From Psycho-Linguistics to the Politics of Psychopathy. Part 1: Propaganda.

We are living in an Orwellian society. Here’s a long but important article about the way language has been used to promote psychopathy in society and politics, and target the most vulnerable members of society. It’s a form of societal scapegoating, not much different than the way dysfunctional families target their most sensitive member (the “truthteller”) for abuse and ostracization.

Although this post is told from the perspective of modern British society, it definitely applies to America too (probably even more so), and most of the western world. Psychopathy–and its attendant lack of empathy and ruthlessness–is glorified, even though it’s not called by that name. The real victims of this compassionless agenda–the poor, disabled, minority races, immigrants, and people who otherwise don’t fit the stereotypical “ideal”–are blamed for all the ills of society even though they have never had any power. Think about how similar this is to what goes on in dysfunctional families headed by narcissists. It’s society-wide gaslighting and blame-shifting.

Language is a powerful weapon, and is being successfully used to promote this evil agenda of selfishness and callous disregard. It’s the real world Newspeak.

Kitty S Jones's avatarPolitics and Insights

68196_116423458427191_5364492_n

1. Propaganda Techniques

Metacognition: We need to be mindful of how we think as well as what we think.

While the term propaganda has acquired a strongly negative connotation by association with its most manipulative and jingoistic examples (e.g. Nazi propaganda used to justify the Holocaust), propaganda in its original sense was neutral, and could refer to uses that were generally benign or innocuous, such as public health recommendations, signs encouraging citizens to participate in a census or election, or messages encouraging people to report crimes to law agencies, amongst others.

So the exact definition of propaganda is constantly debated, and no specific definition is completely agreed. Some argue that any persuasive communication is propaganda, whilst others hold that propaganda specifically alters political opinions. However, it is doubtless that propaganda is material which is meant to manipulate or change public opinion, and though it may vary in form and technique, it always…

View original post 8,370 more words

What is politics?

Image

paul_begala_quote

George Carlin speaks the truth.

George Carlin was a brilliant comedian who wasn’t afraid to bring up uncomfortable truths, as he does in this standup routine in New York City some years ago.

Is the Illuminati really running everything?

madonna
Madonna wearing the “Eye of Horus,” a commonly seen Illuminati symbol.

For awhile, there’s been a growing Internet meme that states that the Illuminati (a secret fraternal organization started in Bavaria in the late 1800s and closely affiliated with the Masons) is pulling the strings behind everything from politics to the economy to the entertainment industry, and the people we see on our TVs and the media are nothing more than puppets attempting to indoctrinate the rest of us. It’s been purported that 9/11 was an “inside job”, the 2008 financial collapse was planned in order to benefit the richest 1%, and most or even all successful recording artists, actors and other entertainers are secret members of the Illuminati and undergo behind-closed-doors initiations that involve brainwashing,  devil worship and depraved acts such as bestiality and human sacrifice. They believe Illuminati’s sole purpose is to establish a New World Order that rejects God and makes Satan its master. Fundamentalist millenarian Christians swallow this idea hook, line and sinker because it’s in keeping with Biblical prophecy and to them, is proof we are seeing the last of the Last Days, when humanity becomes increasingly debauched, soulless, and turns away from the God of the Bible toward the Self as God (which they purport the New Age teaches).

Being a person who values reason over hysteria, I’ve always been a skeptic when it comes to such conspiracy theories, but lately I’m beginning to wonder. I’ve always believed 9/11 was (at least in part) an inside job and I wouldn’t doubt the financial collapse being one also. I’ve never trusted the government or politicians (OR the powerful corporations and the people who run them) and I strongly believe our society serves and rewards the wealthiest 1%, not the masses. It’s gotten a whole lot worse in recent years too, and psychopathy and blatant narcissism seems to be in excess these days and is treated as almost a virtue and a means to get ahead. But even so, I was still a skeptic about the Illuminati and always laughed when I’d hear the “crazy” conspiracy theories. “Oh, the Illuminati again LOL!” was my attitude whenever I read the warnings of yet another whistle-blowing Klaxon. I wasn’t even sure such an organization existed, never mind have such a powerful influence over the civilized world.

