". . . the art of combining social
forces so as to give society at least a trend toward an ideal" (1896:490). if the ideal is "homo homily lupus est" like it is under neoliberalism the society, or organization/firm gradually self-destruct.
There is a strong correlation between dysfunctional social institutions, decreased relationships to society and the level of delinquency, especially adolescent delinquency. If adolescence is viewed as part of a maturation process with the end goal being the integration of the youth into adult social roles, then in a dysfunctional society likelihood that a youth will become involved with the criminal justice system dramatically increase.
Oct 05, 2012 | www.cosmopolitan.com

Your Coworker

She always asks you to grab her coffee (and doesn't pay you back), and loves to monopolize your time.

How to Deal: Next time she asks you to get something for her (coffee, lunch, whatever), just "forget" to do it or tell her you unfortunately don't have the time. If she keeps swinging by your desk for hour-long "chats," start telling her you really have to get back to an assignment and add, "if we could finish this later, that would be great." Eventually, she'll get the point.

She's obsessed with being the center of attentionand freaks when she isn't.

How to Deal: Sure, it's annoying especially when she can't even deal when your guy's parents ask you about how work is going but it's in your best interests to be nice to her. So throw her a bone. The easiest way: Like her attention-seeking Facebook posts. That way, you can roll your eyes while you do it, and she'll never know.

She's demanding of your time and has a meltdown if you can't accommodate her.

How to Deal: Sit down with her and tell her that, while you love her, you can't be available to her 24/7, 365. Ask your mom how often she thinks is reasonable for you two to hang out or catch up, and then work with that. Maybe all she wants is a regular "date" with you. Once you decide on something, make her stick to it. So, if she starts harassing you about not being able to hang out on a Monday, tell her you're busy, but you'll see her at your regular Thursday night dinner.

She texts and calls you like crazy, and says you're a bad friend if you don't drop everything when she needs you (which is pretty much every day).

How to Deal: It's time to slowly get rid of her which, we know can be tricky when she's in your circle of friends. Whatever you do, don't respond when she gets crazy over text. If she calls you a bad friend, tell her that her behavior is pushing you away or just ignore her altogether. You don't need someone like that in your life.

She needs constant hand-holding (especially after work hours) and can't cope when she doesn't get it.

How to Deal: Our advice: Start looking for a new job. She won't change the way she treats you, and unfortunately, she's calling the shots right now. In the meantime, tell her you don't get work email on your phone. She'll have to think twice about actually calling you at 10 p.m. vs. firing off a demanding email.

