Psychopaths?

What's your take on this?

I wish our politicians were all psychopaths, because maybe then they'd self-destruct and take the state with them.  Unfortunately, I think it's much more likely that most of them are hired agents for the elite who only appear to be psychopaths because the agenda of their controllers is so at odds with that of the people.

Self destructing and taking the state with them may be exactly what they are doing.

psychopath is not a clinical term, if it is antisocial personality disorder it falls under the catagory of a personality disorder which is a bit obtuse in definition.  Either way anyone (especially a non professional) aking diagnoses on people they do not know, or applying personal psych to a group of individuals can not be trusted.

maybe it depends on which clinic you go to.

"A grandiose and superficially charming manipulator who can’t be cured, who uses people for his purposes, feels no remorse, never learns his lesson and has no sense of tomorrow’s consequences for today’s actions? Have I not just given the best general description of a politician ever written?"

 

what are the hundreds of milions who vote every few years or so?  victims????

 

does any of the posters here vote?? 

I wish our politicians were all psychopaths, because maybe then they'd self-destruct and take the state with them.  Unfortunately, I think it's much more likely that most of them are hired agents for the elite who only appear to be psychopaths because the agenda of their controllers is so at odds with that of the people.

This is such a weird 'Illuminati-esque' view a lot of Libertarians have. Politicians think they're good guys. Most people think some politicians are good guys, so why wouldn't the politicians share the view? Sure they 'conspire', but sometimes its 'necessary' to get the 'important' things done. They're ideologically, institutionally, informationally, emotionally and economically insulated from the effects of their policy.

They are, basically, normal people. Except more charismatic, a bit smarter and more heiarchically aggressive. Politicians are engaging in perfectly ordinary human behavior.

Dondoolee:

Either way anyone (especially a non professional) aking diagnoses on people they do not know, or applying personal psych to a group of individuals can not be trusted.

I think someone really missed the point and tone of this article.

what are the hundreds of milions who vote every few years or so?  victims????

Not relevant to the topic.

I dunno, I don't buy it.  Humans are social animals and we tend to build hierarchical structures.  The people who are good at climbing those structures are just that; good at climbing hierarchies.  

I think that it's much more likely that these are just normal people making tough choices that often have far reaching consequences.  It would be simple to say they're all psychopaths but it seems much more likely to me that most of these people are perfectly normal.

Try convincing a normal person to run in an election and then say that.

Caley McKibbin:

Try convincing a normal person to run in an election and then say that.

 

I think by almost anyone's standards many sane "normal" people have run for city council, school board, town sheriff, etc.  I think it would take an unusually isolated person to think otherwise.

P.S. if you think radical libertarians are "normal", we are most likely using two different definitions 

You are calling me isolated?  I've run in provincial and federal elections.  I know a few things, one of which is that very few people would do it.

P.S. if you think radical libertarians are "normal", we are most likely using two different definitions

lols@that

the topic is a question: psychopaths? what is your take in this?? from the this........."A psychopath is a person who lacks the empathy that most human beings have and that allows them to exist as social animals. Capable of evincing emotions they do not feel, they are superficially charming but ultimately deceitful and manipulative. A grandiose and superficially charming manipulator who can’t be cured, who uses people for his purposes, feels no remorse, never learns his lesson and has no sense of tomorrow’s consequences for today’s actions? Have I not just given the best general description of a politician ever written?"" now if pychopath politicians year after year somehow arent recognized by the miollions that vote year after year....are the policiticsans really the psychopaths?? are the miollions year after year victims of the psychopaths??? seems very relavant to me . remember what is your take on this??? is that a topic or a question?

Liberté:

This is such a weird 'Illuminati-esque' view a lot of Libertarians have.

It's weird to not to have this view.

And nothing you said following the quoted passage, did anything to disprove this notion.

Seph:

It's weird to not to have this view.

It's weirder to assume that all such conspiracies boil down to collusion / intent, just as weird to assume all possible colluders (is this a word?) are too stupid to do so / unintentional, when it can be viewed that it is often hard to distinguish between collusion & gross incompetence.  

For instance, many view the katrina response as purposeful neglect on the part of the present administration / federal government, implying conspiracy, due to New Orleans being mostly minorities or non-whites, but it's well known from the fallout that FEMA had been grossly inept before the event even took place.    

To echo a previous sentence said elsewhere, many people who are the object of conspiracy theories (in this instance, politicians) may fully believe they are the "good guys".  

It's incredibly simplified & not nearly as complex or interesting as conspiracies, but many people who politicans "represent" also engage in such simplified rationalizations & logic.  
 

If by weird you mean "perfectly ordinary" then we agree.

You should really read Jeffrey Friedman of Critical Review on his analysis of the systemic knowledge problems of politics. Politics is not a league of villains (there are no villains in reality). It is heirarchical male shuffling for status, wealth and access to mates. Apes do it all the time. People are apes.

Liberté:

If by weird you mean "perfectly ordinary" then we agree.

You should really read Jeffrey Friedman of Critical Review on his analysis of the systemic knowledge problems of politics. Politics is not a league of villains (there are no villains in reality). It is heirarchical male shuffling for status, wealth and access to mates. Apes do it all the time. People are apes.

So to sum up your position:

An institutuion with a coercive monopoly of justice, taxation, law making and law enforcement, will absolutely not use this power to create coflict in order to judge in its own favour.

To even suggest that there could be genuinely evil people in the state is ridiculous.

You need to spend more time reading David Ray Griffin, I'm afraid.

An institutuion with a coercive monopoly of justice, taxation, law making and law enforcement, will absolutely not use this power to create coflict in order to judge in its own favour.

Of course it will, that's the whole point of having government power. The point is that they feel perfectly justified in doing so and, by their ideological and informational situation, are just as 'correct' as the Roth'tards are for railing against municipal garbage collectors.

To even suggest that there could be genuinely evil people in the state is ridiculous.

There are no genuinely evil people in the Universe. There is no such thing as evil. There are only conflicts of interest.

Roth'tards

Staying classy, as always.