But the other day I was watching some videos of celebrities who allegedly were inducted into the Illuminati (these videos are all over Youtube) and saw something frightening: at some point after their initiation (and usually immediately following or during a star’s sudden rise to fame and fortune), the light goes out in their eyes and they become flat and dead looking.  Of course, Photoshopping can do a lot to “convince” us of the truth of that, so this alone wouldn’t convince me the theory is true. Besides, the entertainment industry itself can certainly take a toll on your soul once you achieve fame, without there being any secret demon-worshipping activities involved at all. When you become famous you lose your right to any semblance of privacy or a life of your own: your life isn’t your own anymore; it now belongs to the music or film producers and powerful corporations who are motivated by money and greed, and you must maintain the image they want you to present at all times if you want to keep your contract. In essence, you must sell out to the fame-machine. In that sense, you can actually lose your soul.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26rLYghPDsc
One example of the celebrities-are-Illuminati meme. Fact or fiction?

So it wasn’t the entertainers’ blank, expressionless faces and fake smiles that made me think there could be something unholy going on in entertainment (most obviously in music) as well as big business and politics. It was the symbolism. Almost all successful musicians these days use a great deal of Illuminati symbolism in their performances, music videos, and publicity photos: some of these are The Eye of Horus (the all-seeing eye) enclosed within pyramids (both of which also appear on the back of the American dollar bill), certain hand signs associated with the Illuminati, one eye being covered in some way, satanic goat’s heads (the god Baphomet), checkerboard floors, diamonds, and other satanic or illuminati symbolism. Although some effort is made to make these symbols subliminal, they are becoming increasingly obvious.

It’s believed by many that these entertainers are forced to “pay homage” to the Illuminati through these symbols, and that they also serve as a “secret communication” between Illuminati members that the rest of us won’t catch. It’s also been said it’s meant to indoctrinate the masses to the idea of satanism and the unholy, softening us to the eventual takeover of the world by the devil.

Illuminati symbolism in entertainment and politics is nothing new, but less effort is made now to hide it, and some form of this symbolism seems to appear in EVERY music video made by extremely successful music stars. Photos of celebrities in music, film and TV; and politicians and business leaders often show them covering one eye or making the ubiquitous Illuminati hand signs:

beyonce
Beyonce and her husband Jay-Z are highly rumored to be high ranking Illuminati members.

barack_obama
The popular “devils horns” that’s often seen at rock concerts is actually an Illuminati symbol and us used in politics as well.

handsigns
Another example of an Illuminati hand sign and another symbol, a diamond.

But even this wasn’t enough to make me think the takeover of the media and entertainment by the Illuminati might be true. It was this video of Taylor Swift performing at the 2012 AMA awards:

Taylor Swift, was, until around the time of this video (and her simultaneous switch from country to pop music), was a virginal pop-country princess whose videos and shows were wholesome enough for parents to take their preteen daughters to and Taylor was held up as a role model. Her songs were catchy and tuneful and she always dressed modestly and just seemed like such a nice person in an industry full of so much depravement and immorality. But here, we see a different Taylor. Yes, she is older and with age one would expect more “worldliness,” but I’m not so sure. This performance has been said by many to be a representation of her initiation into the Illuminati (which purportedly took place in 2009, with the Kanye West incident being a “test,” which she passed).  In the beginning of this video, she comes out on stage dressed in virginal white (meant to represent the early Taylor) but then is “raped” by the dancers (representing the Illuminati) and emerges dressed in black and red, and suddenly her demeanor changes from sweet to siren-ish. The video is full of Illuminati and Masonic symbolism too.
It’s interesting that this seems to be a pattern, particularly in the music industry: once a celebrity becomes a commercial success, suddenly they take a very dark turn and the symbolism begins to appear.

While I can’t say Taylor has lost her soul or has the dead-eye look some celebrities seem to get (in her interviews she seems quite together and happy and as nice as ever), she is now the most powerful person in the music industry and her success only seems to keep growing. Her music has also become a lot darker. Did she sell out to the forces of Satan in exchange for unlimited fame and fortune? Will she harden even more as she gets deeper into the cult? Will the light go out in her eyes? What about other successful celebrities? Are they masters of their fortune or are they really victims and slaves to a sinister force they have no control over anymore?