[Nov 10, 2017] The (Unlucky) 13 Traits Of High-Maintenance People HuffPost

The high maintenance man or woman is the layman's term for someone with a Cluster B (antisocial, narcissistic, histrionic, or borderline) personality disorder or a subclinical version with those traits.
Notable quotes:
"... The 5 second solution: "How do you intend to solve that problem?" Teach your employees to come to you with ideas and solutions for your feedback, but that your door and inbox are not open for dropping their challenges into your lap. ..."
"... The 5 second solution: React to the bigger issue at hand, to avoid being pulled into the daily tug and pull of keeping an oversized ego at bay. David Williams outlines four steps for taming an ego here . ..."
"... The 5 second solution: Teach your team to avoid "upward delegation" – that their responsibility is to handle their job, not to hand pieces of it back to the boss, or heaven forbid, to the client. ..."
"... The 5 second solution: As a leader, you do individuals locked into the "blame game" a favor by not playing into the negativity dialogue. "I'm sorry that happened. But you're here now – we appreciate and respect you – and we have work to do." ..."
"... The 5 second solution: Don't provide one. Listen freely to collaboration and ideas -- but avoid feeding someone's need to "make the rounds" at the office to mire in the anguishing complaints about their challenging tasks and accounts. ..."
"... The 5 Second solution: let the drama begin and end in HR. In the agency world, one individual became so adept at working the system, even a day off required a phone appointment with HR to "hash out a few issues." It was a wake up call for us all – for a chronically high maintenance person, even their days away from the office can produce a negative energy drain. Let HR handle the situation–but when someone becomes a near full time issue, it's a sure sign their high maintenance is an issue the company will need to address. ..."
"... The 5 Second solution: Discipline yourself to be a company that covers its own expenses, and spend only what the business can afford to pay for in cash. The environment of discipline as opposed to the perpetual anxiety for "more" can carry over to help employees learn to manage their personal expenses better as well. In any case, work to prevent employees from making the office a perpetual sounding board for their personal "woes." ..."
"... The 5 Second solution: To keep these behaviors from derailing their company culture, the best example must come from the top. A leader who avoids flaunting material status and is willing to do for the company what is expected of others does a great deal to enhance the working culture for all. ..."
"... The 5 second solution: Learn to set and maintain appropriate boundaries with these personality types. As a reminder to all in a company, great people talk about ideas -- but small people focus their talk on other people or "things". Change the subject as many times as needed until the idea of a higher level of thinking and acting can thrive. ..."
"... The 5 Second solution: Generally, in a case like this, there is direct intervention required. Remind the individual that if they can't respect the boss and someone must leave generally, it won't be the boss. Find a constructive way to address what ails you–change the trend for the better–get along–or consider a move or a change for the long term. But in the world of business, undermining the boss will hurt the perpetrator far more than the target, even if the resentment is justified. ..."
Nov 10, 2017 | www.huffingtonpost.com
David Williams' Confessions of a High Maintenance CEO is making me laugh (somewhat in humor, but also in guilt.) Most CEOs are high maintenance. However, most every business has been riddled at one time or another with the issues of chronically (and negatively) high maintenance people at work.

More From Forbes:
-- 20 Job Rules For Millennials
-- Seven Common Small Business Mistakes And How To Deal With Them
-- 11 Ways to Beat the Monday Blues

These situations are not the ebb and flow of creative energy, but the result of unhealthy people producing a toxic energy drain. High maintenance people can also be overwhelming as friends. Ironically, their tendency to lose friends contributes even further to their inclination to latch onto "people targets" at work.

Courtesy of columnist Ayanna Guyhto , here are the 13 unlucky signs of negative high maintenance followed by a few of the methods you can use to reduce the drain of "people debt" on your company's energy level and bottom line:

The 13 Traits of High Maintenance People:

See the complete list at Forbes )

1 -They have urgent "needs." To a high maintenance personality, everything is urgent. Every piece of email needs to be copied to someone in authority and every action needs to be passed by the boss before they proceed.

The 5 second solution: "How do you intend to solve that problem?" Teach your employees to come to you with ideas and solutions for your feedback, but that your door and inbox are not open for dropping their challenges into your lap.

2 – They have a sense of entitlement. Everyone deserves to be treated with equal respect. The high maintenance individual will expect more. When this happens, there's generally an unhealthy level of ego at play.

The 5 second solution: React to the bigger issue at hand, to avoid being pulled into the daily tug and pull of keeping an oversized ego at bay. David Williams outlines four steps for taming an ego here .

3 – They could be self-sufficient. But they're not. The task could be as simple as looking up an email address, retrieving a file, or looking up a bit of needed information over the web. But this person feels more engaged and important by making continual requests for service from others, including the boss.

The 5 second solution: Teach your team to avoid "upward delegation" – that their responsibility is to handle their job, not to hand pieces of it back to the boss, or heaven forbid, to the client.

4 – They cling to stories of personal wrongs from the past. The high maintenance individual has a difficult time moving past real or imagined wrongs of the past. The faults of others become a script that plays over and over as justification for extra support, lower work expectations, or greater entitlements now.

The 5 second solution: As a leader, you do individuals locked into the "blame game" a favor by not playing into the negativity dialogue. "I'm sorry that happened. But you're here now – we appreciate and respect you – and we have work to do."

5 – They talk. A lot. The high maintenance person thrives on attention. They have a continual need for others to serve as their sounding boards. While discussion and brainstorming is necessary and healthy, high maintenance people feel the need to use their co-workers as ad hoc life advisors and coaches; however they have little desire or motivation to actually hear and take the advice they receive. Mostly, they crave a listening ear.

The 5 second solution: Don't provide one. Listen freely to collaboration and ideas -- but avoid feeding someone's need to "make the rounds" at the office to mire in the anguishing complaints about their challenging tasks and accounts.

6 – They are seldom satisfied. High maintenance people will see the flaws in every situation. Even when they've been given extra care and attention, they will invariably find something wrong with the solution or service they've received, or will feel the need to ask for an additional "adjustment" in order to gratify their need to feel validated and served.

7 – They are high-strung. Not all high-strung people are high maintenance. But the person with excessive needs will be persistently vocal and anxious about the things they require. Again – it's a dependency you shouldn't encourage or feed.

8 – They live in a state of perpetual drama. If you are around a high maintenance person for an extended period of time, you will observe frequent periods of meltdown during the course of the day. Every small inconvenience or mistake becomes a crisis. They will learn to work the internal HR system heavily at every turn.

The 5 Second solution: let the drama begin and end in HR. In the agency world, one individual became so adept at working the system, even a day off required a phone appointment with HR to "hash out a few issues." It was a wake up call for us all – for a chronically high maintenance person, even their days away from the office can produce a negative energy drain. Let HR handle the situation–but when someone becomes a near full time issue, it's a sure sign their high maintenance is an issue the company will need to address.

9 – They handle money poorly. Regardless of the economy or circumstance, high maintenance people are perpetually in debt. No matter their income, their living expenditures and needs are invariably more. They expend an exceptional amount of stress and energy dealing with past due accounts and the perpetual juggling act to use this month's income to cover last month's bills.

The 5 Second solution: Discipline yourself to be a company that covers its own expenses, and spend only what the business can afford to pay for in cash. The environment of discipline as opposed to the perpetual anxiety for "more" can carry over to help employees learn to manage their personal expenses better as well. In any case, work to prevent employees from making the office a perpetual sounding board for their personal "woes."

10 – They place a high importance on material status. The entitlement aspect of high maintenance people leads them to be keenly focused on the belongings or the status of others as well. This trait can infect the highest people in the organization, such as the CEO who demands that every company event include the provision of free upgrades and presidential suites at no additional cost. Ironically, the focus on material possessions and status is actually the sign of insecurity and of a low self-esteem.

The 5 Second solution: To keep these behaviors from derailing their company culture, the best example must come from the top. A leader who avoids flaunting material status and is willing to do for the company what is expected of others does a great deal to enhance the working culture for all.

11 – They are obsessed with details–theirs and yours. They are highly focused on the too-much-information and none-of-your-business particulars of your life and also of theirs.

The 5 second solution: Learn to set and maintain appropriate boundaries with these personality types. As a reminder to all in a company, great people talk about ideas -- but small people focus their talk on other people or "things". Change the subject as many times as needed until the idea of a higher level of thinking and acting can thrive.

12 – They seem "unsettled." The high maintenance person is constantly ill at ease, buying, altering or discarding possessions and complaining about their work or living conditions. The details that are non-issues to others are insurmountable hurdles to them. Happiness perpetually evades them.

13 – They resent authority are often critical of others. It is extremely difficult for these individuals to respect authority or to see the bigger picture. Instead, they hold fast to their opinions of the support they need and the credit they should receive in order to fulfill their assignments. Passive aggressive behavior is paramount (undermining the boss by spreading unrest or ill will – often veiling the bad behavior in an aura of superiority or nobility).

The 5 Second solution: Generally, in a case like this, there is direct intervention required. Remind the individual that if they can't respect the boss and someone must leave generally, it won't be the boss. Find a constructive way to address what ails you–change the trend for the better–get along–or consider a move or a change for the long term. But in the world of business, undermining the boss will hurt the perpetrator far more than the target, even if the resentment is justified.