Is there really a such thing as the Illuminati at all? If so, does it really have that much power over our society and does it really represent the takeover of evil? Or is it all a huge delusion, the product of the overactive and paranoid imaginings of unenlightened people who don’t trust anything anymore?

What do you think? Let’s talk.

Is Donald Trump actually a narcissist? Therapists weigh in.

donald-trump-therapists-mental-evaluation
Photo-Illustration by Ben Park; By Noam Galai/WireImage/Getty Images (Trump).

Is Donald Trump really a narcissist?

Is the sky blue? Does a bear relieve himself in the woods? Is the Pope Catholic?

I think he is, and a ridiculous one with weird orange skin at that. If the Oompa Loompas were electing a President, he’d fit right in. He’d be a huge embarrassment to this country, and we already have enough to be embarrassed about.

Seriously though, Donald Trump really is a narcissist. Actual therapists have pegged him as a textbook case of NPD. Here’s an article from Vanity Fair that talks about what they have to say:

Is Donald Trump Actually a Narcissist? Therapists Weigh In
By Henry Alford
Published in Vanity Fair on November 11, 2015

trump_quote

For mental-health professionals, Donald Trump is at once easily diagnosed but slightly confounding. “Remarkably narcissistic,” said developmental psychologist Howard Gardner, a professor at Harvard Graduate School of Education. “Textbook narcissistic personality disorder,” echoed clinical psychologist Ben Michaelis. “He’s so classic that I’m archiving video clips of him to use in workshops because there’s no better example of his characteristics,” said clinical psychologist George Simon, who conducts lectures and seminars on manipulative behavior. “Otherwise, I would have had to hire actors and write vignettes. He’s like a dream come true.”

That mental-health professionals are even willing to talk about Trump in the first place may attest to their deep concern about a Trump presidency. As Dr. Robert Klitzman, a professor of psychiatry and the director of the master’s of bioethics program at Columbia University, pointed out, the American Psychiatric Association declares it unethical for psychiatrists to comment on an individual’s mental state without examining him personally and having the patient’s consent to make such comments. This so-called Goldwater rule arose after the publication of a 1964 Fact magazine article in which psychiatrists were polled about Senator Barry Goldwater’s fitness to be president. Senator Goldwater brought a $2 million suit against the magazine and its publisher; the Supreme Court awarded him $1 in compensatory damages and $75,000 in punitive damages.

But you don’t need to have met Donald Trump to feel like you know him; even the smallest exposure can make you feel like you’ve just crossed a large body of water in a small boat with him. Indeed, though narcissistic personality disorder was removed from the most recent issue of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, for somewhat arcane reasons*, the traits that have defined the disorder in the past—grandiosity; an expectation that others will recognize one’s superiority; a lack of empathy—are writ large in Mr. Trump’s behavior.

Read the rest of this article here.

Is this the man we really want as President? Not me.  For the record, I don’t really disagree with his politics (he’s not that conservative), but he’s nothing but a blowhard and there’s probably no substance under all that hot air.

* My understanding is Narcissistic Personality Disorder (DSM 301.81) was kept in the DSM-V; does anyone have any recent information about this? How ghastly if it were no longer considered a mental illness.

Bonus: here’s a complilation of Trump’s funniest moments.

How did narcissism get so “popular”? (part two of two)

narcissist_nation

Here is the second installment, as I promised–I apologize for the delay. In part one, I covered the way narcissism has increasingly infiltrated our society and become a near-virtue to be emulated, starting in the late 1940s and 1950s in a postwar America now regarded to be a world superpower. The babies born in this mood of can-do optimism, the Baby Boomers, were indulged by their parents, who believed anything was possible and showered their children with all the new toys, space-age technology, and new permissive child-rearing techniques that were suddenly popular.