By now you should be detecting a pattern of traits so apparent they are even humorous.

As an employer, however, I'm not laughing -- I'm recognizing that much of the impetus lies with the boss or employer to vet prospective employees for emotional maturity (what author Dan Goleman refers to as "Emotional IQ") in making great hires. Alan Hall gives great advice on hiring as well, in his Forbes article and eBook the 7 C's: How to Find and Hire Great Employees .

Responsibility lies with the company to create and reinforce a positive culture. Do you have a working environment that allows bad behaviors to take hold and fester? Do you actively feed and reward the positive behaviors? Do you set a good example yourself?

If your company is already infected, you should deal with the situation directly. In some cases, you may succeed in helping these individuals to find their better nature and make a positive change. Nothing is more rewarding than turning a negative pattern around. However, in some cases the toxicity may be so deeply embedded that the only way to deal effectively is to simply refuse to engage. You will need to be firm. You may even need to part ways.

Have you had this experience? I imagine the answer is "yes." I look forward to hearing your stories and hearing about your success.

[Oct 22, 2017] Having a theory of mind is quite distinct from having empathy, and having empathy is quite distinct from using it pervasively to guide personal/social/political life.

Oct 22, 2017 | crookedtimber.org

A sociopath can be very good at reading and manipulating others. Having a theory of mind is quite distinct from having empathy, and having empathy is quite distinct from using it pervasively to guide personal/social/political life.

[Sep 19, 2017] The idea of screening of persons in positions of power for excessive psychopathic, deceptive, and manipulative personalities.

Sep 19, 2017 | www.unz.com

Joe Hide > , September 19, 2017 at 2:02 pm GMT

The simple, publically acceptable, and eventually inexpensive and convenient solution to 90% of all these problems. Technological screening of persons in positions of power for excessive psychopathic, deceptive, and manipulative personalities. If put on cell phones as aps, say involving cell phone aps of retinal scanning, heart rate changes, etc., even prospective spouses, business partners, etc could be evaluated. "The Darkness hates the Light because the Light exposes the Darkness for it's evil deeds." So let's do some exposing!

[Sep 17, 2017] Colleagues Addicted to Tech

Notable quotes:
"... dwelling on the negative can backfire. ..."
"... It's fine to acknowledge a misstep. But spin the answer to focus on why this new situation is such an ideal match of your abilities to the employer's needs. ..."
Apr 20, 2015 | NYTimes.com

Discussing Bad Work Situations

I have been in my present position for over 25 years. Five years ago, I was assigned a new boss, who has a reputation in my industry for harassing people in positions such as mine until they quit. I have managed to survive, but it's clear that it's time for me to move along. How should I answer the inevitable interview question: Why would I want to leave after so long? I've heard that speaking badly of a boss is an interview no-no, but it really is the only reason I'm looking to find something new. BROOKLYN

I am unemployed and interviewing for a new job. I have read that when answering interview questions, it's best to keep everything you say about previous work experiences or managers positive.

But what if you've made one or two bad choices in the past: taking jobs because you needed them, figuring you could make it work - then realizing the culture was a bad fit, or you had an arrogant, narcissistic boss?

Nearly everyone has had a bad work situation or boss. I find it refreshing when I read stories about successful people who mention that they were fired at some point, or didn't get along with a past manager. So why is it verboten to discuss this in an interview? How can the subject be addressed without sounding like a complainer, or a bad employee? CHICAGO

As these queries illustrate, the temptation to discuss a negative work situation can be strong among job applicants. But in both of these situations, and in general, criticizing a current or past employer is a risky move. You don't have to paint a fictitiously rosy picture of the past, but dwelling on the negative can backfire. Really, you don't want to get into a detailed explanation of why you have or might quit at all. Instead, you want to talk about why you're such a perfect fit for the gig you're applying for.