In Part One of this article, I discussed how the indulged Boomer generation influenced western society at every stage of life, and (as a generation) grew into grandiose, entitled adults who demanded (and got) special treatment every step of the way. I covered the decades from the 1950s through the 1980s, and described how narcissism became increasingly regarded as a desireable quality. By the 1980s, narcissism came out of the closet, with the election of a president (Reagan) who encouraged greed, materialism, and entitlements for the wealthy with his “trickle down economics.” At the same time, empathy, neighborliness, and general goodwill toward others seemed to become almost quaint, a naive relic of the past. The juggernaut was the new “greed is good” philosophy, made popular by a 1987 hit movie, “Wall Street,” (which was of course the place to be). Narcissism was no longer something to be hidden; now it was something to aspire to.

In this next installment, I’ll be focusing less on the Boomers and more on the continued growth of narcissism in society, as well as the backlash against it–the narcissistic abuse and ACON community–which began as an Internet phenomenon during the mid 1990s due to one self-professed narcissist named Sam Vaknin. But actually, the seeds of the backlash had been planted as far back as 1983, with M. Scott Peck’s bestselling book, “People of the Lie.”

1990s.

cast_friends

The greed worshipping culture begun in the 1980s continued during the 1990s, as Boomers rose to power and we elected our first Boomer president, Bill Clinton, in 1992. Under Clinton, the economy boomed, and a new breed of Yuppies, the Dot Com entrepreneurs (who were mostly Generation X), rode on the coattails of the newly born Internet, and they made money hand over fist until they went bust several years later. But people still went shopping and the culture at large was becoming increasingly exhibitionistic, obnoxious, and in-your-face (reality shows were born during this time), while corporations grew bigger and more unwieldy (unlimited growth, like a cancer, was encouraged, and smaller companies merged into megacorporations the size of small governments). Meanwhile, government institutions built in the more sedate and community-oriented 1950s and 1960s began to splinter and crumble. The government, especially the part of the government that tried to help its less fortunate citizens and attempted to even the playing field through fair taxation, became The Enemy.

But a backlash was beginning to silently bubble under all the glitz and bling of the ’90s. Back in 1983, a psychiatrist turned born-again Christian named M. Scott Peck published his groundbreaking book, “People of the Lie.” Here, for the first time, was a self help psychology book that focused on “evil”–specifically, people who were evil. The traits described in the book are exactly those of malignant narcissism. The book resonated with many, particularly with Gen-Xers and later born Boomers (Generation Jones), who had been raised by narcissistic parents. In some cases, especially for younger Boomers and early Gen-Xers, these kids had been betrayed by initially doting Silent generation parents who suddenly, during the 1960s or 1970s, seemed to suddenly care only about their own self-development at the expense of their confused and hurt adolescent and preteen children who they no longer seemed to even like much (this is exactly what my experience had been growing up in the 60s and 70s: my parents changed and no longer seemed to care).

But in the early 1980s, Peck’s “evil people” were not automatically equated with narcissists or people with other Cluster B disorders. Until the mid-90s, narcissism–or NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder)–was simply a psychiatric label given to certain patients with a certain set of traits, who may or may not have been evil. NPD wasn’t demonized yet.

Then along came Sam Vaknin in 1995. Vaknin, a former white collar criminal and self-confessed narcissist, had written a tome about narcissism called “Malignant Self-Love: Narcissism Revisited.” Written initially to obtain supply and a guru-like status for himself, Vaknin’s book actually helped many of the narcissistic abuse victims who read it and recognized their abusers in its 600+ pages. Vaknin’s idea of NPD didn’t fit that described in the DSM: he mixed in with NPD several traits of psychopathy, antisocial personality disorder (ASPD), and Borderline personality disorder (BPD), to describe a particularly dangerous type of malignant narcissist that made the toxic people described in M. Scott Peck’s book seem almost tame in comparison.

The book was successful, and soon Vaknin started his own website, and discussion groups, and abuse victims all over the world jumped on the bandwagon. Vaknin, exactly the sort of person they sought to avoid, had become their savior and guiding light out of darkness.

Until the 2000s, Vaknin’s was pretty much the only voice on the Internet about narcissistic abuse. But in the very late 90s, a few books were beginning to be published about this “new” type of abuse that didn’t necessary include physical violence (but could). Parents, particularly mothers, were the focus, and a subset of the narcissistic abuse community–one that focused on narcissistic mothers and the damage they had done to their now-adult children–formed the template for the explosive ACON (Adult Children of Narcissists) movement.

2000s.

bling

For a brief time, after the tragedy of September 11, 2001, it looked like Americans just might start to care about each other again. There was an outpouring of support for the victims of the 9/11 disasters, and solidarity shown among all Americans. For the first time, regional differences and even racial differences didn’t seem to matter, and Americans were united by their flying of the flag. No one seemed all that concerned by the curtailment of certain freedoms and and increase in xenophobia–after all, it was for the protection of the country, right?

But as a result, the economy was suffering, so George W. Bush Jr. (“Dubya”) gave us all permission to “go shopping.” And so we did. It was back to the bread and circuses and the shallow, materialistic culture of the 1980s through pre-2001.

Reality shows rose in popularity and the badder the behavior, the more popular they got. New celebrities were famous only for “being famous,” having a famous parent, or just for acting badly. People aspired to be just like Snooki and The Situation from The Jersey Shore, or Tiffany “New York” Pollard from Flavor of Love. All of these characters were narcissists, or at least acted that way for the benefit of the camera. And people loved them for it.

During the 2000s, Millennials, the rising young adult generation, born in the 1980s and 1990s, started being being accused of being narcissistic, but if they are, you can blame their parents for having taught them these values. In addition, a lot of gaslighting is going on by older generations, who blame the Millennials for their inability to find jobs that pay a living wage and provide benefits, forcing them to live at home and be dependent for longer than earlier generations–and accuse them of being “lazy,” “spoiled,” and “entitled.” But what about their mostly Boomer and Gen-X parents, who modeled this sort of behavior?

Politicians became more blatantly narcissistic and their lack of empathy sank to new lows. One politician said if you weren’t rich, you should blame yourself. Blaming the victim became increasingly popular, and was even seen by some conservative politicians as a “Christian” way to behave–for if you were favored by God, He would bless you with wealth and material comforts. Religion itself became a way for narcissists to rise to positions of great power, and use their “favored status” in God’s eyes as a way to abuse their flock of followers.

Meanwhile, the narcissistic abuse commmunity continued to grow, and blogs written by abuse survivors were beginning to pop up all over the Internet. The abuse community developed their own lingo, some of it borrowed from earlier movements such as 12-step programs (codependent, enabling, people-pleaser are examples), some from pioneers such as Sam Vaknin (narcissistic supply, confabulation), and some from mental health experts going all the way back to Freud. Some terms were taken from popular movies, such as “flying monkeys” (The Wizard of Oz), and “gaslighting” (Gaslight).

2010s.

tea-party

Being only 5 years into the 2010s, it’s hard to see any patterns yet, but it does seem that the problem of narcissism is finally being noticed by the general public. One of the Republican presidential candidates, Donald Trump, is well known for his “NPD” and called out for his grandiose antics constantly, even by people outside the narcissistic abuse community. Narcissism is a fashionable topic now–the fascination by it may only be a fad, but it’s making people pay attention. Lately I’ve noticed a number of Christians who are abandoning the fiscally conservative values held by groups such as the Tea Party, who are about as collectively entitled as you can get (they had better get their social security, but to hell with that child who needs special medical treatment but can’t get it because his parents are too poor). It’s probably too soon to tell whether the “social gospel” is making a return, but there does seem to be a greater call for an increase in empathy and caring for each other and building communities instead of just building up the Almighty Self.

It will be interesting to see what the rest of this decade holds.

Our twisted society.

impoverished

There’s already been enough written about the narcissistic society we live in that rewards greed and selfishness (even ruthlessness) and thinks of corporations as people. There’s something deeply wrong with any society where CEOs are making hundreds of times more than the workers at the bottom of the totem pole, who are trying to subsist on minimum wage and sometimes having to work 2 or 3 jobs just to make ends meet. There’s something evil about any society where the working poor still may not be able to afford a place to live, and cannot even go to the doctor when they get sick. And then on top of that, they are accused of being lazy, stupid, or shiftless. These victims of the system are blamed for all of society’s ills by–you guessed it–the Tea Partiers in their sterile, gated communities and the ultra wealthy who drive new Lamborghinis and own four vacation homes.