So, for instance, a question about leaving a long-held job could be answered by suggesting that the new position offers a chance to contribute more and learn new skills by working with a stronger team. This principle applies in responding to curiosity about jobs that you held for only a short time.

It's fine to acknowledge a misstep. But spin the answer to focus on why this new situation is such an ideal match of your abilities to the employer's needs.

The truth is, even if you're completely right about the past, a prospective employer doesn't really want to hear about the workplace injustices you've suffered, or the failings of your previous employer. A manager may even become concerned that you will one day add his or her name to the list of people who treated you badly. Save your cathartic outpourings for your spouse, your therapist, or, perhaps, the future adoring profile writer canonizing your indisputable success.

Send your workplace conundrums to workologist@nytimes.com, including your name and contact information (even if you want it withheld for publication). The Workologist is a guy with well-intentioned opinions, not a professional career adviser. Letters may be edited.

[Sep 11, 2017] Neoliberalism is creating loneliness. That's what is wrenching society apart by George Monbiot

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Consumerism fills the social void. But far from curing the disease of isolation, it intensifies social comparison to the point at which, having consumed all else, we start to prey upon ourselves. Social media brings us together and drives us apart, allowing us precisely to quantify our social standing, and to see that other people have more friends and followers than we do. ..."
"... A recent survey in England suggests that one in four women between 16 and 24 have harmed themselves, and one in eight now suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Anxiety, depression, phobias or obsessive compulsive disorder affect 26% of women in this age group. This is what a public health crisis looks like. ..."
"... Opioids relieve both physical agony and the distress of separation. Perhaps this explains the link between social isolation and drug addiction. ..."
"... Children who experience emotional neglect, according to some findings, suffer worse mental health consequences than children suffering both emotional neglect and physical abuse: hideous as it is, violence involves attention and contact. Self-harm is often used as an attempt to alleviate distress: another indication that physical pain is not as bad as emotional pain. As the prison system knows only too well, one of the most effective forms of torture is solitary confinement. ..."
"... It's unsurprising that social isolation is strongly associated with depression, suicide, anxiety, insomnia, fear and the perception of threat. It's more surprising to discover the range of physical illnesses it causes or exacerbates. Dementia, high blood pressure, heart disease, strokes, lowered resistance to viruses, even accidents are more common among chronically lonely people. Loneliness has a comparable impact on physical health to smoking 15 cigarettes a day: it appears to raise the risk of early death by 26%. This is partly because it enhances production of the stress hormone cortisol, which suppresses the immune system. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is a project that explicitly aims, and has achieved, the undermining and elimination of social networks in favour of market competition ..."
"... In practice, loosening social and legal institutions has reduced social security (in the general sense rather than simply welfare payments) and encouraged the limitation of social interaction to money based activity ..."
"... All powerful institutions have a vested interest in keeping us atomized and individualistic. The gangs at the top don't want competition. They're afraid of us. In particular, they're afraid of men organising into gangs. That's where this very paper comes in ..."
"... The alienation genie was out of the bottle with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and mass migration to cities began and we abandoned living in village communities ..."
"... Neoliberalism expressly encourages 'atomisation'- it is all about reducing human interaction to markets. And so this is just one of the reasons that neoliberalism is such a bunk philosophy. ..."
"... My stab at an answer would first question the notion that we are engaging in anything. That presupposes we are making the choices. Those who set out the options are the ones that make the choices. We are being engaged by the grotesquely privileged and the pathologically greedy in an enterprise that profits them still further. It suits the 1% very well strategically, for obvious reasons, that the 99% don't swap too many ideas with each other. ..."
"... According to Robert Putnam, as societies become more ethnically diverse they lose social capital, contributing to the type of isolation and loneliness which George describes. Doesn't sound as evil as neoliberalism I suppose. ..."
"... multiculturalism is a direct result of Neoliberalism. The market rules and people are secondary. Everything must be done for business owners, and that everything means access to cheap labor. ..."
"... I'd have thought what he really wants to say is that loneliness as a phenomenon in modern Western society arises out of an intent on the part of our political and social elites to divide us all into competing against one another, as individuals and as members of groups, all the better to keep us under control and prevent us from working together to claim our fair share of resources. ..."
"... Has it occurred to you that the collapse in societal values has allowed 'neo-liberalism' to take hold? ..."
"... No. It has been the concentrated propaganda of the "free" press. Rupert Murdoch in particular, but many other well-funded organisations working in the background over 50 years. They are winning. ..."
"... We're fixated on a magical, abstract concept called "the economy". Everything must be done to help "the economy", even if this means adults working through their weekends, neglecting their children, neglecting their elderly parents, eating at their desks, getting diabetes, breaking down from stress, and giving up on a family life. ..."
"... You can make a reasonable case that 'Neoliberalism' expects that every interaction, including between individuals, can be reduced to a financial one. ..."
"... As can be seen from many of the posts, neo-liberalism depends on, and fosters, ignorance, an inability to see things from historical and different perspectives and social and intellectual disciplines. On a sociological level how other societies are arranged throws up interesting comparisons. Scandanavian countries, which have mostly avoided neo-liberalism by and large, are happier, healthier places to live. America and eastern countries arranged around neo-liberal, market driven individualism, are unhappy places, riven with mental and physical health problems and many more social problems of violence, crime and suicide. ..."
"... The people who fosted this this system onto us, are now either very old or dead. We're living in the shadow of their revolutionary transformation of our more equitable post-war society. Hayek, Friedman, Keith Joseph, Thatcher, Greenspan and tangentially but very influentially Ayn Rand. Although a remainder (I love the wit of the term 'Remoaner') , Brexit can be better understood in the context of the death-knell of neoliberalism. ..."
"... Criticism of his hypotheses on this thread (where articualted at all) focus on the existence of solitude and loneliness prior to neo liberalism, which seems to me to be to deliberately miss his point: this was formerly a minor phenomenon, yet is now writ on an incredible scale - and it is a social phenomenon particular to those western economies whose elites have most enthusiastically embraced neo liberalism. ..."
"... We all want is to: (and feel we have the right to) wear the best clothes, have the foreign holidays, own the latest tech and eat the finest foods. At the same time our rights have increased and awareness of our responsibilities have minimized. The execution of common sense and an awareness that everything that goes wrong will always be someone else fault. ..."
"... We are not all special snowflakes, princesses or worthy of special treatment, but we act like self absorbed, entitled individuals. Whether that's entitled to benefits, the front of the queue or bumped into first because its our birthday! ..."
"... Unhealthy social interaction, yes. You can never judge what is natural to humans based on contemporary Britain. Anthropologists repeatedly find that what we think natural is merely a social construct created by the system we are subject to. ..."
"... We are becoming fearful of each other and I believe the insecurity we feel plays a part in this. ..."
"... We have become so disconnected from ourselves and focused on battling to stay afloat. Having experienced periods of severe stress due to lack of money I couldn't even begin to think about how I felt, how happy I was, what I really wanted to do with my life. I just had to pay my landlord, pay the bills and try and put some food on my table so everything else was totally neglected. ..."
"... We need a radical change of political thinking to focus on quality of life rather than obsession with the size of our economy. High levels of immigration of people who don't really integrate into their local communities has fractured our country along with the widening gap between rich and poor. Governments only see people in terms of their "economic value" - hence mothers being driven out to work, children driven into daycare and the elderly driven into care homes. Britain is becoming a soulless place - even our great British comedy is on the decline. ..."
"... Quality of life is far more important than GDP I agree but it is also far more important than inequality. ..."
"... Thatcher was only responsible for "letting it go" in Britain in 1980, but actually it was already racing ahead around the world. ..."