But the insane disparity between the ultra-rich and the poor is an issue that’s well-known and finally beginning to be talked about more in the media, and that’s a good thing. I don’t want to get on a political soapbox though. I actually want to talk about something else that’s related but rarely discussed: the way a few people are rewarded for being leeches on society and sucking the life out of hardworking, deserving people who are left with nothing. Ironically, it’s liberal politics, rather than conservative, that’s responsible for what I’m about to rant about. In my opinion, neither of the major political parties have anyone’s best interests at heart. They’re both funded by mega-corporations who only have their own interests in mind and care nothing about the people who live under their dominion.

I’m referring here to my ex. I know I’ve talked about this lifesucking parasite before, but someone brought it up and I’ve been triggered again, so I’m going to rant. I also realize I’ve had issues with those who hold onto a victim mentality, but sometimes things just get to be too much and there’s no escaping our victimization. Sometimes you just have to rant.

Our sick society is rewarding a man richly for having antisocial personality disorder. This conscienceless jerk used and abused me for 27 years — freeloading off my already strapped circumstances for 7 of those years and refusing to work or lift a finger during the time he stayed glued to my couch while I worked my ass off so that he could qualify for disability (SSI). He was always lazy as f*ck and even though was capable of a limited amount of labor, he always made the excuse that he couldn’t work and still qualify for disability (physically, he has diabetes and knee problems).

He expected me to give him a free place to stay, drive him to his doctors appointments, and never even bothered to clean the house or even clean up after himself. This leech stayed on my couch, leaving a dent in it from his constant hateful presence, left his dirty dishes and cigarette butts all over the coffee table, threw trash on the floor, brought in a dog that almost got me kicked out of my house, and expecting me to buy his cigarettes and lottery tickets. He complained about the inexpensive but healthy food I bought. He thought that because he was diabetic, he was entitled to steak every night. He blasted his horrible music when I was trying to sleep and raged at me whenever I asked him to turn it down. He spent all his time trolling political websites, cruelly bullying people he disagreed with. He insisted I hand him over a third of my tax returns, but now that he has money he won’t give me a dime (not that I would ask because technically I’m NC with him).

useless_bum

He was rejected 4 times for SSI, and a year after I got a restraining order on him (for threatening my daughter), he finally got his booty–-which included $31K in back disability pay for the years he freeloaded off me. (Yes, I know I was stupid to allow this but whenever I threatened to kick him out, he’d threaten to commit suicide and make it look like a murder, and I was so beaten down I felt like I didn’t have a choice).

That was bad enough, but a few months ago I learned that his SSI income was DOUBLED because his psychiatrist diagnosed him with ASPD because he’s unemployable and “possibly homicidal.” Thats right–he’s being PAID not to work because he’s an antisocial POS. With the $31K (which is already spent–God knows how he accomplished that in just two months) he bought himself a brand new truck, a huge flat screen TV and a collection of new swords, and no doubt enough weed to last him for months. To his credit, he did buy our son (who he bullied and scapegoated throughout his childhood) some expensive camera equipment, but I suspect there was self-interest involved in this–buying my son over to his side so he can gloat about how I’m too poor to ever buy him anything.

rich_and_poor

The original $700 a month he was to be getting per month in benefits was increased to $1200 after he was diagnosed with ASPD! He also gets almost $400 a month in food stamps and full medical coverage. He still sits around watching TV and trolling political websites all day and sleeping. Meanwhile I have to keep slaving away at a grueling job that’s slowly killing me and have NOTHING to show for it. I can’t afford cable and don’t even own a TV, have no health insurance, and can’t even get my ancient car fixed. Yes, of course I’m envious. 😡 I get so mad just thinking about it that it can and has ruined my day, so that’s all I’m going to say because it’s unhealthy for me to dwell on it.

I’m trying to let go of this bitterness because there’s nothing I can do about it. I might write an anonymous letter to the paper describing the injustice of this state of affairs, but then again, I might not because I know nothing will be done. I can’t dwell on these bitter feelings even if they’re justified. It’s a very sick society where dangerous and useless people like him get to live high off the hog and honest people who try to play by the rules have to slave away at 2 or 3 jobs just to have food on the table–AND we still have to pay taxes to keep human cancers like him enjoying their creature comforts.

I only have one thing left to say:

fucking_insane

“The Narcissist in Chief” (New York Times article)

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gestures and declares “You’re fired!” at a rally in Manchester, New Hampshire, June 17, 2015. REUTERS/Dominick Reuter TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY – RTX1GZCO

The Narcissist in Chief
By Scott O. Lilienfield and Ashley L. Watts, for The Opinion Pages, The New York Times, September 4, 2015

WITH the presidential campaign in full swing, a perennial question has resurfaced: How much weight should voters give to candidates’ personalities? The political rise of Donald J. Trump has drawn attention to one personality trait in particular: narcissism. Although narcissism does not lend itself to a precise definition, most psychologists agree that it comprises self-centeredness, boastfulness, feelings of entitlement and a need for admiration.

We have never met Mr. Trump, let alone examined him, so it would be inappropriate of us to offer a formal assessment of his level of narcissism. And in all fairness, today’s constant media attention makes a sizable ego a virtual job requirement for public office. Still, the Trump phenomenon raises the question of what kinds of leaders narcissists make. Fortunately, a recent body of research has suggested some answers.

In a 2013 article in Psychological Science, we and our colleagues approached this question by studying the 42 United States presidents up to and including George W. Bush. (The primary data were collected before Barack Obama’s presidency.) First we took a data set compiled by the psychologists Steven Rubenzer and Thomas Faschingbauer, who for an earlier study asked experts on each president to complete personality surveys on the subjects of their expertise. Then, using standard formulas from the research literature on personality, we produced estimates of each president’s narcissism level. Finally, we correlated these personality ratings with data from surveys of presidential performance obtained from independent panels of historians.

We found that narcissism, specifically “grandiose narcissism” — an amalgam of flamboyance, immodesty and dominance — was associated with greater overall presidential success. (This relation was small to moderate in magnitude.) The two highest scorers on grandiose narcissism were Lyndon B. Johnson and Theodore Roosevelt, the two lowest James Monroe and Millard Fillmore.

Grandiose narcissism was tied to slightly better crisis management, public persuasiveness and agenda-setting. Presidents with high levels of this trait were also more likely to assume office by winning election in a landslide (55 percent or more of the popular vote) and to initiate new legislation.

Read the rest of this article here.

Here is a bonus quiz on political ideology and your best candidates that was suggested by Linda Lee–it can be taken here: http://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz?utm_source=outbrain&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=q_us_hrvd1
I’m 91% Bernie Sanders. 🙂

The hypocrisy of the “pro-life” stance.

Catholic nun Sister Joan Chittister is making a lot of sense here, and I couldn’t agree more. It’s fine to be pro-life, but if you are, then for God’s sake, care about the children who don’t get to choose whether they are born or not, and all too often are abused because their parents lack the emotional and financial resources to be able to care for them properly.

prolife

“Is Donald Trump Just Another Narcissistic Liberal?”

trump
Photo credit: Andrew Cline / Shutterstock.com

I rarely post political articles, because I don’t want to alienate anyone based on their political affiliation, but with the election right around the corner…and I thought this article I found on Sam Vaknin’s Facebook page for his book “Malignant Self-Love” is an especially interesting one that’s appropriate to the subject matter of this blog, so I’m going to share it.

My own 2 cents:
I’m not sure that Obama is a narcissist in spite of all the memes and arguments to that effect (though he might be–I think most politicians probably are), but the info here about Trump is right on. I didn’t know he was a liberal.

I don’t think Trump is a malignant narcissist (though I’m not sure), but I wouldn’t want him for president, no matter if he’s left or right, because he’d be a joke and embarrassment. Trump embarrasses himself but he’s too narcissistic to know how ridiculous he is. He would be a disaster to this country because the last thing our country needs right now is a narcissistic president who constantly brags about his achievements.

“Is Donald Trump Just Another Narcissistic Liberal?”
By Richard Larsen, westernjournalism.com