"... Eric Fromm made similar arguments to Monbiot about the psychological impact of modern capitalism (Fear of Freedom and The Sane Society) - although the Freudian element is a tad outdated. However, for all the faults of modern society, I'd rather be unhappy now than in say, Victorian England. Similarly, life in the West is preferable to the obvious alternatives. ..."
"... Whilst it's very important to understand how neoliberalism, the ideology that dare not speak it's name, derailed the general progress in the developed world. It's also necessary to understand that the roots this problem go much further back. Not merely to the start of the industrial revolution, but way beyond that. It actually began with the first civilizations when our societies were taken over by powerful rulers, and they essentially started to farm the people they ruled like cattle. On the one hand they declared themselves protector of their people, whilst ruthlessly exploiting them for their own political gain. I use the livestock farming analogy, because that explains what is going on. ..."
"... Neo-liberalism allows psychopaths to flourish, and it has been argued by Robert Hare that they are disproportionately represented in the highest echelons of society. So people who lack empathy and emotional attachment are probably weilding a significant amount of influence over the way our economy and society is organised. Is it any wonder that they advocate an economic model which is most conducive to their success? Things like job security, rigged markets, unions, and higher taxes on the rich simply get in their way. ..."
"... . Data suggests that inequality has widened massively over the last 30 years ( https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/infographic-income-inequality-uk ) - as has social mobility ( https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/may/22/social-mobility-data-charts ). Homelessness has risen substantially since 1979. ..."
"... As a director and CEO of an organisation employing several hundred people I became aware that 40% of the staff lived alone and that the workplace was important to them not only for work but also for interacting with their colleagues socially . ..."
"... A thoughtful article. But the rich and powerful will ignore it; their doing very well out of neo liberalism thank you. Meanwhile many of those whose lives are affected by it don't want to know - they're happy with their bigger TV screen. Which of course is what the neoliberals want, 'keep the people happy and in the dark'. An old Roman tactic - when things weren't going too well for citizens and they were grumbling the leaders just extended the 'games'. Evidently it did the trick ..."
"... Sounds like the inevitable logical outcome of a society where the predator sociopathic and their scared prey are all that is allowed. This dynamic dualistic tautology, the slavish terrorised to sleep and bullying narcissistic individual, will always join together to protect their sick worldview by pathologising anything that will threaten their hegemony of power abuse: compassion, sensitivity, moral conscience, altruism and the immediate effects of the ruthless social effacement or punishment of the same ie human suffering. ..."
"... "Alienation, in all areas, has reached unprecedented heights; the social machinery for deluding consciousnesses in the interest of the ruling class has been perfected as never before. The media are loaded with upscale advertising identifying sophistication with speciousness. Television, in constant use, obliterates the concept under the image and permanently feeds a baseless credulity for events and history. Against the will of many students, school doesn't develop the highly cultivated critical capacities that a real sovereignty of the people would require. And so on. ..."
"... There's no question - neoliberalism has been wrenching society apart. It's not as if the prime movers of this ideology were unaware of the likely outcome viz. "there is no such thing as society" (Thatcher). Actually in retrospect the whole zeitgeist from the late 70s emphasised the atomised individual separated from the whole. Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene" (1976) may have been influential in creating that climate. ..."
"... I would add that the basic concepts of the Neoliberal New world order are fundamentally Evil, from the control of world population through supporting of strife starvation and war to financial inducements of persons in positions of power. Let us not forget the training of our younger members of our society who have been induced to a slavish love of technology. ..."
"... The kind of personal freedom that you say goes hand in hand with capitalism is an illusion for the majority of people. It holds up the prospect of that kind of freedom, but only a minority get access to it. ..."
"... Problems in society are not solved by having a one hour a week class on "self esteem". In fact self-esteem and self-worth comes from the things you do. ..."
"... Neoliberalism is the bastard child of globalization which in effect is Americanization. The basic premise is the individual is totally reliant on the corporate world state aided by a process of fear inducing mechanisms, p